Has Johnson got it right clamping down on home working? – politicalbetting.com

NerysHughes said:

MoonRabbit said:

NerysHughes said:

wooliedyed said:

MoonRabbit said:

wooliedyed said:

MoonRabbit said:

wooliedyed said:

MoonRabbit said:

wooliedyed said:

MoonRabbit said:

wooliedyed said:

MoonRabbit said:

Unpopular said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Scott_xP said:

This appears to be a major change. Now saying he’ll resign if the police say he breached rules, not just if he’s issued an FPN. https://twitter.com/REWearmouth/status/1526172579958071296

Must be confident he isn't going to even get his wrist slapped.

I honestly though that was going to be the politically convenient fudge for everybody. Plod say looks like there was probably a minor breach, but even if they had known about it at the time, they would have just advised how to ensure better adherence to the rules. Then, Starmer gets to play man of integrity card.

Apologies if I'm getting my scandals mixed up, but surely that won't wash since, I believe, plod were there?

Yes. Security detail were at Partygate and Beergate. No one can get away with lying.

Except possibly the police.

“ looks like there was probably a minor breach, but even if they had known about it at the time, they would have just advised how to ensure better adherence to the rules.”

so what you thinking was the minor breach? Rules for mixing indoors not same as partygate, all they need to at currygate is isay they worked through takeaway and on afterwards, they don’t even have to prove it, it had to be proved they didn’t - sounds like they did or they didn’t, what can be a minor breach of those rules? Not keeping two poppadoms apart?

It had to be reasonably necessary for work. They could, for example, have given everyone an hour to go to a takeout or eat alone outdoors at a pub etc. Inconvenient, but that's what the rest of us were stuck with.
Hence they needed to be doing something as part of the 15 person meal workwise that required them to all be there.
'It wouldn't have made sense to all go off on our own' is not an excuse.
Which is the point- the rules he eagerly supported were complete bollocks

Still doesn’t answer the question though, what exactly are you proving they did wrong, even for just an advisory note?

They need to show the meal and being 'gathered together we 15' was reasonably necessary for work purposes, or rather the police merely need to say they do not believe it was and a breach of the guidelines and law, technical or otherwise, has occurred

Edit - 15 people were not allowed to eat together indoors except where reasonably necessary for work. 15 people did, the onus is on them to show it was reasonably necessary

Shouldn’t be too difficult that? Top politicians in election campaign wouldn’t expect to be standard hours, and to make the most of all in one place opportunities for wash up and planning. Especially as they passed police phone and server logs to prove they were working, can’t really leave police with much of a doubt?

Well, given witnesses present have said no work was done and some of them were pissed there's clearly some doubt from some that it was necessary, dilligent work. And 'wash up and planning' do not require you to breach the rules on numbers indoors together. It can be done remotely, via zoom etc. 'Making the most of all in one place opportunities' was indeed explicitly against the guidelines for campaigning during Covid. In person meetings were to be minimized.

I believe the whistleblowers only went as far as saying some people didn’t do much work, treated it more as a social, and this has in turn been disputed. Can the police actually use that to prove guilt on anyone? Trusting so much on testimony of a whistleblower has caused police so much grief in other cases hasn’t it, they are bound to be cautious, or even have a different take direct from whistleblower witnesses than we have via the media?

Well, we will see what they have gathered I guess but essentially if there's enough 'doubt' they can fudge it, say it looks like there may have been a breach, that they aren't issuing retrospective fines but have spoken to all concerned to ensure they are aware of their responsibilities 'should such a situation arise in future'. Or 'spoken to everyone about the importance of following the law in its entirety'
And Starmer is left with a tricky choice.
Also note there is no need to 'prove guilt' for a FPN, they just need to be reasonably sure it would hold up if taken to court in dispute.

Edit - and from a public perspective, it remains the case that we all had to jump through stupid hoops, so there is simply no valid reason from a fairness perspective for SKS to have sat down and had booze and supper with 14 other people indoors. It was simply unnecessary. Convenient, perhaps, but it would have been convenient for a lot of us to do a lot of things we couldn't

“ Starmer is left with a tricky choice.”. Tricky choice? I think he would declare himself exonerated if the outcome was as you described.

With Partygate, where there was no excuse to be socialising indoors with a beer, but they paid taxpayers money to a photographer to show them socialising indoors with a beer, open and shut case not likely to go to court. Anyone at beergate though, as it’s not so obvious to show wrongdoing, might feel aggrieved enough to take it to court, police will have to be very “reasonably sure” they wouldn’t lose in court.

“no valid reason from a fairness perspective for SKS to have sat down and had booze and supper with 14 other people indoors. It was simply unnecessary. Convenient, perhaps”. Absolutely right. But it’s not what they did though, they worked, grabbed takeaway whilst working. 100% smack bang in middle of rules at the time.

He declares himself a lot of things. Others will differ. And it will taint him in the eyes of many.

They did not 'grab a takeaway', the meal was pre-planned, it does not state on the plan that it is a working meal, some have said no work took place, others differ. Time will tell, but it's certainly impossible to conclude either it was legal or not at this stage as we weren't there, we can only believe what we believe to be the case.

The video of him stood up drinking beer with people wondering around with no covid precautions being followed does not look good and such "work events" were not happening at that time.

I would be very surprised if Durham Police approve the event and make a statement to that effect. i think the minimum will be "it should not have happened"

At least we are arguing beergate again. I had missed it 😆

I am surprised as SKS's confidence that the event was OK and in line with the Covid rules at that time.

Perhaps he doubts your confidence in the Daily Mail for truthful and accurate reporting.

BlancheLivermore said:

StuartDickson said:

Applicant said:

StuartDickson said:

Big day in Sweden, and a lot of politicians here are making memorable statements. The atmosphere is grave.

Our foreign minister Ann Linde just said on the SR P1 NATO special (think BBC R4 abandons whole schedule and dedicates channel to the NATO application):

- “… är det en ökad sårbarhet för Sverige. Det är helt klart.

… Därför så har vi också varit noga med och se till och fått säkerhetsförsäkringar från de stora länderna som USA, Frankrike, Tyskland, de nordiska länderna och så vidare, för att öka säkerheten.”

- ”… it is an increased vulnerability for Sweden. That's quite clear.

… Therefore, we have also been careful to ensure and receive security promises from the major countries such as the United States, France, Germany, the Nordic countries and so on, to increase security.”

Hmm… sorry Boris, when it comes to selling NATO to the Swedish people, there is one state nobody is boasting about. The “UK” is just an “etc”.

That's because we already have a security arrangement with Sweden independent of (if not entirely orthogonal to) NATO.

Nope. The UK is just one among a very long list of states who have made the same independent interim security arrangements with Sweden. And the UK arrangement is not even deemed significant enough for the foreign minister to even mention it. She obviously doesn’t read PB.

Sweden's government website on some of these arrangements..

"France
Sweden has well-established cooperation with France in the area of defence. This cooperation focuses on international operations in primarily Africa, exercises and cooperation in the defence materiel area.

Germany
Germany and Sweden have a long tradition of bilateral and multilateral cooperation. In June 2017, Sweden’s and Germany’s defence ministers signed a joint letter of intent to deepen and increase cooperation between the Swedish and German armed forces and other defence agencies through the development of the current cooperation and the promotion of new initiatives.

The United Kingdom
Sweden’s cooperation with the UK is of particular importance to security in the Baltic Sea region. Sweden and the UK have significant defence equipment cooperation and, in 2019, the countries signed a memorandum of understanding on Future Combat Air Systems Cooperation (FCASC). Exercises and training as well as research and development are other areas in which there is close cooperation. Bilateral agreements between the UK and Sweden are not affected by the UK’s withdrawal from the EU.

Sweden has a long-term interest in continued close cooperation between the EU and the UK in the area of security and defence policy, regardless of whether the UK is a member of the EU or not. Swedish-British cooperation should also be seen as an important support function in the transatlantic link."

https://www.government.se/government-policy/international-defence-cooperation/bilateral-cooperation/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Joint_Expeditionary_Force - been around for nearly a decade, and is the basis of a lot of military cooperation in/around the Baltic.

IIRC there are Finnish and Swedish troops taking part in a joint exercise in Estonia at the moment. I think it is under the aegis of this agreement, combined with NATO?

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Great to see Finland and Sweden both formally confirming applications to join NATO.

In four months the Great Russian Bear has been humiliated by Slava Ukraini, pushed back first from Kyiv and then from Kherson and seen two nations famous for neutrality for decades now aligning with NATO.

And now NATO are talking openly about the possibility of Ukraine winning the war. If they do, they should join NATO themselves.

What a catastrophic humiliating screw up by Putin.

An admission that his reason for the special military operation was bollocks from the start.

https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1526175012096548864
Putin today:
NATO expansion is artificial. Russia has no problems with Finland and Sweden, so their entry into NATO does not pose an immediate threat. Russia's response to the entry of Finland and Sweden into NATO will depend on the expansion of the alliance's infrastructure...

Also an admission that despite all his bellicose rhetoric about NATO expansion, the defanged Russian bear has been revealed to be utterly impotent and can't do anything about expansion. While they're comprehensively failing in a war with Ukraine, they're not going to open a second front in Finland.

