The battle to find Starmer’s succesor as LOTO? – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
Chuka Umunna?FrancisUrquhart said:What's the record for the shortest leadership bid....Mr Green has to be in the running.
0 -
Depends on whether Badenoch, Braverman and Patel get their act together or not. They're fishing in the same pond, aren't they? There's enough MPs to get one of them into the ballots, but not all three.MISTY said:numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
Does Bandenoch even have enough endorsements to make it to the second round?0 -
So. Boris' government was run on the priorities of Twitter?williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
Noted.2 -
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
3 -
We don't even know if Patel is standing.Stuartinromford said:
Depends on whether Badenoch, Braverman and Patel get their act together or not. They're fishing in the same pond, aren't they? There's enough MPs to get one of them into the ballots, but not all three.MISTY said:numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
Does Bandenoch even have enough endorsements to make it to the second round?
So far out of her depth it is untrue.0 -
The priorities of Twitter are to get the money Musk owes them paid aren't they?dixiedean said:
So. Boris' government was run on the priorities of Twitter?williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
Noted.0 -
It is a myth that there's been stagnation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Instead the proceeds of growth had to go into paying off Blair and Brown's credit style spending.-1 -
I think that any of this lot will be lightweights and it will be two more years of Johnsonian ineptness but without the entertainment factorNigel_Foremain said:
Oh no, she thinks she knows "the people's priorities". Sounds very like Johnson.williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
1 -
It is a compelling motivation, but not if it replaces him with someone not much better. The reality is that you judge a person by the company they keep. He was quite happy to keep Johnson's company, even after Partygate. For that he should not be rewarded. It shows that if he has principles they are as "flexible" as Johnson's, and even if one gives him benefit of the doubt on that, his indecision is bare for all to see.eek said:
Surely that's the plan of all sane MPs - get this sorted out ASAP so Bozo is gone ASAP..Big_G_NorthWales said:Even Gavin Williamson has declared for Rishi
The way this is going he could be PM next week0 -
It also doesn't address the basic point that, if it is anything like the universities I know, a great deal of this training will be to meet legislative requirements (e.g. on personal info) - I've done such courses. Which requirements were imposed by HMG regs and Parliamentary legislation. So why not simply subsume it into the overall research overhead?oxfordsimon said:
I know it comes from the idea of treating public sector activity as a business but if you don't have a proper business mentality running the shop, you end up with bloat.Carnyx said:
Concerning the public sector as a whole, this stems from thinking introduced by the Conservatives, as I well recall from the early days ... not exactly helping improve efficiency is it?oxfordsimon said:
In almost any public funding organisation, there is always bloat when it comes to staffing.BartholomewRoberts said:
Start sacking people in useless jobs. There's plenty of those about.CorrectHorseBattery said:
There is no more to slim unless we start sacking people. How is that going to help?williamglenn said:@singharj
Badenoch now saying politicians have “for too long being telling you: you can have your cake and eat it”
She tries to distance herself from unfunded tax cuts and spending rises by suggesting she’ll slim down the state
https://twitter.com/singharj/status/1546799488047644672
The tax base is at the highest its been in decades and spending went up not down during so-called "austerity". There's plenty to slim.
I know it is a minor example but my housemate works for the IT department at the University of Oxford. A large part of her role is teaching researchers how to manage their data and other such jobs.
At present, these courses (which are only open to members of staff and students) are free to attend.
The powers that be have now decided that they will have to become chargeable.
So money will be moved from one part of the university accounts to another part of the university accounts
And to do this, more admin staff in the Finance department will have to be employed and more admin time in individual departments will be used to process the payment requisitions.
None of this actually helps researchers. Indeed attendance at the courses is likely to drop as a result.
So new processes and systems are being introduced, more staff costs incurred for no improvement is actual delivery.
The university generates no new money out of this. And it will actually increase staff costs.
This is typical public sector thinking. And I am pretty confident similar bloat exists in every other public organisation in our nation.
Moving money around different departments just costs money. It doesn't generate it.1 -
I think this is about right FWIW - she (Mordaunt) is the dark horse and I'd guess would beat Truss if it came to a member's vote. She simply has more substance.HYUFD said:
She won't, she has already launched, already has more than enough MPs to get nominated unlike Shapps and will likely be runner up to Sunak in the ballot tomorrow.CorrectHorseBattery said:Mordaunt goes for Sunak IMHO and she ends up Chancellor or something like that
0 -
There has been stagnation and only a muppet would deny it.BartholomewRoberts said:
It is a myth that there's been stagnation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Instead the proceeds of growth had to go into paying off Blair and Brown's credit style spending.3 -
Yep. The US and UK want to keep harsh sanctions in place until Russia has reformed sufficiently to be allowed back into the world, which will be several years away still.Malmesbury said:
Well, the sanctions that the US has imposed means that any German entities starting up Nord Stream 2 would be breaking US sanctions. Good luck trying to do finance on this planet while avoiding the US sanction regime.BlancheLivermore said:
How long until Germany opens NordStream 2?Andy_JS said:"Germany faces ‘nightmare’ winter as Russia shuts down Nord Stream 1" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/germany-faces-nightmare-winter-as-russia-shuts-down-nord-stream-1-8vnzc950j
This will, I predict, become a source of friction. When Germany decides the Ukraine War is over as far as they are concerned, they will want to lift sanctions. The US will, almost certainly, want to keep sanctions - certainly far longer than Germany...
Germany wants some negotiated ceasefire followed immediately by turning on the gas taps.0 -
There is a clarity in the way she speaks that is admirable. But there is also a failure to recognise how complicated things are. She may well be leader one day but not, I think, this time. She needs more experience in bigger jobs first.numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
2 -
Possible blocks of support:
Sunak, Tugendhat, Hunt.
Mordaunt, Truss, Javid.