Now is the perfect cover for any Eastern European nations who aren't under the umbrella of NATO protection to take the opportunity to do so, fast.

St Bart. What do you make of Bank of Englands issues with labour market? Are we getting close to being able to use term Stagflation?

Bailey says Bank of England surprised by large fall in size of labour market
Bailey says one factor is that the labour market is now smaller by about 450,000, or 1.3%, now than it was pre-Covid.

He says there has been a 3% increase in the proportion of people economically inactive.

There are more people who are long-term sick, he says.

He says it is not clear why. Some of it is likely to be long Covid, he says. And he says some people might be nervous about going back to work because of Covid.

UPDATE: Bailey said:

We have seen a fall in the size of the labour market; since 2019, we’ve seen a fall of around 450,000, or 1.3%.
In the margin of the labour force it’s a very big fall and represents a 3% increase in number of economically inactive people, meaning someone who isn’t searching for a job, unlike an unemployed person who is looking for one.
The scale and persistence of this drop has been a surprise to us.
We have seen an increase in long-term sickness in that number of about 320,000 people, and so what we’ve done in the main monetary policy report is to lower the projected view of labour participation.

kjh said:

On topic: Whether Boris is right or wrong about working from home the key thing is it is none of his f-ing business.

Honestly these Conservatives with their mantra of not getting involved in peoples lives just can't help themselves from doing just that.

I believe the apparently misinterpreted line about being more honoured in the breach than in the observance would apply to that supposed Conservative mantra.

Once in government politicians tend to find that getting involved with and telling people what to do with their lives is a ok. Indeed, some salivate about how they get to impose their values and preferences on the country because they won.

Leon said:

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

I'm all for getting people back to the office, but I am amused at the idea a preference for 'village life', whatever that means, is akin to being a medieval peasant. I think far fewer would yearn for village life if it was in any way alike that of a medieval village!

Bank of England Governor Warns Of ‘Apocalyptic’ Food Price Rises Due To Ukraine War

Probably not the best time to be contemplating a trade war with the EU, really.

Story by @SophiaSleigh ⬇️

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/bank-of-england-governor-warns-of-apocalyptic-food-price-rises-due-to-ukraine-war_uk_62825524e4b0c2dce652ccef

Redfield & Wilton Strategies

Westminster Voting Intention (15 May):

Labour 39% (–)
Conservative 35% (+2)
Liberal Democrat 12% (–)
Green 6% (-1)
Scottish National Party 4% (-1)
Reform UK 3% (+1)
Other 1% (–)

Changes +/- 8 May

kjh said:

MarqueeMark said:

Malmesbury said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Great to see Finland and Sweden both formally confirming applications to join NATO.

In four months the Great Russian Bear has been humiliated by Slava Ukraini, pushed back first from Kyiv and then from Kherson and seen two nations famous for neutrality for decades now aligning with NATO.

And now NATO are talking openly about the possibility of Ukraine winning the war. If they do, they should join NATO themselves.

What a catastrophic humiliating screw up by Putin.

An admission that his reason for the special military operation was bollocks from the start.

https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1526175012096548864
Putin today:
NATO expansion is artificial. Russia has no problems with Finland and Sweden, so their entry into NATO does not pose an immediate threat. Russia's response to the entry of Finland and Sweden into NATO will depend on the expansion of the alliance's infrastructure...

Also an admission that despite all his bellicose rhetoric about NATO expansion, the defanged Russian bear has been revealed to be utterly impotent and can't do anything about expansion. While they're comprehensively failing in a war with Ukraine, they're not going to open a second front in Finland.

Now is the perfect cover for any Eastern European nations who aren't under the umbrella of NATO protection to take the opportunity to do so, fast.

There are no European Countries left who would want to be in NATO - Serbia definitely wouldn't, Bosnia probably not. Austria is neutral by treaty, Switzerland relies on he fact that you'd have to fight all the way though NATO to get to them....

https://www.nato.int/nato-on-the-map

A Belarus that has overthrown its dictator and seen what happened to Ukraine might....

Moldova might be getting jittery over its neutrality stance as well.

I think it was the Finnish President when discussing neutrality who pointed out that since Russia started demanding people not be able to do things, like join NATO, then that would make it no longer their choice to not be in it, and thus not really neutrality anymore.

Russia's diplomatic hysteria and trash talking seems to have made Putin feel like a big man, but made it clear neutrality may not really be neutrality anymore, it was bowing to Russian demands, and the invasion showed the potential cost of that.

kjh said:

kle4 said:

kjh said:

On topic: Whether Boris is right or wrong about working from home the key thing is it is none of his f-ing business.

Honestly these Conservatives with their mantra of not getting involved in peoples lives just can't help themselves from doing just that.

I believe the apparently misinterpreted line about being more honoured in the breach than in the observance would apply to that supposed Conservative mantra.

Once in government politicians tend to find that getting involved with and telling people what to do with their lives is a ok. Indeed, some salivate about how they get to impose their values and preferences on the country because they won.

I can't think who you mean.

The giveaway was 'salivate' wasn't it?

dixiedean said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Seems the 4.5 billion Chelsea deal is at risk as impasse between Abramovich and HMG

Hopefully they'll only have to relegate the bottom two

You will be fine. Leeds will go down.

kjh said:

On topic: Whether Boris is right or wrong about working from home the key thing is it is none of his f-ing business.

Honestly these Conservatives with their mantra of not getting involved in peoples lives just can't help themselves from doing just that.

Except it is the government's business if people cannot work because their driving licences have not been processed, cannot go on holiday because productivity at the Passport Office has collapsed, if, as is the case locally, it is taking more than a month for a consultant's letter to be typed and posted, if people cannot sell their homes bought 4 years ago because they still don't have a valid title, if people are sitting in jail for more than a year before coming to trial, etc etc.

Private businesses can and should do what they like and what suits them best but the service being provided by HMG across a range of functions at the moment is not nearly good enough and the government is (rightly) getting the flack for it.

bigjohnowls said:

SKS approval rating falls from minus 2 to minus 9 in a week

RW- Keir Starmer has seen his approval rating drop to -9%. 25% approve of Keir Starmer’s job performance (-1), while 34% disapprove (+6).

You should be delighted. Otherwise you'd have nothing interesting to post. Can you post the poll?

londonpubman said:

dixiedean said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Seems the 4.5 billion Chelsea deal is at risk as impasse between Abramovich and HMG

Hopefully they'll only have to relegate the bottom two

You will be fine. Leeds will go down.

Struijk has prolonged our agony until 5.45ish Sunday with that sneakuiliser on Sunday, I was confident we were down till that

DavidL said:

kjh said:

On topic: Whether Boris is right or wrong about working from home the key thing is it is none of his f-ing business.

Honestly these Conservatives with their mantra of not getting involved in peoples lives just can't help themselves from doing just that.

Except it is the government's business if people cannot work because their driving licences have not been processed, cannot go on holiday because productivity at the Passport Office has collapsed, if, as is the case locally, it is taking more than a month for a consultant's letter to be typed and posted, if people cannot sell their homes bought 4 years ago because they still don't have a valid title, if people are sitting in jail for more than a year before coming to trial, etc etc.

Private businesses can and should do what they like and what suits them best but the service being provided by HMG across a range of functions at the moment is not nearly good enough and the government is (rightly) getting the flack for it.

The government is not restricting itself to moaning about WFH among its own employees, though that is their focus. It is quite clear they don't want anyone doing it, as they criticise it in generalities, as a concept, not merely as it relates to government business.

kle4 said:

kjh said:

MarqueeMark said:

Malmesbury said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Great to see Finland and Sweden both formally confirming applications to join NATO.

In four months the Great Russian Bear has been humiliated by Slava Ukraini, pushed back first from Kyiv and then from Kherson and seen two nations famous for neutrality for decades now aligning with NATO.

And now NATO are talking openly about the possibility of Ukraine winning the war. If they do, they should join NATO themselves.

What a catastrophic humiliating screw up by Putin.

An admission that his reason for the special military operation was bollocks from the start.

https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1526175012096548864
Putin today:
NATO expansion is artificial. Russia has no problems with Finland and Sweden, so their entry into NATO does not pose an immediate threat. Russia's response to the entry of Finland and Sweden into NATO will depend on the expansion of the alliance's infrastructure...

Also an admission that despite all his bellicose rhetoric about NATO expansion, the defanged Russian bear has been revealed to be utterly impotent and can't do anything about expansion. While they're comprehensively failing in a war with Ukraine, they're not going to open a second front in Finland.

Now is the perfect cover for any Eastern European nations who aren't under the umbrella of NATO protection to take the opportunity to do so, fast.

There are no European Countries left who would want to be in NATO - Serbia definitely wouldn't, Bosnia probably not. Austria is neutral by treaty, Switzerland relies on he fact that you'd have to fight all the way though NATO to get to them....

https://www.nato.int/nato-on-the-map

A Belarus that has overthrown its dictator and seen what happened to Ukraine might....

Moldova might be getting jittery over its neutrality stance as well.

I think it was the Finnish President when discussing neutrality who pointed out that since Russia started demanding people not be able to do things, like join NATO, then that would make it no longer their choice to not be in it, and thus not really neutrality anymore.

Russia's diplomatic hysteria and trash talking seems to have made Putin feel like a big man, but made it clear neutrality may not really be neutrality anymore, it was bowing to Russian demands, and the invasion showed the potential cost of that.

That’s a very astute point by the Finnish PM. Basically Putin said Choose us or them?

Who in Europe is going to “choose Russia” having seen the rape-krieg across Ukraine? The naked, mutilated girls hanging in the forests?

Russia has descended to barbarism. It will be shunned

Applicant said:

StuartDickson said:

Big day in Sweden, and a lot of politicians here are making memorable statements. The atmosphere is grave.

Our foreign minister Ann Linde just said on the SR P1 NATO special (think BBC R4 abandons whole schedule and dedicates channel to the NATO application):

- “… är det en ökad sårbarhet för Sverige. Det är helt klart.

… Därför så har vi också varit noga med och se till och fått säkerhetsförsäkringar från de stora länderna som USA, Frankrike, Tyskland, de nordiska länderna och så vidare, för att öka säkerheten.”

- ”… it is an increased vulnerability for Sweden. That's quite clear.

… Therefore, we have also been careful to ensure and receive security promises from the major countries such as the United States, France, Germany, the Nordic countries and so on, to increase security.”

Hmm… sorry Boris, when it comes to selling NATO to the Swedish people, there is one state nobody is boasting about. The “UK” is just an “etc”.

That's because we already have a security arrangement with Sweden independent of (if not entirely orthogonal to) NATO.

While that's true, it's not a mutual defence alliance.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Seems the 4.5 billion Chelsea deal is at risk as impasse between Abramovich and HMG

So Abramovich's claims he wasn't trying to profit from the sale of Chelsea might not have been truthful and honest?

Who could have ever foreseen that? That's almost as shocking as finding out the Pope might be a Catholic.

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

kjh said:

On topic: Whether Boris is right or wrong about working from home the key thing is it is none of his f-ing business.

Honestly these Conservatives with their mantra of not getting involved in peoples lives just can't help themselves from doing just that.

Except it is the government's business if people cannot work because their driving licences have not been processed, cannot go on holiday because productivity at the Passport Office has collapsed, if, as is the case locally, it is taking more than a month for a consultant's letter to be typed and posted, if people cannot sell their homes bought 4 years ago because they still don't have a valid title, if people are sitting in jail for more than a year before coming to trial, etc etc.

Private businesses can and should do what they like and what suits them best but the service being provided by HMG across a range of functions at the moment is not nearly good enough and the government is (rightly) getting the flack for it.

The government is not restricting itself to moaning about WFH among its own employees, though that is their focus. It is quite clear they don't want anyone doing it, as they criticise it in generalities, as a concept, not merely as it relates to government business.

Well, to that extent I would disagree with them unless they have clear evidence that it is affecting national productivity adversely. That does seem to be the public sector experience but it is not likely to be universal, not at all. Of course they may be worried too about the adverse effect on the funding of public transport systems, city centre shops etc too. But they need to sort out their own house before they start criticising others who may be doing it better.

kle4 said:

Leon said:

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

I'm all for getting people back to the office, but I am amused at the idea a preference for 'village life', whatever that means, is akin to being a medieval peasant. I think far fewer would yearn for village life if it was in any way alike that of a medieval village!

I live in a settlement of 9,000 people. Always some debate whether that is a town or a village.
I mostly WFH (1 day a week in the office at the moment).
The "village" has a full size Tesco, a leisure centre with a swimming pool and 2 High Schools (it's West Scotland of course). Hardly the peasant life.

StuartDickson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

StuartDickson said:

Big day in Sweden, and a lot of politicians here are making memorable statements. The atmosphere is grave.

Our foreign minister Ann Linde just said on the SR P1 NATO special (think BBC R4 abandons whole schedule and dedicates channel to the NATO application):

- “… är det en ökad sårbarhet för Sverige. Det är helt klart.

… Därför så har vi också varit noga med och se till och fått säkerhetsförsäkringar från de stora länderna som USA, Frankrike, Tyskland, de nordiska länderna och så vidare, för att öka säkerheten.”

- ”… it is an increased vulnerability for Sweden. That's quite clear.

… Therefore, we have also been careful to ensure and receive security promises from the major countries such as the United States, France, Germany, the Nordic countries and so on, to increase security.”

Hmm… sorry Boris, when it comes to selling NATO to the Swedish people, there is one state nobody is boasting about. The “UK” is just an “etc”.

Highly predictable comment from the most anti UK poster on this site

Many would reject this attitude not least with the current actions of Germany and France enabling Putin's war machine to continue

https://www.business-standard.com/article/international/uk-signs-security-deal-with-sweden-and-finland-marking-steadfast-support-122051100990_1.html

Stooey’s draft epitaph:

“He was the most anti UK poster on an obscure blog.”

Hmmm… needs some work. But cheers for the inspiration.

You are absolutely right. You are not worth paying any attention to whatsoever.

MoonRabbit said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Great to see Finland and Sweden both formally confirming applications to join NATO.

In four months the Great Russian Bear has been humiliated by Slava Ukraini, pushed back first from Kyiv and then from Kherson and seen two nations famous for neutrality for decades now aligning with NATO.

And now NATO are talking openly about the possibility of Ukraine winning the war. If they do, they should join NATO themselves.

What a catastrophic humiliating screw up by Putin.

An admission that his reason for the special military operation was bollocks from the start.

https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1526175012096548864
Putin today:
NATO expansion is artificial. Russia has no problems with Finland and Sweden, so their entry into NATO does not pose an immediate threat. Russia's response to the entry of Finland and Sweden into NATO will depend on the expansion of the alliance's infrastructure...

Also an admission that despite all his bellicose rhetoric about NATO expansion, the defanged Russian bear has been revealed to be utterly impotent and can't do anything about expansion. While they're comprehensively failing in a war with Ukraine, they're not going to open a second front in Finland.

Now is the perfect cover for any Eastern European nations who aren't under the umbrella of NATO protection to take the opportunity to do so, fast.

St Bart. What do you make of Bank of Englands issues with labour market? Are we getting close to being able to use term Stagflation?

Bailey says Bank of England surprised by large fall in size of labour market
Bailey says one factor is that the labour market is now smaller by about 450,000, or 1.3%, now than it was pre-Covid.

He says there has been a 3% increase in the proportion of people economically inactive.

There are more people who are long-term sick, he says.

He says it is not clear why. Some of it is likely to be long Covid, he says. And he says some people might be nervous about going back to work because of Covid.

UPDATE: Bailey said:

We have seen a fall in the size of the labour market; since 2019, we’ve seen a fall of around 450,000, or 1.3%.
In the margin of the labour force it’s a very big fall and represents a 3% increase in number of economically inactive people, meaning someone who isn’t searching for a job, unlike an unemployed person who is looking for one.
The scale and persistence of this drop has been a surprise to us.
We have seen an increase in long-term sickness in that number of about 320,000 people, and so what we’ve done in the main monetary policy report is to lower the projected view of labour participation.

No. The whole point of stagflation is two compounding crises of unemployment and inflation. Traditional cures for inflation worsen the unemployment crisis, traditional cures for unemployment worsen inflation, so you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.

We have full employment and inflation. That isn't stagflation, since you can try to tackle inflation without worrying about the fact that there are millions unemployed.

People who have voluntarily retired or are otherwise not looking for work are not the same as the unemployed who are looking for work but can't find any.

No_Offence_Alan said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

I'm all for getting people back to the office, but I am amused at the idea a preference for 'village life', whatever that means, is akin to being a medieval peasant. I think far fewer would yearn for village life if it was in any way alike that of a medieval village!

I live in a settlement of 9,000 people. Always some debate whether that is a town or a village.
I mostly WFH (1 day a week in the office at the moment).
The "village" has a full size Tesco, a leisure centre with a swimming pool and 2 High Schools (it's West Scotland of course). Hardly the peasant life.

9000 inhabitants is not a “village” by any standard. Who the heck calls that a village?!

I am right how sitting in a Greek village having a beer. This is what a village looks like

About 30 houses. Maybe 100 inhabitants. Two tavernas and a church

kle4 said:

Leon said:

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

I'm all for getting people back to the office, but I am amused at the idea a preference for 'village life', whatever that means, is akin to being a medieval peasant. I think far fewer would yearn for village life if it was in any way alike that of a medieval village!

Many people who live in towns and cities yearn for rural life. Hence programmes like 'Escape to the Country'. But those people are at least a little mistaken about Country Life. What they yearn for is the picture perfect villages they visit on a Sunday, possibly at the end of a long walk. Possibly a village in the Lake District or the Yorkshire Dales or the Costwolds. A village which, due the presence of people like them, has pubs and coffee shops and cafes out of all proportion to its size.
But most villages aren't like that. Most villages are small and unremarkable and dead. They might have a pub, and it might be a good pub, but it probably isn't. They might have a cafe, but it probably doesn't open very often. They might have a shop, and it might be a lovely little community owned thing where you can buy fudge and artisan coffee and vegetables at three times supermarket prices; or it may be a Happy Shopper in which nothing has changed since the 1970s.
And even in the good villages, living there is very different from visiting them for the afternoon or the weekend.