Badenoch, Braverman, Zahawi, Patel.1 -
She just listed cost of living, health, crime, education, etc as the most important issues and said they should focus on governing rather than attacking Labour.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
3 -
Johnson was the worst PM in my lifetime (which starts with Wilson in the mid sixties) - followed by Blair. Cameron had his flaws but he was miles better for this country than Blair who could never open his mouth without filling it with lies.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.0 -
While I think her pronouncements on Brexit are out of alignment with my beliefs I hope it will be Mordaunt. We need a fresh broom. If she turns out to be crap, then Labour then deserve to win.Beibheirli_C said:
I think that any of this lot will be lightweights and it will be two more years of Johnsonian ineptness but without the entertainment factorNigel_Foremain said:
Oh no, she thinks she knows "the people's priorities". Sounds very like Johnson.williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
0 -
Oh I do the exact same thing (I'm a solution architect for MS's Power Platform) - and I have zero problems automating jobs out of the way.Malmesbury said:
I currently work on destroying jobs. Literally.eek said:
Those jobs all exist for a reason - so you need to bin the reason why the job exists.BartholomewRoberts said:
Start sacking people in useless jobs. There's plenty of those about.CorrectHorseBattery said:
There is no more to slim unless we start sacking people. How is that going to help?williamglenn said:@singharj
Badenoch now saying politicians have “for too long being telling you: you can have your cake and eat it”
She tries to distance herself from unfunded tax cuts and spending rises by suggesting she’ll slim down the state
https://twitter.com/singharj/status/1546799488047644672
The tax base is at the highest its been in decades and spending went up not down during so-called "austerity". There's plenty to slim.
And that opens up a different question - what should the Government do and why?
My work consists of building completely automated flows in a bank, with manual interventions at few defined points. This will eliminate all the copy and pasta between systems and whole teams of people who shout at other banks on the phone about how they can't add.
Five minutes in the NHS (for example) tells you that vast increases in productivity and job satisfaction could be created by proper processes and systems. Instead, it appears to be a system that spends much of it energy (and money) on stopping the medics doing their jobs.
@BartholomewRoberts isn't talking about efficiency and quality improvements though he just wants to bin jobs he doesn't see the point of. My viewpoint is that few people create jobs for the sake of it, so those equality officers and similar roles exist for a reason.
And that's my biggest issue here I can save a whole pile of money 1 to 2 years down the line but to do that you need to invest money first - and you will need to have a software deployment (and staff redeployment) plan that doesn't scare the people who are seeing their work disappear4 -
I agree to the extent that Shapps' endorsement doesn't makes Sunak massively more likely to become PM.Andy_JS said:
Shapps had very little support. Surprised his endorsement has moved the market so much.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Rumour Shapps will drop out and endorse Rishi. ETA which he now has; also Raab endorsement.MikeSmithson said:Just been out. Why has Rishi surged in the betting?
What it does do, however, is give a valuable insight into thinking among Tory MPs. Shapps is an ambitious and somewhat Machiavellian political operator who isn't backing Sunak because he has some kind of deep philosophical and policy connection with the man - he's doing it because he has taken the temperature of colleagues and decided his best option is to get on board with a winner. He might be wrong, but that's the judgment he's making and he knows a lot about Tory politics, particularly in Parliament.
In these situations, in terms of betting, don't look at what people are saying - look at what they are doing. What Shapps has done doesn't change the weather but does indicate what the weather is.5 -
It is not possible to assess Blair's achievements without allowing for the incredible hand of aces & picture cards he was dealt.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Taking that into account, Blair is not that much better than Cameron.
Both are clearly better than Boris.1 -
Imagine the kind of literally insane muppet that could accidentally trick himself into supporting Jeremy Corbyn2
-
More to selflessly throw their support behind an apparent frontrunner in the hope of getting a plum Cabinet job.Beibheirli_C said:
Perhaps they were more deluded than the others?FrancisUrquhart said:Why did the likes of Rabb and Shapps even start a campaign?
Did Raab actually start a campaign though? I lose track.0 -
Okay good that’s better! How will she tackle thesewilliamglenn said:
She just listed cost of living, health, crime, education, etc as the most important issues and said they should focus on governing rather than attacking Labour.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
0 -
I think that was a warning to his own back/frontbenchers, not a comparison with the Opposition-in-waiting.dixiedean said:
So. Boris' government was run on the priorities of Twitter?williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
Noted.0 -
The quango'isation of government should be a concern - it is about removing accountability in the spending of public money using "independence" as a fig leaf. It also is quite handy in a chumocracy as a way to employ friends and family without the hassle of it being too obvious.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
3 -
In which case I hope she wins. I no longer have a vote, but if I did I would vote Mordaunt. Sunak is yesterday's lightweight.HYUFD said:
She won't, she has already launched, already has more than enough MPs to get nominated unlike Shapps and will likely be runner up to Sunak in the ballot tomorrow.CorrectHorseBattery said:Mordaunt goes for Sunak IMHO and she ends up Chancellor or something like that
2 -
We can agree that Cameron and Blair were infinitely better than Johnson yes. And until Brexit Cameron achievement wise wasn’t bad despite his moronic austerity.YBarddCwsc said:
It is not possible to assess Blair's achievements without allowing for the incredible hand of aces & picture cards he was dealt.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Taking that into account, Blair is not that much better than Cameron.
Both are clearly better than Boris.1 -
I have to say, I prefer Liverpool's skyline. There are some really interesting buildings around the city centreCookie said:
It's the colour of it which is dividing opinion.Beibheirli_C said:
It is up near Piccadilly Station, between it and Great Ancoats St. Up there, anything new built would be an improvement and bring the place on a bit. Ancoats itself has had a lot of redevelopment and it looks better for itPro_Rata said:
That's not offensive and quite like the part octagon shaping. And it's not that tall really.Nigelb said:
That is quite deliberate, I think.Leon said:
Boring, I'm afraid - to my mind. Also, 96% of planned buildings look better in the render than in reality, so that will get worseCookie said:Off thread, but do other posters have a view on this proposed tower in Manchester:
You will not be surprised to learn that Amir Khan is involved.
To my surprise, despite trying, I don't hate it. (I hope I'm not unduly influenced in this by the fact that Sam Wheeler, the Momentum largely anti-development councillor for this part of the city centre, does hate it.) I think the higher the building, the more reflective it needs to be, particularly in a city where sunshine isn't a given, and it will at least be shiny.
https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/developer-of-manchesters-19m-gold-tower-eyes-more-sites/
And quite a few renders I've seen are from perspectives impossible in real life unless you're airborne. Good architects are rare.
Where is it? Are we looking N / NE towards the St. Peter's Square there? Somewhere west of Oxford Road?
As I said, while I expected to hate it, I don't. And it's better than what's there at the moment (though there are new buildings in Manchester which are better than what was there before but still represent a regrettable missed opportunity, and in this area of town I would expect something else to come forward if this does not).
For me, it passes the test - but I can see why it's controversial.0 -
She was just talking about long-term system change rather than short-term gimmicks and making policy for tabloid headlines.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Okay good that’s better! How will she tackle thesewilliamglenn said:
She just listed cost of living, health, crime, education, etc as the most important issues and said they should focus on governing rather than attacking Labour.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
3 -
He counts as at least four different people, I thinkAndy_JS said:
Shapps had very little support. Surprised his endorsement has moved the market so much.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Rumour Shapps will drop out and endorse Rishi. ETA which he now has; also Raab endorsement.MikeSmithson said:Just been out. Why has Rishi surged in the betting?
0 -
Yes, that is spot-on, I think. Indeed I think I tipped her as a possible future leader a couple of years ago. But you are right that she's still too green to go straight into the PM slot.DavidL said:
There is a clarity in the way she speaks that is admirable. But there is also a failure to recognise how complicated things are. She may well be leader one day but not, I think, this time. She needs more experience in bigger jobs first.numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
3 -
Is not another element the use of charitable status to gain tax advantages?Malmesbury said:
The quango'isation of government should be a concern - it is about removing accountability in the spending of public money using "independence" as a fig leaf. It also is quite handy in a chumocracy as a way to employ friends and family without the hassle of it being too obvious.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
0 -
There is also an instinctive fear among some German leaders that at the first sign of hardship, the German people will start shopping at Hugo Boss. This doesn't match the experiences of the 1950s, or the unemployment of the 80s... but they believe it.Sandpit said:
Yep. The US and UK want to keep harsh sanctions in place until Russia has reformed sufficiently to be allowed back into the world, which will be several years away still.Malmesbury said:
Well, the sanctions that the US has imposed means that any German entities starting up Nord Stream 2 would be breaking US sanctions. Good luck trying to do finance on this planet while avoiding the US sanction regime.BlancheLivermore said:
How long until Germany opens NordStream 2?Andy_JS said:"Germany faces ‘nightmare’ winter as Russia shuts down Nord Stream 1" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/germany-faces-nightmare-winter-as-russia-shuts-down-nord-stream-1-8vnzc950j
This will, I predict, become a source of friction. When Germany decides the Ukraine War is over as far as they are concerned, they will want to lift sanctions. The US will, almost certainly, want to keep sanctions - certainly far longer than Germany...
Germany wants some negotiated ceasefire followed immediately by turning on the gas taps.0 -
Philosophical question: do we sometimes overestimate how important convenience is or should be compared to other values? Maybe other things are more important than convenience.eek said:
Oh I do the exact same thing (I'm a solution architect for MS's Power Platform) - and I have zero problems automating jobs out of the way.Malmesbury said:
I currently work on destroying jobs. Literally.eek said:
Those jobs all exist for a reason - so you need to bin the reason why the job exists.BartholomewRoberts said:
Start sacking people in useless jobs. There's plenty of those about.CorrectHorseBattery said:
There is no more to slim unless we start sacking people. How is that going to help?williamglenn said:@singharj
Badenoch now saying politicians have “for too long being telling you: you can have your cake and eat it”
She tries to distance herself from unfunded tax cuts and spending rises by suggesting she’ll slim down the state
https://twitter.com/singharj/status/1546799488047644672
The tax base is at the highest its been in decades and spending went up not down during so-called "austerity". There's plenty to slim.
And that opens up a different question - what should the Government do and why?
My work consists of building completely automated flows in a bank, with manual interventions at few defined points. This will eliminate all the copy and pasta between systems and whole teams of people who shout at other banks on the phone about how they can't add.
Five minutes in the NHS (for example) tells you that vast increases in productivity and job satisfaction could be created by proper processes and systems. Instead, it appears to be a system that spends much of it energy (and money) on stopping the medics doing their jobs.
@BartholomewRoberts isn't talking about efficiency and quality improvements though he just wants to bin jobs he doesn't see the point of. My viewpoint is that few people create jobs for the sake of it, so those equality officers and similar roles exist for a reason.
And that's my biggest issue here I can save a whole pile of money 1 to 2 years down the line but to do that you need to invest money first - and you will need to have a software deployment (and staff redeployment) plan that doesn't scare the people who are seeing their work disappear0 -
I forgot about that. Quick trip to Swindon and he was out. What's he up to these days? I totally forgot he was the future once.Sandpit said:
Chuka Umunna?FrancisUrquhart said:What's the record for the shortest leadership bid....Mr Green has to be in the running.
0 -
Only Sunak does, at present, but we'll see what happens when nominations close today.MISTY said:numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
Does Bandenoch even have enough endorsements to make it to the second round?0 -
How’s about those waiting months for passports, or driving licences, or trying to work through an issue with HMRC?CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
What she’s saying, is that the head of the DVLA should be on the block, if their organisation is not capable of delivering the very basics of the service to which the public should expect.
The more I see of her, the more I like Kemi.5 -
Yes it’s a balance. To take the extreme example, moving the NHS further away form DH and ministerial direction is wrong. It must be accountable and anyway ministers soon regretted not having control. But some things do need distance - something like the Serious Fraud Office or the DPP. Or regulators like the FCA.Malmesbury said:
The quango'isation of government should be a concern - it is about removing accountability in the spending of public money using "independence" as a fig leaf. It also is quite handy in a chumocracy as a way to employ friends and family without the hassle of it being too obvious.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
0 -
If one were being really catty... (why not?)Nigel_Foremain said:
It is a compelling motivation, but not if it replaces him with someone not much better. The reality is that you judge a person by the company they keep. He was quite happy to keep Johnson's company, even after Partygate. For that he should not be rewarded. It shows that if he has principles they are as "flexible" as Johnson's, and even if one gives him benefit of the doubt on that, his indecision is bare for all to see.eek said:
Surely that's the plan of all sane MPs - get this sorted out ASAP so Bozo is gone ASAP..Big_G_NorthWales said:Even Gavin Williamson has declared for Rishi
The way this is going he could be PM next week
It was OK for Boris to treat the country as a whole as mugs.