I idealise the Lake District. I've whiled away man a happy hour thinking how nice it would be to live there. But even so, there are only two or three places in the Lake District I'd actually like to live: the towns. And they are only liveable because tourism gives them far more vitality than most towns of their size.

wooliedyed said:

Cookie said:

Roger said:

MoonRabbit said:

On topic. Boris is spot on with suspicions of home working bringing far too many negatives, and the electorate will support him.

More productive or less productive? Those trying to work from home whilst child minding are obviously less productive than both themselves in office without those distractions and a colleague wfh without those distractions. Also depends on tasks. A task needing face-to-face communication is going to be less productive without it.

don’t call it working from home, call it remote working, for then you have people working remotely since year dot you can compare it to. Back in the sixties there was a study of People out and about working remotely fixing office machinery, each knew a different trick the others didn’t. When they all got together in a diner for a meal they shared all these tricks and productivity shot up. If knowledge share drops off due to remote working, it’s a huge hit on productivity that can only be noticed over longer time spans not shorter ones, why? Becuase most studies have innovation is a key part of productivity, and innovation is now proved to being killed by remote working the earlier studies didn’t pick up.

Unions should be wary about it. It can’t be measured solely as working from home getting tasks done versus in office getting tasks done. If productivity appears up with home workers it may be because workers slip into longer working hours, the pay off is burn out and mental health, not getting their brains or bodies enough break away from work.

Rees Mogg is winning this argument single handedly, though Boris intervention has helped. Mogg said it’s used for long weekends, Mondays, Fridays, is he wrong? Let’s look at the stat for the days people most work remotely…

Are you a Lib Dem or a dyed-in-the-wool Tory? It's confusing. You seem more enchanted with Johnson than you were with Mme Le Pen which is a long way down the rabbit hole

As Lord Gnome would say 'I think we should be told!'

It's possible that you can not be a Tory and yet not express outright hostility to all Tories and all Tory ideas.

I can think of plenty of areas in which I find agreement with people in different parts of the political spectrum. It would be odd if I did not.

The more rabid Tory hatred is becoming more and more a middle class/graduate/luvvie thing, they have detoxified in parts of the working class. Probably because progressivism has moved from redistribution and state ownership ideologies to encompass divisive social issues that see generally less sympathy in the WC, who identify more with the small c conservative side of the debate

Another gap between the two is the "they are all the same" line that this government hides behind on standards and ethics. Rightly or wrongly, it seems to me far more commonly accepted in working class/non graduates than middle class/graduates. Probably a nuance thing, both sides do break the rules and to an extent always have done, just this current Tory lot are taking it to a new and more dangerous level.

Carnyx said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

kjh said:

On topic: Whether Boris is right or wrong about working from home the key thing is it is none of his f-ing business.

Honestly these Conservatives with their mantra of not getting involved in peoples lives just can't help themselves from doing just that.

Except it is the government's business if people cannot work because their driving licences have not been processed, cannot go on holiday because productivity at the Passport Office has collapsed, if, as is the case locally, it is taking more than a month for a consultant's letter to be typed and posted, if people cannot sell their homes bought 4 years ago because they still don't have a valid title, if people are sitting in jail for more than a year before coming to trial, etc etc.

Private businesses can and should do what they like and what suits them best but the service being provided by HMG across a range of functions at the moment is not nearly good enough and the government is (rightly) getting the flack for it.

The government is not restricting itself to moaning about WFH among its own employees, though that is their focus. It is quite clear they don't want anyone doing it, as they criticise it in generalities, as a concept, not merely as it relates to government business.

Well, to that extent I would disagree with them unless they have clear evidence that it is affecting national productivity adversely. That does seem to be the public sector experience but it is not likely to be universal, not at all. Of course they may be worried too about the adverse effect on the funding of public transport systems, city centre shops etc too. But they need to sort out their own house before they start criticising others who may be doing it better.

Point of order. Do we know the staffing is the same?

And some of the delay will be backlog from the lockdowns. This is not attributable to the availability of WFH, strictly, in itself - but there is a connection also if the demand is itself a backlog. eg passports suddenly obsolescing en bloc over 2 years.

Of course, this doesn't escuse lack of action of whatever kind needed.

I think that backlogs in a lot of areas undoubtedly increased during lockdowns (although that itself is some evidence that WFH is simply not as efficient for adminstrative tasks); the public sector had extremely cautious isolation protocols so the time staff were off skyrocketed and of course a lot of people were ill. But its time to pull a finger out, several in fact.

noneoftheabove said:

wooliedyed said:

Cookie said:

Roger said:

MoonRabbit said:

On topic. Boris is spot on with suspicions of home working bringing far too many negatives, and the electorate will support him.

More productive or less productive? Those trying to work from home whilst child minding are obviously less productive than both themselves in office without those distractions and a colleague wfh without those distractions. Also depends on tasks. A task needing face-to-face communication is going to be less productive without it.

don’t call it working from home, call it remote working, for then you have people working remotely since year dot you can compare it to. Back in the sixties there was a study of People out and about working remotely fixing office machinery, each knew a different trick the others didn’t. When they all got together in a diner for a meal they shared all these tricks and productivity shot up. If knowledge share drops off due to remote working, it’s a huge hit on productivity that can only be noticed over longer time spans not shorter ones, why? Becuase most studies have innovation is a key part of productivity, and innovation is now proved to being killed by remote working the earlier studies didn’t pick up.

Unions should be wary about it. It can’t be measured solely as working from home getting tasks done versus in office getting tasks done. If productivity appears up with home workers it may be because workers slip into longer working hours, the pay off is burn out and mental health, not getting their brains or bodies enough break away from work.

Rees Mogg is winning this argument single handedly, though Boris intervention has helped. Mogg said it’s used for long weekends, Mondays, Fridays, is he wrong? Let’s look at the stat for the days people most work remotely…

Are you a Lib Dem or a dyed-in-the-wool Tory? It's confusing. You seem more enchanted with Johnson than you were with Mme Le Pen which is a long way down the rabbit hole

As Lord Gnome would say 'I think we should be told!'

It's possible that you can not be a Tory and yet not express outright hostility to all Tories and all Tory ideas.

I can think of plenty of areas in which I find agreement with people in different parts of the political spectrum. It would be odd if I did not.

The more rabid Tory hatred is becoming more and more a middle class/graduate/luvvie thing, they have detoxified in parts of the working class. Probably because progressivism has moved from redistribution and state ownership ideologies to encompass divisive social issues that see generally less sympathy in the WC, who identify more with the small c conservative side of the debate

Another gap between the two is the "they are all the same" line that this government hides behind on standards and ethics. Rightly or wrongly, it seems to me far more commonly accepted in working class/non graduates than middle class/graduates. Probably a nuance thing, both sides do break the rules and to an extent always have done, just this current Tory lot are taking it to a new and more dangerous level.

I'd agree with that, yes

NerysHughes said:

kjh said:

NerysHughes said:

MoonRabbit said:

NerysHughes said:

wooliedyed said:

MoonRabbit said:

wooliedyed said:

MoonRabbit said:

wooliedyed said:

MoonRabbit said:

wooliedyed said:

MoonRabbit said:

wooliedyed said:

MoonRabbit said:

Unpopular said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Scott_xP said:

This appears to be a major change. Now saying he’ll resign if the police say he breached rules, not just if he’s issued an FPN. https://twitter.com/REWearmouth/status/1526172579958071296

Must be confident he isn't going to even get his wrist slapped.

I honestly though that was going to be the politically convenient fudge for everybody. Plod say looks like there was probably a minor breach, but even if they had known about it at the time, they would have just advised how to ensure better adherence to the rules. Then, Starmer gets to play man of integrity card.

Apologies if I'm getting my scandals mixed up, but surely that won't wash since, I believe, plod were there?

Yes. Security detail were at Partygate and Beergate. No one can get away with lying.

Except possibly the police.

“ looks like there was probably a minor breach, but even if they had known about it at the time, they would have just advised how to ensure better adherence to the rules.”

so what you thinking was the minor breach? Rules for mixing indoors not same as partygate, all they need to at currygate is isay they worked through takeaway and on afterwards, they don’t even have to prove it, it had to be proved they didn’t - sounds like they did or they didn’t, what can be a minor breach of those rules? Not keeping two poppadoms apart?

It had to be reasonably necessary for work. They could, for example, have given everyone an hour to go to a takeout or eat alone outdoors at a pub etc. Inconvenient, but that's what the rest of us were stuck with.
Hence they needed to be doing something as part of the 15 person meal workwise that required them to all be there.
'It wouldn't have made sense to all go off on our own' is not an excuse.
Which is the point- the rules he eagerly supported were complete bollocks

Still doesn’t answer the question though, what exactly are you proving they did wrong, even for just an advisory note?

They need to show the meal and being 'gathered together we 15' was reasonably necessary for work purposes, or rather the police merely need to say they do not believe it was and a breach of the guidelines and law, technical or otherwise, has occurred

Edit - 15 people were not allowed to eat together indoors except where reasonably necessary for work. 15 people did, the onus is on them to show it was reasonably necessary

Shouldn’t be too difficult that? Top politicians in election campaign wouldn’t expect to be standard hours, and to make the most of all in one place opportunities for wash up and planning. Especially as they passed police phone and server logs to prove they were working, can’t really leave police with much of a doubt?