It was OK for Boris to try and get Paterson off.
The thing that made MPs give up on Boris was the Pincher fiasco. And that was the first one that affected them immediately and personally, because who wants a drunk groper as their HR manager?
More joy in heaven over one sinner who repenteth and all that, but Conservative MPs really ought to be asking themselves why they put up with him for so long.0 -
Charities are another part of the "layering".....Carnyx said:
Is not another element the use of charitable status to gain tax advantages?Malmesbury said:
The quango'isation of government should be a concern - it is about removing accountability in the spending of public money using "independence" as a fig leaf. It also is quite handy in a chumocracy as a way to employ friends and family without the hassle of it being too obvious.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
- Placement.
- Layering.
- Integration / Extraction.
1 - Placement.
-
As an adopted Stopfordian, I'm happier living in (Greater) Manchester, but would recommend visiting Liverpool over Manc. It's a wonderful city; not just just the skyline, the whole 'Georgian Quarter' bit, and even the ropeworks haven't had their cultural/youthful heft entirely corporatised and packaged as Ancoats and the NQ has.Beibheirli_C said:
I have to say, I prefer Liverpool's skyline. There are some really interesting buildings around the city centreCookie said:
It's the colour of it which is dividing opinion.Beibheirli_C said:
It is up near Piccadilly Station, between it and Great Ancoats St. Up there, anything new built would be an improvement and bring the place on a bit. Ancoats itself has had a lot of redevelopment and it looks better for itPro_Rata said:
That's not offensive and quite like the part octagon shaping. And it's not that tall really.Nigelb said:
That is quite deliberate, I think.Leon said:
Boring, I'm afraid - to my mind. Also, 96% of planned buildings look better in the render than in reality, so that will get worseCookie said:Off thread, but do other posters have a view on this proposed tower in Manchester:
You will not be surprised to learn that Amir Khan is involved.
To my surprise, despite trying, I don't hate it. (I hope I'm not unduly influenced in this by the fact that Sam Wheeler, the Momentum largely anti-development councillor for this part of the city centre, does hate it.) I think the higher the building, the more reflective it needs to be, particularly in a city where sunshine isn't a given, and it will at least be shiny.
https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/developer-of-manchesters-19m-gold-tower-eyes-more-sites/
And quite a few renders I've seen are from perspectives impossible in real life unless you're airborne. Good architects are rare.
Where is it? Are we looking N / NE towards the St. Peter's Square there? Somewhere west of Oxford Road?
As I said, while I expected to hate it, I don't. And it's better than what's there at the moment (though there are new buildings in Manchester which are better than what was there before but still represent a regrettable missed opportunity, and in this area of town I would expect something else to come forward if this does not).
For me, it passes the test - but I can see why it's controversial.0 -
Interesting. I like what I read.williamglenn said:
She was just talking about long-term system change rather than short-term gimmicks and making policy for tabloid headlines.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Okay good that’s better! How will she tackle thesewilliamglenn said:
She just listed cost of living, health, crime, education, etc as the most important issues and said they should focus on governing rather than attacking Labour.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
1 -
UNESCO disagree...Beibheirli_C said:
I have to say, I prefer Liverpool's skyline. There are some really interesting buildings around the city centreCookie said:
It's the colour of it which is dividing opinion.Beibheirli_C said:
It is up near Piccadilly Station, between it and Great Ancoats St. Up there, anything new built would be an improvement and bring the place on a bit. Ancoats itself has had a lot of redevelopment and it looks better for itPro_Rata said:
That's not offensive and quite like the part octagon shaping. And it's not that tall really.Nigelb said:
That is quite deliberate, I think.Leon said:
Boring, I'm afraid - to my mind. Also, 96% of planned buildings look better in the render than in reality, so that will get worseCookie said:Off thread, but do other posters have a view on this proposed tower in Manchester:
You will not be surprised to learn that Amir Khan is involved.
To my surprise, despite trying, I don't hate it. (I hope I'm not unduly influenced in this by the fact that Sam Wheeler, the Momentum largely anti-development councillor for this part of the city centre, does hate it.) I think the higher the building, the more reflective it needs to be, particularly in a city where sunshine isn't a given, and it will at least be shiny.
https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/developer-of-manchesters-19m-gold-tower-eyes-more-sites/
And quite a few renders I've seen are from perspectives impossible in real life unless you're airborne. Good architects are rare.
Where is it? Are we looking N / NE towards the St. Peter's Square there? Somewhere west of Oxford Road?
As I said, while I expected to hate it, I don't. And it's better than what's there at the moment (though there are new buildings in Manchester which are better than what was there before but still represent a regrettable missed opportunity, and in this area of town I would expect something else to come forward if this does not).
For me, it passes the test - but I can see why it's controversial.
I have to say the view of Manchester from the Great Divide (Pennines) has changed somewhat over the past 20 years, but it does looks a bit 'generic city' from a distance. It is a bit, well, dull.1 -
Blair is disappointing because he had a once-in-a-century opportunity in 1997. The Left may never get such a brilliant opportunity again to remake Britain.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We can agree that Cameron and Blair were infinitely better than Johnson yes. And until Brexit Cameron achievement wise wasn’t bad despite his moronic austerity.YBarddCwsc said:
It is not possible to assess Blair's achievements without allowing for the incredible hand of aces & picture cards he was dealt.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Taking that into account, Blair is not that much better than Cameron.
Both are clearly better than Boris.
Enormous good will, a huge majority, intelligent & talented -- Blair could & should have done so much more with all that.4 -
Nigel Mills back Kemi.
Badenoch and Truss very close to the threshold now
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1546808752011100163
Tugendhat’s launch on BBC news now.0 -
Guido has Penny, Rishi and Tugendhat over the magic 20. Truss is 1 short.Applicant said:
Only Sunak does, at present, but we'll see what happens when nominations close today.MISTY said:numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
Does Bandenoch even have enough endorsements to make it to the second round?1 -
"I don't like her because I perceive her as right-wing. These issues are not important to me."CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
3 -
No - I think he took soundings, and found he was out of his depth in the Tory puddle.Ghedebrav said:
More to selflessly throw their support behind an apparent frontrunner in the hope of getting a plum Cabinet job.Beibheirli_C said:
Perhaps they were more deluded than the others?FrancisUrquhart said:Why did the likes of Rabb and Shapps even start a campaign?