Well, given witnesses present have said no work was done and some of them were pissed there's clearly some doubt from some that it was necessary, dilligent work. And 'wash up and planning' do not require you to breach the rules on numbers indoors together. It can be done remotely, via zoom etc. 'Making the most of all in one place opportunities' was indeed explicitly against the guidelines for campaigning during Covid. In person meetings were to be minimized.

I believe the whistleblowers only went as far as saying some people didn’t do much work, treated it more as a social, and this has in turn been disputed. Can the police actually use that to prove guilt on anyone? Trusting so much on testimony of a whistleblower has caused police so much grief in other cases hasn’t it, they are bound to be cautious, or even have a different take direct from whistleblower witnesses than we have via the media?

Well, we will see what they have gathered I guess but essentially if there's enough 'doubt' they can fudge it, say it looks like there may have been a breach, that they aren't issuing retrospective fines but have spoken to all concerned to ensure they are aware of their responsibilities 'should such a situation arise in future'. Or 'spoken to everyone about the importance of following the law in its entirety'
And Starmer is left with a tricky choice.
Also note there is no need to 'prove guilt' for a FPN, they just need to be reasonably sure it would hold up if taken to court in dispute.

Edit - and from a public perspective, it remains the case that we all had to jump through stupid hoops, so there is simply no valid reason from a fairness perspective for SKS to have sat down and had booze and supper with 14 other people indoors. It was simply unnecessary. Convenient, perhaps, but it would have been convenient for a lot of us to do a lot of things we couldn't

“ Starmer is left with a tricky choice.”. Tricky choice? I think he would declare himself exonerated if the outcome was as you described.

With Partygate, where there was no excuse to be socialising indoors with a beer, but they paid taxpayers money to a photographer to show them socialising indoors with a beer, open and shut case not likely to go to court. Anyone at beergate though, as it’s not so obvious to show wrongdoing, might feel aggrieved enough to take it to court, police will have to be very “reasonably sure” they wouldn’t lose in court.

“no valid reason from a fairness perspective for SKS to have sat down and had booze and supper with 14 other people indoors. It was simply unnecessary. Convenient, perhaps”. Absolutely right. But it’s not what they did though, they worked, grabbed takeaway whilst working. 100% smack bang in middle of rules at the time.

He declares himself a lot of things. Others will differ. And it will taint him in the eyes of many.

They did not 'grab a takeaway', the meal was pre-planned, it does not state on the plan that it is a working meal, some have said no work took place, others differ. Time will tell, but it's certainly impossible to conclude either it was legal or not at this stage as we weren't there, we can only believe what we believe to be the case.

The video of him stood up drinking beer with people wondering around with no covid precautions being followed does not look good and such "work events" were not happening at that time.

I would be very surprised if Durham Police approve the event and make a statement to that effect. i think the minimum will be "it should not have happened"

At least we are arguing beergate again. I had missed it 😆

I am surprised as SKS's confidence that the event was OK and in line with the Covid rules at that time.

Yes but that is because you seem to think there were imaginary rules in place at the time.

The police must also think that otherwise they would not be investigating

You honestly think the police have any desire to investigate it?

Leon said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

I'm all for getting people back to the office, but I am amused at the idea a preference for 'village life', whatever that means, is akin to being a medieval peasant. I think far fewer would yearn for village life if it was in any way alike that of a medieval village!

I live in a settlement of 9,000 people. Always some debate whether that is a town or a village.
I mostly WFH (1 day a week in the office at the moment).
The "village" has a full size Tesco, a leisure centre with a swimming pool and 2 High Schools (it's West Scotland of course). Hardly the peasant life.

9000 inhabitants is not a “village” by any standard. Who the heck calls that a village?!

I am right how sitting in a Greek village having a beer. This is what a village looks like

About 30 houses. Maybe 100 inhabitants. Two tavernas and a church

I recall at school discussion of how to define villages, towns, cities etc, and different countries doing so differently. On the basis of judging them by amenity provision it was pointed out it could be argued a Norwegian 'town' might be 200 people, while some 'villages' in poorer areas of the Africa say could be tens of thousands. That would be a pretty ridiculous approach in fairness.

I think up to a couple of thousand can generally get classed as a 'large village' in this country (if not too dense, eg a massive new settlement on the edge of a larger town) - often it is a historic core village identity, and then larger areas of modern development which call themselves part of the village as it is less council tax. There are certainly parishes which have upwards of 7k people in them, across a number of settlements perhaps, which I'd argue is really stretching it.

Roger said:

MoonRabbit said:

On topic. Boris is spot on with suspicions of home working bringing far too many negatives, and the electorate will support him.

More productive or less productive? Those trying to work from home whilst child minding are obviously less productive than both themselves in office without those distractions and a colleague wfh without those distractions. Also depends on tasks. A task needing face-to-face communication is going to be less productive without it.

don’t call it working from home, call it remote working, for then you have people working remotely since year dot you can compare it to. Back in the sixties there was a study of People out and about working remotely fixing office machinery, each knew a different trick the others didn’t. When they all got together in a diner for a meal they shared all these tricks and productivity shot up. If knowledge share drops off due to remote working, it’s a huge hit on productivity that can only be noticed over longer time spans not shorter ones, why? Becuase most studies have innovation is a key part of productivity, and innovation is now proved to being killed by remote working the earlier studies didn’t pick up.

Unions should be wary about it. It can’t be measured solely as working from home getting tasks done versus in office getting tasks done. If productivity appears up with home workers it may be because workers slip into longer working hours, the pay off is burn out and mental health, not getting their brains or bodies enough break away from work.

Rees Mogg is winning this argument single handedly, though Boris intervention has helped. Mogg said it’s used for long weekends, Mondays, Fridays, is he wrong? Let’s look at the stat for the days people most work remotely…

Are you a Lib Dem or a dyed-in-the-wool Tory? It's confusing. You seem more enchanted with Johnson than you were with Mme Le Pen which is a long way down the rabbit hole

As Lord Gnome would say 'I think we should be told!'

Pen 😦 I didn’t like Pen at all, made clear in all posts she would never get my vote. I tried to slap your complacency, with wake up Roger its closer and dicier this time, but you weren’t listening. Fortunately, after scary even polls straight after round 1, macron built a gap.

It’s good we share likes and agreements in art and cinema, despite you not agreeing with my topical political posts because you have weird politics. The problem with personal jibes like Pen one, like the Enoch Powell one you made is that they don’t really work if they are not backed up by explaining how they tie in with someone’s bit of analysis they have posted? Which of my views is Pen or Enoch Powell? I’m posting to actually welcome such feedback. It will help me learn more. As I had to look up Enoch Powell, who turns out to be a top Tory who was in Labour first, and was somewhere to the left of the Boris government on immigration policy. But that was just he was shaped by the times he was in, when world wasn’t global village, and we could still dream of being global Britain without it being a joke idea?

In fact Marx said something like his views are shaped by being a German Jew living in exile in London, I’m also perfectly straight up and honest about myself - brought up in Yorkshire (proper Yorkshire North Yorkshire lass) family of Tory party members, and I am the only one whose never voted Tory! Since posting on PB I think I have become even more a Lib Dem supporter, because things are posted here about what Boris government do that make me really mad. But I’m still right wing, anti union baron, staunch defender of how important our monarchy is, and the Church of England too, and by believing in God and CoE I’m instantly out of step with about 90% of PB posters I’m sure! Being Gen Z (just) makes me out of step with 90% of PB thinking I suspect.
I live in Chelsea with my millennial girlfriend who I want to Marry, espicelly on nights like this when she’s gone drinking after work or volleyball and keeps texting “back soon”.
And I love pigs, because they have been fun with me my entire life



So I don’t expect you to agree with my politics and analysis Roger, because we are different people living different lives isn’t it, so disagreements with anyone as I post wrong calls don’t bother me at all because all my thoughts all come from an honest place. But you can at least get the facts right in your posts. 😇

DavidL said:

kjh said:

On topic: Whether Boris is right or wrong about working from home the key thing is it is none of his f-ing business.

Honestly these Conservatives with their mantra of not getting involved in peoples lives just can't help themselves from doing just that.

Except it is the government's business if people cannot work because their driving licences have not been processed, cannot go on holiday because productivity at the Passport Office has collapsed, if, as is the case locally, it is taking more than a month for a consultant's letter to be typed and posted, if people cannot sell their homes bought 4 years ago because they still don't have a valid title, if people are sitting in jail for more than a year before coming to trial, etc etc.

Private businesses can and should do what they like and what suits them best but the service being provided by HMG across a range of functions at the moment is not nearly good enough and the government is (rightly) getting the flack for it.

It is up to the boss to decide which is most effective. If people need to be in the office I have no issue with that being mandated by the bosses in the civil service or private industry. It has nothing to do with politicians.

Lol, the ‘Onion Bears’. Would bring a tear to a mannequin’s eye.

https://twitter.com/sevillaenge/status/1526167754159624192?s=21

Cookie said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

I'm all for getting people back to the office, but I am amused at the idea a preference for 'village life', whatever that means, is akin to being a medieval peasant. I think far fewer would yearn for village life if it was in any way alike that of a medieval village!