Did Raab actually start a campaign though? I lose track.1 -
Which, I think, is what led to me having a small high-odds bet on her, although now mostly traded out (I looked at her in more detail and agreed). So, thanks for thatRichard_Nabavi said:
Yes, that is spot-on, I think. Indeed I think I tipped her as a possible future leader a couple of years ago. But you are right that she's still too green to go straight into the PM slot.DavidL said:
There is a clarity in the way she speaks that is admirable. But there is also a failure to recognise how complicated things are. She may well be leader one day but not, I think, this time. She needs more experience in bigger jobs first.numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
1 -
That is essentially what happens now. There is a team dedicated to supporting researchers in a range of data and information areas. A central cost which is rightly part of running a major research university.Carnyx said:
It also doesn't address the basic point that, if it is anything like the universities I know, a great deal of this training will be to meet legislative requirements (e.g. on personal info) - I've done such courses. Which requirements were imposed by HMG regs and Parliamentary legislation. So why not simply subsume it into the overall research overhead?oxfordsimon said:
I know it comes from the idea of treating public sector activity as a business but if you don't have a proper business mentality running the shop, you end up with bloat.Carnyx said:
Concerning the public sector as a whole, this stems from thinking introduced by the Conservatives, as I well recall from the early days ... not exactly helping improve efficiency is it?oxfordsimon said:
In almost any public funding organisation, there is always bloat when it comes to staffing.BartholomewRoberts said:
Start sacking people in useless jobs. There's plenty of those about.CorrectHorseBattery said:
There is no more to slim unless we start sacking people. How is that going to help?williamglenn said:@singharj
Badenoch now saying politicians have “for too long being telling you: you can have your cake and eat it”
She tries to distance herself from unfunded tax cuts and spending rises by suggesting she’ll slim down the state
https://twitter.com/singharj/status/1546799488047644672
The tax base is at the highest its been in decades and spending went up not down during so-called "austerity". There's plenty to slim.
I know it is a minor example but my housemate works for the IT department at the University of Oxford. A large part of her role is teaching researchers how to manage their data and other such jobs.
At present, these courses (which are only open to members of staff and students) are free to attend.
The powers that be have now decided that they will have to become chargeable.
So money will be moved from one part of the university accounts to another part of the university accounts
And to do this, more admin staff in the Finance department will have to be employed and more admin time in individual departments will be used to process the payment requisitions.
None of this actually helps researchers. Indeed attendance at the courses is likely to drop as a result.
So new processes and systems are being introduced, more staff costs incurred for no improvement is actual delivery.
The university generates no new money out of this. And it will actually increase staff costs.
This is typical public sector thinking. And I am pretty confident similar bloat exists in every other public organisation in our nation.
Moving money around different departments just costs money. It doesn't generate it.1 -
I agree also. She should come out of this contest with a senior government role hopefully, and be a big beast challenger next time the leadership is decided. I think she will benefit from some extra time to hone her policies and politics.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, that is spot-on, I think. Indeed I think I tipped her as a possible future leader a couple of years ago. But you are right that she's still too green to go straight into the PM slot.DavidL said:
There is a clarity in the way she speaks that is admirable. But there is also a failure to recognise how complicated things are. She may well be leader one day but not, I think, this time. She needs more experience in bigger jobs first.numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
0 -
The MPs in general have responsibility, but the people who are most to blame are those in cabinet. Why did none of them insist on better standards? They knew what was going on, but did nothing until it got so bad and so embarrassing. They all need time on the backbenches.Stuartinromford said:
If one were being really catty... (why not?)Nigel_Foremain said:
It is a compelling motivation, but not if it replaces him with someone not much better. The reality is that you judge a person by the company they keep. He was quite happy to keep Johnson's company, even after Partygate. For that he should not be rewarded. It shows that if he has principles they are as "flexible" as Johnson's, and even if one gives him benefit of the doubt on that, his indecision is bare for all to see.eek said:
Surely that's the plan of all sane MPs - get this sorted out ASAP so Bozo is gone ASAP..Big_G_NorthWales said:Even Gavin Williamson has declared for Rishi
The way this is going he could be PM next week
It was OK for Boris to treat the country as a whole as mugs.
It was OK for Boris to try and get Paterson off.
The thing that made MPs give up on Boris was the Pincher fiasco. And that was the first one that affected them immediately and personally, because who wants a drunk groper as their HR manager?
More joy in heaven over one sinner who repenteth and all that, but Conservative MPs really ought to be asking themselves why they put up with him for so long.0 -
UNESCO disagrees but @BartholomewRoberts loves it - as means there is a large carpark near the new shopping centreFlatlander said:
UNESCO disagree...Beibheirli_C said:
I have to say, I prefer Liverpool's skyline. There are some really interesting buildings around the city centreCookie said:
It's the colour of it which is dividing opinion.Beibheirli_C said:
It is up near Piccadilly Station, between it and Great Ancoats St. Up there, anything new built would be an improvement and bring the place on a bit. Ancoats itself has had a lot of redevelopment and it looks better for itPro_Rata said:
That's not offensive and quite like the part octagon shaping. And it's not that tall really.Nigelb said:
That is quite deliberate, I think.Leon said:
Boring, I'm afraid - to my mind. Also, 96% of planned buildings look better in the render than in reality, so that will get worseCookie said:Off thread, but do other posters have a view on this proposed tower in Manchester:
You will not be surprised to learn that Amir Khan is involved.
To my surprise, despite trying, I don't hate it. (I hope I'm not unduly influenced in this by the fact that Sam Wheeler, the Momentum largely anti-development councillor for this part of the city centre, does hate it.) I think the higher the building, the more reflective it needs to be, particularly in a city where sunshine isn't a given, and it will at least be shiny.
https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/developer-of-manchesters-19m-gold-tower-eyes-more-sites/
And quite a few renders I've seen are from perspectives impossible in real life unless you're airborne. Good architects are rare.
Where is it? Are we looking N / NE towards the St. Peter's Square there? Somewhere west of Oxford Road?
As I said, while I expected to hate it, I don't. And it's better than what's there at the moment (though there are new buildings in Manchester which are better than what was there before but still represent a regrettable missed opportunity, and in this area of town I would expect something else to come forward if this does not).
For me, it passes the test - but I can see why it's controversial.
I have to say the view of Manchester from the Great Divide (Pennines) has changed somewhat over the past 20 years, but it does looks a bit 'generic city' from a distance. It is a bit, well, dull.
* Robert I know that's a bit unfair but the reason why Liverpool lost it UNESCO status was because of economic improvements and a lot of people point scoring over things they didn't like.
As for the tower block - my initial thought is the colour is wrong - however I remember a visit to BP in Aberdeen years ago and there is nothing worse than looking at bad architecture (that tower ain't bad, just boring) in the wrong colour. And Aberdeen granite doesn't look great when it's fakely placed badly on a tower block1 -
Yes, given that all candidates have to support Brexit, it makes little difference that Mordaunt was supporting before the referendum, rather than later. She does at least come over as authentic.Nigel_Foremain said:
While I think her pronouncements on Brexit are out of alignment with my beliefs I hope it will be Mordaunt. We need a fresh broom. If she turns out to be crap, then Labour then deserve to win.Beibheirli_C said:
I think that any of this lot will be lightweights and it will be two more years of Johnsonian ineptness but without the entertainment factorNigel_Foremain said:
Oh no, she thinks she knows "the people's priorities". Sounds very like Johnson.williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
Brexit is no longer much of an issue in the Party, just degrees of support for tearing up an international treaty. That of course may not be the case with the rest of the country by GE 2024, with 2 more years of sunny uplands looking like a burnt out desert...1 -
I gave up keeping track. In my opinion they all proved their unfitness byGhedebrav said:
More to selflessly throw their support behind an apparent frontrunner in the hope of getting a plum Cabinet job.Beibheirli_C said:
Perhaps they were more deluded than the others?FrancisUrquhart said:Why did the likes of Rabb and Shapps even start a campaign?
Did Raab actually start a campaign though? I lose track.
1 - Running for PM rather then the actual post "Leader of the Conservative Party"
2 - Leapfrogging each other for the most aggressive tax cuts
3 - Looking for people and groups to bash (Woke! We hate Woke!!!!)
There is a lot of stuff that needs sorting out and none of them seem to be anywhere near it. The NHS seems to be on its knees, the country's debt burden is sky-high, we STILL have not sorted out our borders and imports and so on.
Instead it is all "Vote for me! I will give lots of money and slash everything". The irony is, of course, that if the break the NHS the grey vote will be massively affected since they are a major NHS user1 -
Convenience largely comes down to reducing the "effective cost" of X.Andy_JS said:
Philosophical question: do we sometimes overestimate how important convenience is or should be compared to other values? Maybe other things are more important than convenience.eek said:
Oh I do the exact same thing (I'm a solution architect for MS's Power Platform) - and I have zero problems automating jobs out of the way.Malmesbury said:
I currently work on destroying jobs. Literally.eek said:
Those jobs all exist for a reason - so you need to bin the reason why the job exists.BartholomewRoberts said:
Start sacking people in useless jobs. There's plenty of those about.CorrectHorseBattery said:
There is no more to slim unless we start sacking people. How is that going to help?williamglenn said:@singharj
Badenoch now saying politicians have “for too long being telling you: you can have your cake and eat it”
She tries to distance herself from unfunded tax cuts and spending rises by suggesting she’ll slim down the state
https://twitter.com/singharj/status/1546799488047644672
The tax base is at the highest its been in decades and spending went up not down during so-called "austerity". There's plenty to slim.
And that opens up a different question - what should the Government do and why?
My work consists of building completely automated flows in a bank, with manual interventions at few defined points. This will eliminate all the copy and pasta between systems and whole teams of people who shout at other banks on the phone about how they can't add.
Five minutes in the NHS (for example) tells you that vast increases in productivity and job satisfaction could be created by proper processes and systems. Instead, it appears to be a system that spends much of it energy (and money) on stopping the medics doing their jobs.
@BartholomewRoberts isn't talking about efficiency and quality improvements though he just wants to bin jobs he doesn't see the point of. My viewpoint is that few people create jobs for the sake of it, so those equality officers and similar roles exist for a reason.
And that's my biggest issue here I can save a whole pile of money 1 to 2 years down the line but to do that you need to invest money first - and you will need to have a software deployment (and staff redeployment) plan that doesn't scare the people who are seeing their work disappear
The entire economic story since the mechanisation of agriculture is that reducing costs (by increasing productivity) doesn't create unemployment. It actually creates new opportunities to create more wealth.0 -
I don't think this meets the definition of literal insanity.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
She's talked about a whole lot of things. If the issue above was all the she talked about, then yes, it would be a very odd campaign. But to raise some side issues during the course of a campaign isn't literally insane.1 -
It is because that is what it is.Flatlander said:
UNESCO disagree...Beibheirli_C said:
I have to say, I prefer Liverpool's skyline. There are some really interesting buildings around the city centreCookie said:
It's the colour of it which is dividing opinion.Beibheirli_C said:
It is up near Piccadilly Station, between it and Great Ancoats St. Up there, anything new built would be an improvement and bring the place on a bit. Ancoats itself has had a lot of redevelopment and it looks better for itPro_Rata said:
That's not offensive and quite like the part octagon shaping. And it's not that tall really.Nigelb said:
That is quite deliberate, I think.Leon said:
Boring, I'm afraid - to my mind. Also, 96% of planned buildings look better in the render than in reality, so that will get worseCookie said:Off thread, but do other posters have a view on this proposed tower in Manchester:
You will not be surprised to learn that Amir Khan is involved.
To my surprise, despite trying, I don't hate it. (I hope I'm not unduly influenced in this by the fact that Sam Wheeler, the Momentum largely anti-development councillor for this part of the city centre, does hate it.) I think the higher the building, the more reflective it needs to be, particularly in a city where sunshine isn't a given, and it will at least be shiny.
https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/developer-of-manchesters-19m-gold-tower-eyes-more-sites/
And quite a few renders I've seen are from perspectives impossible in real life unless you're airborne. Good architects are rare.