Many people who live in towns and cities yearn for rural life. Hence programmes like 'Escape to the Country'. But those people are at least a little mistaken about Country Life. What they yearn for is the picture perfect villages they visit on a Sunday, possibly at the end of a long walk. Possibly a village in the Lake District or the Yorkshire Dales or the Costwolds. A village which, due the presence of people like them, has pubs and coffee shops and cafes out of all proportion to its size.
But most villages aren't like that. Most villages are small and unremarkable and dead. They might have a pub, and it might be a good pub, but it probably isn't. They might have a cafe, but it probably doesn't open very often. They might have a shop, and it might be a lovely little community owned thing where you can buy fudge and artisan coffee and vegetables at three times supermarket prices; or it may be a Happy Shopper in which nothing has changed since the 1970s.
And even in the good villages, living there is very different from visiting them for the afternoon or the weekend.

I idealise the Lake District. I've whiled away man a happy hour thinking how nice it would be to live there. But even so, there are only two or three places in the Lake District I'd actually like to live: the towns. And they are only liveable because tourism gives them far more vitality than most towns of their size.

Quite. Some people think they will saunter into their new village pub and be entertained by the tall tales of oddball rural types and perhaps be asked to be treasurer of the local cider circle. By the second night they fully expect to have bagged dinner invites to all the local farms to try their produce.
Fleece the towny twats for every penny then hate campaign them outwith the bounds.

Leon said:

kle4 said:

kjh said:

MarqueeMark said:

Malmesbury said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Great to see Finland and Sweden both formally confirming applications to join NATO.

In four months the Great Russian Bear has been humiliated by Slava Ukraini, pushed back first from Kyiv and then from Kherson and seen two nations famous for neutrality for decades now aligning with NATO.

And now NATO are talking openly about the possibility of Ukraine winning the war. If they do, they should join NATO themselves.

What a catastrophic humiliating screw up by Putin.

An admission that his reason for the special military operation was bollocks from the start.

https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1526175012096548864
Putin today:
NATO expansion is artificial. Russia has no problems with Finland and Sweden, so their entry into NATO does not pose an immediate threat. Russia's response to the entry of Finland and Sweden into NATO will depend on the expansion of the alliance's infrastructure...

Also an admission that despite all his bellicose rhetoric about NATO expansion, the defanged Russian bear has been revealed to be utterly impotent and can't do anything about expansion. While they're comprehensively failing in a war with Ukraine, they're not going to open a second front in Finland.

Now is the perfect cover for any Eastern European nations who aren't under the umbrella of NATO protection to take the opportunity to do so, fast.

There are no European Countries left who would want to be in NATO - Serbia definitely wouldn't, Bosnia probably not. Austria is neutral by treaty, Switzerland relies on he fact that you'd have to fight all the way though NATO to get to them....

https://www.nato.int/nato-on-the-map

A Belarus that has overthrown its dictator and seen what happened to Ukraine might....

Moldova might be getting jittery over its neutrality stance as well.

I think it was the Finnish President when discussing neutrality who pointed out that since Russia started demanding people not be able to do things, like join NATO, then that would make it no longer their choice to not be in it, and thus not really neutrality anymore.

Russia's diplomatic hysteria and trash talking seems to have made Putin feel like a big man, but made it clear neutrality may not really be neutrality anymore, it was bowing to Russian demands, and the invasion showed the potential cost of that.

That’s a very astute point by the Finnish PM. Basically Putin said Choose us or them?

President, not PM (though she probably said something similar). Fortunately they are easy to tell apart, I hate identikit politicians.

kjh said:

DavidL said:

kjh said:

On topic: Whether Boris is right or wrong about working from home the key thing is it is none of his f-ing business.

Honestly these Conservatives with their mantra of not getting involved in peoples lives just can't help themselves from doing just that.

Except it is the government's business if people cannot work because their driving licences have not been processed, cannot go on holiday because productivity at the Passport Office has collapsed, if, as is the case locally, it is taking more than a month for a consultant's letter to be typed and posted, if people cannot sell their homes bought 4 years ago because they still don't have a valid title, if people are sitting in jail for more than a year before coming to trial, etc etc.

Private businesses can and should do what they like and what suits them best but the service being provided by HMG across a range of functions at the moment is not nearly good enough and the government is (rightly) getting the flack for it.

It is up to the boss to decide which is most effective. If people need to be in the office I have no issue with that being mandated by the bosses in the civil service or private industry. It has nothing to do with politicians.

In the Public Sector the politicians are the boss. They are accountable for the performance of their departments and the quality of services they provide and they are responding to public frustration that it is not nearly good enough for the money that is being spent.

kle4 said:

Cookie said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

I'm all for getting people back to the office, but I am amused at the idea a preference for 'village life', whatever that means, is akin to being a medieval peasant. I think far fewer would yearn for village life if it was in any way alike that of a medieval village!

Many people who live in towns and cities yearn for rural life. Hence programmes like 'Escape to the Country'. But those people are at least a little mistaken about Country Life. What they yearn for is the picture perfect villages they visit on a Sunday, possibly at the end of a long walk. Possibly a village in the Lake District or the Yorkshire Dales or the Costwolds. A village which, due the presence of people like them, has pubs and coffee shops and cafes out of all proportion to its size.
But most villages aren't like that. Most villages are small and unremarkable and dead. They might have a pub, and it might be a good pub, but it probably isn't. They might have a cafe, but it probably doesn't open very often. They might have a shop, and it might be a lovely little community owned thing where you can buy fudge and artisan coffee and vegetables at three times supermarket prices; or it may be a Happy Shopper in which nothing has changed since the 1970s.
And even in the good villages, living there is very different from visiting them for the afternoon or the weekend.

I idealise the Lake District. I've whiled away man a happy hour thinking how nice it would be to live there. But even so, there are only two or three places in the Lake District I'd actually like to live: the towns. And they are only liveable because tourism gives them far more vitality than most towns of their size.

Let's not even get started on the not uncommon experience of 'outsiders' helping to prevent even small development in their perfect village, and the children of locals therefore being unable to afford to live there.

The story of how outsiders who moved into Par in Cornwall tried to get the clay works shut down, and were somewhat surprised by the rude reception they received is brilliantly funny.

From the accounts I heard in the pub, it would make a comedy series.

Leon said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

Lol. I am not one for boasting about my earnings, but I think you would have to sell a lot more of your trashy novels to come close. The prob with your very medieval mindset is that you think the world is very simplisticThis is because you are actually rather disappointed with your life, hence all the boasting. A classic psychological indicator of dissatisfaction. There will be some people who live in villages who are as small minded as you. Indeed many voted Brexit, just like you. There are others who choose to live like that because an English village is the epitome of class and beauty. Somewhat better than living in some noisy shitty little flat in Clapham.

Mate, I’m literally sitting here drinking a beer looking at this BECAUSE IT’S MY JOB




Am I “rather disappointed with my life”? I suppose it’s possible. And I am I unself-aware? However I then wonder what kind of amazing life I would have to lead for me to be content with it. A life full of intergalactic time travel?

You over analyse. I’m just an enthusiast - and a show off, and an exhibitionist

I used to travel a lot for my work. Got pretty fecking tedious after a while, so you have my sympathy. Some people used to think it was glamourous, and I used to send my friends pics in lovely places, and they used to think "we don't really care". Bit like when you post your pics on here.

wooliedyed said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

kle4 said:

kjh said:

MarqueeMark said:

Malmesbury said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Great to see Finland and Sweden both formally confirming applications to join NATO.

In four months the Great Russian Bear has been humiliated by Slava Ukraini, pushed back first from Kyiv and then from Kherson and seen two nations famous for neutrality for decades now aligning with NATO.

And now NATO are talking openly about the possibility of Ukraine winning the war. If they do, they should join NATO themselves.

What a catastrophic humiliating screw up by Putin.

An admission that his reason for the special military operation was bollocks from the start.

https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1526175012096548864
Putin today:
NATO expansion is artificial. Russia has no problems with Finland and Sweden, so their entry into NATO does not pose an immediate threat. Russia's response to the entry of Finland and Sweden into NATO will depend on the expansion of the alliance's infrastructure...

Also an admission that despite all his bellicose rhetoric about NATO expansion, the defanged Russian bear has been revealed to be utterly impotent and can't do anything about expansion. While they're comprehensively failing in a war with Ukraine, they're not going to open a second front in Finland.

Now is the perfect cover for any Eastern European nations who aren't under the umbrella of NATO protection to take the opportunity to do so, fast.

There are no European Countries left who would want to be in NATO - Serbia definitely wouldn't, Bosnia probably not. Austria is neutral by treaty, Switzerland relies on he fact that you'd have to fight all the way though NATO to get to them....

https://www.nato.int/nato-on-the-map

A Belarus that has overthrown its dictator and seen what happened to Ukraine might....

Moldova might be getting jittery over its neutrality stance as well.

I think it was the Finnish President when discussing neutrality who pointed out that since Russia started demanding people not be able to do things, like join NATO, then that would make it no longer their choice to not be in it, and thus not really neutrality anymore.

Russia's diplomatic hysteria and trash talking seems to have made Putin feel like a big man, but made it clear neutrality may not really be neutrality anymore, it was bowing to Russian demands, and the invasion showed the potential cost of that.

That’s a very astute point by the Finnish PM. Basically Putin said Choose us or them?

President, not PM (though she probably said something similar). Fortunately they are easy to tell apart, I hate identikit politicians.

She looks like Arwen after she's been on a six week elf bender
Which given her naughtiness during covid I suspect is true true true

I liked the story of her getting in a little trouble because she went out clubbing during Covid. Not because I think it is an issue that she is young enough to still be interested in going clubbing, all the merrier I say, but because she said she'd left her work phone at home when doing so - perhaps I ask too much of heads of government, but I'd hope they were contactable at all hours if necessary. At the least it shows a firm commitment in FInland to work life balance.

Carnyx said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

I'm all for getting people back to the office, but I am amused at the idea a preference for 'village life', whatever that means, is akin to being a medieval peasant. I think far fewer would yearn for village life if it was in any way alike that of a medieval village!

I live in a settlement of 9,000 people. Always some debate whether that is a town or a village.
I mostly WFH (1 day a week in the office at the moment).
The "village" has a full size Tesco, a leisure centre with a swimming pool and 2 High Schools (it's West Scotland of course). Hardly the peasant life.

Hmm, not much different from mine. And of course Wick is only slightly smaller.

When I was growing up everyone referred to Cheadle Hulme (pop. c 29,000) as a village. On the grounds that it's not a town. Fair enough, but it's not what people think of as a village and probably not what we're discussing here.

kle4 said:

Leon said:

kle4 said:

kjh said:

MarqueeMark said:

Malmesbury said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Great to see Finland and Sweden both formally confirming applications to join NATO.

In four months the Great Russian Bear has been humiliated by Slava Ukraini, pushed back first from Kyiv and then from Kherson and seen two nations famous for neutrality for decades now aligning with NATO.

And now NATO are talking openly about the possibility of Ukraine winning the war. If they do, they should join NATO themselves.

What a catastrophic humiliating screw up by Putin.

An admission that his reason for the special military operation was bollocks from the start.

https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1526175012096548864
Putin today:
NATO expansion is artificial. Russia has no problems with Finland and Sweden, so their entry into NATO does not pose an immediate threat. Russia's response to the entry of Finland and Sweden into NATO will depend on the expansion of the alliance's infrastructure...

Also an admission that despite all his bellicose rhetoric about NATO expansion, the defanged Russian bear has been revealed to be utterly impotent and can't do anything about expansion. While they're comprehensively failing in a war with Ukraine, they're not going to open a second front in Finland.

Now is the perfect cover for any Eastern European nations who aren't under the umbrella of NATO protection to take the opportunity to do so, fast.

There are no European Countries left who would want to be in NATO - Serbia definitely wouldn't, Bosnia probably not. Austria is neutral by treaty, Switzerland relies on he fact that you'd have to fight all the way though NATO to get to them....

https://www.nato.int/nato-on-the-map

A Belarus that has overthrown its dictator and seen what happened to Ukraine might....

Moldova might be getting jittery over its neutrality stance as well.

I think it was the Finnish President when discussing neutrality who pointed out that since Russia started demanding people not be able to do things, like join NATO, then that would make it no longer their choice to not be in it, and thus not really neutrality anymore.

Russia's diplomatic hysteria and trash talking seems to have made Putin feel like a big man, but made it clear neutrality may not really be neutrality anymore, it was bowing to Russian demands, and the invasion showed the potential cost of that.

That’s a very astute point by the Finnish PM. Basically Putin said Choose us or them?

President, not PM (though she probably said something similar). Fortunately they are easy to tell apart, I hate identikit politicians.

Politics is clearly not showbusiness for ugly people in Finland.

DavidL said:

kjh said:

DavidL said:

kjh said:

On topic: Whether Boris is right or wrong about working from home the key thing is it is none of his f-ing business.

Honestly these Conservatives with their mantra of not getting involved in peoples lives just can't help themselves from doing just that.

Except it is the government's business if people cannot work because their driving licences have not been processed, cannot go on holiday because productivity at the Passport Office has collapsed, if, as is the case locally, it is taking more than a month for a consultant's letter to be typed and posted, if people cannot sell their homes bought 4 years ago because they still don't have a valid title, if people are sitting in jail for more than a year before coming to trial, etc etc.

Private businesses can and should do what they like and what suits them best but the service being provided by HMG across a range of functions at the moment is not nearly good enough and the government is (rightly) getting the flack for it.

It is up to the boss to decide which is most effective. If people need to be in the office I have no issue with that being mandated by the bosses in the civil service or private industry. It has nothing to do with politicians.

In the Public Sector the politicians are the boss. They are accountable for the performance of their departments and the quality of services they provide and they are responding to public frustration that it is not nearly good enough for the money that is being spent.

They are not responsible for day to day management. They are entitled to push their view on government employees nonetheless, but it was an area where Sir Humphrey was actually correct when pointing out Hacker did not run the department, not in that way.

kle4 said:

wooliedyed said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

kle4 said:

kjh said:

MarqueeMark said:

Malmesbury said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Great to see Finland and Sweden both formally confirming applications to join NATO.

In four months the Great Russian Bear has been humiliated by Slava Ukraini, pushed back first from Kyiv and then from Kherson and seen two nations famous for neutrality for decades now aligning with NATO.

And now NATO are talking openly about the possibility of Ukraine winning the war. If they do, they should join NATO themselves.

What a catastrophic humiliating screw up by Putin.

An admission that his reason for the special military operation was bollocks from the start.

https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1526175012096548864
Putin today:
NATO expansion is artificial. Russia has no problems with Finland and Sweden, so their entry into NATO does not pose an immediate threat. Russia's response to the entry of Finland and Sweden into NATO will depend on the expansion of the alliance's infrastructure...

Also an admission that despite all his bellicose rhetoric about NATO expansion, the defanged Russian bear has been revealed to be utterly impotent and can't do anything about expansion. While they're comprehensively failing in a war with Ukraine, they're not going to open a second front in Finland.

Now is the perfect cover for any Eastern European nations who aren't under the umbrella of NATO protection to take the opportunity to do so, fast.

There are no European Countries left who would want to be in NATO - Serbia definitely wouldn't, Bosnia probably not. Austria is neutral by treaty, Switzerland relies on he fact that you'd have to fight all the way though NATO to get to them....

https://www.nato.int/nato-on-the-map

A Belarus that has overthrown its dictator and seen what happened to Ukraine might....

Moldova might be getting jittery over its neutrality stance as well.

I think it was the Finnish President when discussing neutrality who pointed out that since Russia started demanding people not be able to do things, like join NATO, then that would make it no longer their choice to not be in it, and thus not really neutrality anymore.

Russia's diplomatic hysteria and trash talking seems to have made Putin feel like a big man, but made it clear neutrality may not really be neutrality anymore, it was bowing to Russian demands, and the invasion showed the potential cost of that.

That’s a very astute point by the Finnish PM. Basically Putin said Choose us or them?

President, not PM (though she probably said something similar). Fortunately they are easy to tell apart, I hate identikit politicians.

She looks like Arwen after she's been on a six week elf bender
Which given her naughtiness during covid I suspect is true true true

I liked the story of her getting in a little trouble because she went out clubbing during Covid. Not because I think it is an issue that she is young enough to still be interested in going clubbing, all the merrier I say, but because she said she'd left her work phone at home when doing so - perhaps I ask too much of heads of government, but I'd hope they were contactable at all hours if necessary. At the least it shows a firm commitment in FInland to work life balance.

Imma not checking my phone there's a boy I want to bang down the club.
She also has expenses issues apparently.
She's a Tory. A foxy, clubby, slightly fey, party Tory

Cookie said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

Lol. I am not one for boasting about my earnings, but I think you would have to sell a lot more of your trashy novels to come close. The prob with your very medieval mindset is that you think the world is very simplisticThis is because you are actually rather disappointed with your life, hence all the boasting. A classic psychological indicator of dissatisfaction. There will be some people who live in villages who are as small minded as you. Indeed many voted Brexit, just like you. There are others who choose to live like that because an English village is the epitome of class and beauty. Somewhat better than living in some noisy shitty little flat in Clapham.

Mate, I’m literally sitting here drinking a beer looking at this BECAUSE IT’S MY JOB




Am I “rather disappointed with my life”? I suppose it’s possible. And I am I unself-aware? However I then wonder what kind of amazing life I would have to lead for me to be content with it. A life full of intergalactic time travel?

You over analyse. I’m just an enthusiast - and a show off, and an exhibitionist

I used to travel a lot for my work. Got pretty fecking tedious after a while, so you have my sympathy. Some people used to think it was glamourous, and I used to send my friends pics in lovely places, and they used to think "we don'treally care". Bit like when you post your pics on here.

I quite like them, tbh.

So do I, but don't tell him that.

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

I'm all for getting people back to the office, but I am amused at the idea a preference for 'village life', whatever that means, is akin to being a medieval peasant. I think far fewer would yearn for village life if it was in any way alike that of a medieval village!

I live in a settlement of 9,000 people. Always some debate whether that is a town or a village.
I mostly WFH (1 day a week in the office at the moment).
The "village" has a full size Tesco, a leisure centre with a swimming pool and 2 High Schools (it's West Scotland of course). Hardly the peasant life.