Where is it? Are we looking N / NE towards the St. Peter's Square there? Somewhere west of Oxford Road?
As I said, while I expected to hate it, I don't. And it's better than what's there at the moment (though there are new buildings in Manchester which are better than what was there before but still represent a regrettable missed opportunity, and in this area of town I would expect something else to come forward if this does not).
For me, it passes the test - but I can see why it's controversial.
I have to say the view of Manchester from the Great Divide (Pennines) has changed somewhat over the past 20 years, but it does looks a bit 'generic city' from a distance. It is a bit, well, dull.0 -
A Tory Chancellor committed to a radical slashing of the state for two years is one way to ensure a Labour majority.2
-
JRM and GoNads to switch support at the last minute to Braverman to sink Truss at the first hurdle.numbertwelve said:
Guido has Penny, Rishi and Tugendhat over the magic 20. Truss is 1 short.Applicant said:
Only Sunak does, at present, but we'll see what happens when nominations close today.MISTY said:numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
Does Bandenoch even have enough endorsements to make it to the second round?0 -
Here’s hoping:
MPs think Suella struggling to get to 20
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/15468098452061143043 -
Yoohoo! Dominic! He's waving, Petunia.Nigelb said:
No - I think he took soundings, and found he was out of his depth in the Tory puddle.Ghedebrav said:
More to selflessly throw their support behind an apparent frontrunner in the hope of getting a plum Cabinet job.Beibheirli_C said:
Perhaps they were more deluded than the others?FrancisUrquhart said:Why did the likes of Rabb and Shapps even start a campaign?
Did Raab actually start a campaign though? I lose track.
0 -
20 gets you on the ballot for the first round, but you need 30 to get through to the second round.numbertwelve said:
Guido has Penny, Rishi and Tugendhat over the magic 20. Truss is 1 short.Applicant said:
Only Sunak does, at present, but we'll see what happens when nominations close today.MISTY said:numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
Does Bandenoch even have enough endorsements to make it to the second round?0 -
Blair introduced a lot of socially liberal measures eg homosexual civil partnerships, the Human Rights Act etc plus introduced the minimum wage and devolution for Home Nations and banned foxhunting and was pro immigration.YBarddCwsc said:
Blair is disappointing because he had a once-in-a-century opportunity in 1997. The Left may never get such a brilliant opportunity again to remake Britain.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We can agree that Cameron and Blair were infinitely better than Johnson yes. And until Brexit Cameron achievement wise wasn’t bad despite his moronic austerity.YBarddCwsc said:
It is not possible to assess Blair's achievements without allowing for the incredible hand of aces & picture cards he was dealt.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Taking that into account, Blair is not that much better than Cameron.
Both are clearly better than Boris.
Enormous good will, a huge majority, intelligent & talented -- Blair could & should have done so much more with all that.
However he won his big victories precisely because he was not a socialist Labour leader but a Liberal.
He had no mandate to lead a very leftwing government1 -
We can disagree about Blair/Cameron but you are spot on with Johnson.Richard_Tyndall said:
Johnson was the worst PM in my lifetime (which starts with Wilson in the mid sixties) - followed by Blair. Cameron had his flaws but he was miles better for this country than Blair who could never open his mouth without filling it with lies.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Johnson is the worst PM in British history. Absolutely no doubt about it. Achieved sod all.
But the problem is that we knew all this before he was elected. Against Corbyn I can get it but the Tory members voted for him prior to him running against Corbyn. They should be deeply ashamed for this behaviour.1 -
By cut to benefits, police, courts, prisons and a payfreeze to NHS and other public sector staff...CorrectHorseBattery said:
Okay good that’s better! How will she tackle thesewilliamglenn said:
She just listed cost of living, health, crime, education, etc as the most important issues and said they should focus on governing rather than attacking Labour.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
1 -
Sorry for the stupid question but I am sure the nominations are far short of the number of Tory MPs. Why?0
-
Economically clueless. God help usFoxy said:
By cut to benefits, police, courts, prisons and a payfreeze to NHS and other public sector staff...CorrectHorseBattery said:
Okay good that’s better! How will she tackle thesewilliamglenn said:
She just listed cost of living, health, crime, education, etc as the most important issues and said they should focus on governing rather than attacking Labour.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
0 -
In what world are people thinking Truss is likely? She’s an awful public speaker and stumbles through most speeches she gives. She’ll come apart in any debates/ televised performances.
(I get we are talking about the world of Tory members, who are a strange bunch)0 -
I think in reality Truss is well over.numbertwelve said:
Guido has Penny, Rishi and Tugendhat over the magic 20. Truss is 1 short.Applicant said:
Only Sunak does, at present, but we'll see what happens when nominations close today.MISTY said:numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
Does Bandenoch even have enough endorsements to make it to the second round?2 -
They don't have to publicly declareCorrectHorseBattery said:Sorry for the stupid question but I am sure the nominations are far short of the number of Tory MPs. Why?
0 -
Few Governments have a mandate to run anything except a centralist Government. This Government is the same it got permission to Brexit but only alongside a promise to invest up north for Levelling Up.HYUFD said:
Blair introduced a lot of socially liberal measures eg homosexual civil partnerships, the Human Rights Act etc plus introduced the minimum wage and devolution for Home Nations.YBarddCwsc said:
Blair is disappointing because he had a once-in-a-century opportunity in 1997. The Left may never get such a brilliant opportunity again to remake Britain.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We can agree that Cameron and Blair were infinitely better than Johnson yes. And until Brexit Cameron achievement wise wasn’t bad despite his moronic austerity.YBarddCwsc said:
It is not possible to assess Blair's achievements without allowing for the incredible hand of aces & picture cards he was dealt.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Taking that into account, Blair is not that much better than Cameron.
Both are clearly better than Boris.
Enormous good will, a huge majority, intelligent & talented -- Blair could & should have done so much more with all that.
However he won his big victories precisely because he was not a socialist Labour leader but a Liberal.
He had no mandate to lead a very leftwing government0 -
He stood for Labour leader, forgetting that he’d spent most of his early 20s hanging out in the rave scene with Paul Staines and others. Lots of good stories there, one suspects.FrancisUrquhart said:
I forgot about that. Quick trip to Swindon and he was out. What's he up to these days? I totally forgot he was the future once.Sandpit said:
Chuka Umunna?FrancisUrquhart said:What's the record for the shortest leadership bid....Mr Green has to be in the running.