9000 inhabitants is not a “village” by any standard. Who the heck calls that a village?!

I am right how sitting in a Greek village having a beer. This is what a village looks like

About 30 houses. Maybe 100 inhabitants. Two tavernas and a church

I recall at school discussion of how to define villages, towns, cities etc, and different countries doing so differently. On the basis of judging them by amenity provision it was pointed out it could be argued a Norwegian 'town' might be 200 people, while some 'villages' in poorer areas of the Africa say could be tens of thousands. That would be a pretty ridiculous approach in fairness.

I think up to a couple of thousand can generally get classed as a 'large village' in this country (if not too dense, eg a massive new settlement on the edge of a larger town) - often it is a historic core village identity, and then larger areas of modern development which call themselves part of the village as it is less council tax. There are certainly parishes which have upwards of 7k people in them, across a number of settlements perhaps, which I'd argue is really stretching it.

Generally in most Western countries a city is usually over 100,000 people, a small city or large town is 50 to 100,000, a small town is under 50,000 people and in the UK a village is under 10,000 people and a hamlet under 1,000 people

Blimey. Personally I'd think anything over 100 is a village not a hamlet. My gut says 15-30 is medium town, 5-15 small town. But that's just preference.

Of course, as we know a city in the UK can be any size at all, including the scale of a small village, so none of it makes any sense anyway.

wooliedyed said:

kle4 said:

wooliedyed said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

kle4 said:

kjh said:

MarqueeMark said:

Malmesbury said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Great to see Finland and Sweden both formally confirming applications to join NATO.

In four months the Great Russian Bear has been humiliated by Slava Ukraini, pushed back first from Kyiv and then from Kherson and seen two nations famous for neutrality for decades now aligning with NATO.

And now NATO are talking openly about the possibility of Ukraine winning the war. If they do, they should join NATO themselves.

What a catastrophic humiliating screw up by Putin.

An admission that his reason for the special military operation was bollocks from the start.

https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1526175012096548864
Putin today:
NATO expansion is artificial. Russia has no problems with Finland and Sweden, so their entry into NATO does not pose an immediate threat. Russia's response to the entry of Finland and Sweden into NATO will depend on the expansion of the alliance's infrastructure...

Also an admission that despite all his bellicose rhetoric about NATO expansion, the defanged Russian bear has been revealed to be utterly impotent and can't do anything about expansion. While they're comprehensively failing in a war with Ukraine, they're not going to open a second front in Finland.

Now is the perfect cover for any Eastern European nations who aren't under the umbrella of NATO protection to take the opportunity to do so, fast.

There are no European Countries left who would want to be in NATO - Serbia definitely wouldn't, Bosnia probably not. Austria is neutral by treaty, Switzerland relies on he fact that you'd have to fight all the way though NATO to get to them....

https://www.nato.int/nato-on-the-map

A Belarus that has overthrown its dictator and seen what happened to Ukraine might....

Moldova might be getting jittery over its neutrality stance as well.

I think it was the Finnish President when discussing neutrality who pointed out that since Russia started demanding people not be able to do things, like join NATO, then that would make it no longer their choice to not be in it, and thus not really neutrality anymore.

Russia's diplomatic hysteria and trash talking seems to have made Putin feel like a big man, but made it clear neutrality may not really be neutrality anymore, it was bowing to Russian demands, and the invasion showed the potential cost of that.

That’s a very astute point by the Finnish PM. Basically Putin said Choose us or them?

President, not PM (though she probably said something similar). Fortunately they are easy to tell apart, I hate identikit politicians.

She looks like Arwen after she's been on a six week elf bender
Which given her naughtiness during covid I suspect is true true true

I liked the story of her getting in a little trouble because she went out clubbing during Covid. Not because I think it is an issue that she is young enough to still be interested in going clubbing, all the merrier I say, but because she said she'd left her work phone at home when doing so - perhaps I ask too much of heads of government, but I'd hope they were contactable at all hours if necessary. At the least it shows a firm commitment in FInland to work life balance.

Imma not checking my phone there's a boy I want to bang down the club.
She also has expenses issues apparently.
She's a Tory. A foxy, clubby, slightly fey, party Tory

I like her.

Northern_Al said:

DavidL said:

Carnyx said:

DavidL said:

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

kjh said:

On topic: Whether Boris is right or wrong about working from home the key thing is it is none of his f-ing business.

Honestly these Conservatives with their mantra of not getting involved in peoples lives just can't help themselves from doing just that.

Except it is the government's business if people cannot work because their driving licences have not been processed, cannot go on holiday because productivity at the Passport Office has collapsed, if, as is the case locally, it is taking more than a month for a consultant's letter to be typed and posted, if people cannot sell their homes bought 4 years ago because they still don't have a valid title, if people are sitting in jail for more than a year before coming to trial, etc etc.

Private businesses can and should do what they like and what suits them best but the service being provided by HMG across a range of functions at the moment is not nearly good enough and the government is (rightly) getting the flack for it.

The government is not restricting itself to moaning about WFH among its own employees, though that is their focus. It is quite clear they don't want anyone doing it, as they criticise it in generalities, as a concept, not merely as it relates to government business.

Well, to that extent I would disagree with them unless they have clear evidence that it is affecting national productivity adversely. That does seem to be the public sector experience but it is not likely to be universal, not at all. Of course they may be worried too about the adverse effect on the funding of public transport systems, city centre shops etc too. But they need to sort out their own house before they start criticising others who may be doing it better.

Point of order. Do we know the staffing is the same?

And some of the delay will be backlog from the lockdowns. This is not attributable to the availability of WFH, strictly, in itself - but there is a connection also if the demand is itself a backlog. eg passports suddenly obsolescing en bloc over 2 years.

Of course, this doesn't escuse lack of action of whatever kind needed.

I think that backlogs in a lot of areas undoubtedly increased during lockdowns (although that itself is some evidence that WFH is simply not as efficient for adminstrative tasks); the public sector had extremely cautious isolation protocols so the time staff were off skyrocketed and of course a lot of people were ill. But its time to pull a finger out, several in fact.

Quite right - let's clear the backlog, whatever its causes, which are likely to be multiple.

JRM - let's start by getting rid of 91,000 civil servants. That'll help!

Didn't we employ at least that many for the contact test and trace people? A reasonable enough idea that should have been abandoned much, much earlier as a total failure.

I have recently had Covid. I had 2 tests, both negative, when I was really quite ill and presumably infectious. As I got better I got a positive test which turned negative again only 5 days later. Only 1 experience but we should have realised that test and trace was never going to work 18 months before we did.

Cutting civil servants in areas with backlogs is obviously silly though.

rottenborough said:

Ian Dunt
@IanDunt
·
5h
Nothing cheers me up like reports of Russian military defeat.

If you could bottle the way it makes me feel, Priti Patel would ban it.

https://twitter.com/IanDunt

What would Govey do with it?

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Leon said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Dean, remote working makes it much more viable to live in remoter, more rural areas (provided there's sufficient comms infrastructure). If you demand everyone goes into an office for vague and mystical reasons then that just returns to the pattern of cramming people into and near cities.

The internet might yet be the first thing in history that (through success rather than collapse) leads to cities diminishing and villages proliferating. But it needs remote working to happen.

Who wants to live in a fucking village? Inbred nerds

Anyone who wants to keep away from towny twats like yourself.

If the peak of your ambition in life is to live in, and work in, a village, then you have the mindset of a medieval peasant and you should get the equivalent wage

Indeed, I am pretty sure this is what will happen. People who WFH will end up earning less and less, because they are demonstrably less efficient, until the inferior wages and opportunities are such a deterrent they go back to the office for most of the week

Only really senior people will get the option to WFH at full salary. A perk and an incentive

Lol. I am not one for boasting about my earnings, but I think you would have to sell a lot more of your trashy novels to come close. The prob with your very medieval mindset is that you think the world is very simplisticThis is because you are actually rather disappointed with your life, hence all the boasting. A classic psychological indicator of dissatisfaction. There will be some people who live in villages who are as small minded as you. Indeed many voted Brexit, just like you. There are others who choose to live like that because an English village is the epitome of class and beauty. Somewhat better than living in some noisy shitty little flat in Clapham.

Mate, I’m literally sitting here drinking a beer looking at this BECAUSE IT’S MY JOB




Am I “rather disappointed with my life”? I suppose it’s possible. And I am I unself-aware? However I then wonder what kind of amazing life I would have to lead for me to be content with it. A life full of intergalactic time travel?

You over analyse. I’m just an enthusiast - and a show off, and an exhibitionist

I used to travel a lot for my work. Got pretty fecking tedious after a while, so you have my sympathy. Some people used to think it was glamourous, and I used to send my friends pics in lovely places, and they used to think "we don't really care". Bit like when you post your pics on here.

There’s “travelling for work” which - for most people - means flying into a town, staying in a pleasant hotel and doing a load of meetings then flying out again, with maybe a couple of hours to explore and a nice dinner

Then there’s “getting paid to have holidays in extraordinary places” which is somewhat different?

But I’ll stop now in case I come across as boastful. And I’d hate that

I’m glad for you that you’ve made a lot of money, and I only hope you enjoy it!