He’s now working for JPMorgan as an ESG advisor. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/04/21/bankers-role-footballs-failed-coup-goal-jp-morgan/0 -
But he did have a mandate to introduce AV Plus, and he failed miserably on that.HYUFD said:
Blair introduced a lot of socially liberal measures eg homosexual civil partnerships, the Human Rights Act etc plus introduced the minimum wage and devolution for Home Nations.YBarddCwsc said:
Blair is disappointing because he had a once-in-a-century opportunity in 1997. The Left may never get such a brilliant opportunity again to remake Britain.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We can agree that Cameron and Blair were infinitely better than Johnson yes. And until Brexit Cameron achievement wise wasn’t bad despite his moronic austerity.YBarddCwsc said:
It is not possible to assess Blair's achievements without allowing for the incredible hand of aces & picture cards he was dealt.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Taking that into account, Blair is not that much better than Cameron.
Both are clearly better than Boris.
Enormous good will, a huge majority, intelligent & talented -- Blair could & should have done so much more with all that.
However he won his big victories precisely because he was not a socialist Labour leader but a Liberal.
He had no mandate to lead a very leftwing government
He was a Blairite more than anything. Certainly not a Liberal.0 -
⚠️⚠️Amber Weather Warning updated⚠️⚠️
Exceptionally high temperatures across parts of England and Wales, now updated to extend into Monday
#heatwave
Latest info 👉http://bit.ly/WxWarning
https://twitter.com/metoffice/status/15468080249369927760 -
I've been pronouncing it Badder-knock
Seems I'm wrong, and it's Bayder-knock0 -
I do hope so. I don't know why I dislike her, but it is an instinct. Similar to the instinct I always had for Johnson perhaps? A phony.Pulpstar said:
I think in reality Truss is well over.numbertwelve said:
Guido has Penny, Rishi and Tugendhat over the magic 20. Truss is 1 short.Applicant said:
Only Sunak does, at present, but we'll see what happens when nominations close today.MISTY said:numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
Does Bandenoch even have enough endorsements to make it to the second round?0 -
There be dragons.Nigelb said:
Cheapskate builders ?Cyclefree said:The weather in the Lake District is perfect at the moment.
In Naples it used to get to 40 degrees in the summer. People decamped to the hills or the coast. But if you stayed the rule was to close the shutters during the day so the rooms - large with stone floors - remained cool and dark and to rest during the hottest part of the day.
I like shutters on a house. Why don't we have them here I wonder?
It's not unknown. My parents' (Victorian) house has internal shutters in a couple of the rooms.
IIRC @Cyclefree has a self-build.0 -
Ah got it. Thanks.BlancheLivermore said:
They don't have to publicly declareCorrectHorseBattery said:Sorry for the stupid question but I am sure the nominations are far short of the number of Tory MPs. Why?
0 -
I sort of agree, although the Pincher affair was only really the straw that broke the camel's back.Stuartinromford said:
If one were being really catty... (why not?)Nigel_Foremain said:
It is a compelling motivation, but not if it replaces him with someone not much better. The reality is that you judge a person by the company they keep. He was quite happy to keep Johnson's company, even after Partygate. For that he should not be rewarded. It shows that if he has principles they are as "flexible" as Johnson's, and even if one gives him benefit of the doubt on that, his indecision is bare for all to see.eek said:
Surely that's the plan of all sane MPs - get this sorted out ASAP so Bozo is gone ASAP..Big_G_NorthWales said:Even Gavin Williamson has declared for Rishi
The way this is going he could be PM next week
It was OK for Boris to treat the country as a whole as mugs.
It was OK for Boris to try and get Paterson off.
The thing that made MPs give up on Boris was the Pincher fiasco. And that was the first one that affected them immediately and personally, because who wants a drunk groper as their HR manager?
More joy in heaven over one sinner who repenteth and all that, but Conservative MPs really ought to be asking themselves why they put up with him for so long.
Had Paterson and Partygate not preceded it, it almost certainly wouldn't have brought him down. It was the fact he was on a final warning over his dishonesty, rule-flouting, and throwing colleagues under the bus, leading to a confidence vote that he only really squeaked through. Then he IMMEDIATELY did the same again - lying and sending ministers out to inadvertently lie for him.2 -
She's also talking about slashing "support staff" in schools.Foxy said:
By cut to benefits, police, courts, prisons and a payfreeze to NHS and other public sector staff...CorrectHorseBattery said:
Okay good that’s better! How will she tackle thesewilliamglenn said:
She just listed cost of living, health, crime, education, etc as the most important issues and said they should focus on governing rather than attacking Labour.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
I think she should go straight to the DfE and give it a go.
Because, it's all those pesky support staff that are making it so difficult to recruit teachers after all.0 -
London has the most interesting buildings in the country but overall it's a mess. Manchester needs to decide quickly whether it wants to follow London or Paris, where most buildings are half a dozen storeys high and you can see the Eiffel Tower from a distance. Not sure why we should be able to guess Amir Khan is involved.Beibheirli_C said:
I have to say, I prefer Liverpool's skyline. There are some really interesting buildings around the city centreCookie said:
It's the colour of it which is dividing opinion.Beibheirli_C said:
It is up near Piccadilly Station, between it and Great Ancoats St. Up there, anything new built would be an improvement and bring the place on a bit. Ancoats itself has had a lot of redevelopment and it looks better for itPro_Rata said:
That's not offensive and quite like the part octagon shaping. And it's not that tall really.Nigelb said:
That is quite deliberate, I think.Leon said:
Boring, I'm afraid - to my mind. Also, 96% of planned buildings look better in the render than in reality, so that will get worseCookie said:Off thread, but do other posters have a view on this proposed tower in Manchester:
You will not be surprised to learn that Amir Khan is involved.
To my surprise, despite trying, I don't hate it. (I hope I'm not unduly influenced in this by the fact that Sam Wheeler, the Momentum largely anti-development councillor for this part of the city centre, does hate it.) I think the higher the building, the more reflective it needs to be, particularly in a city where sunshine isn't a given, and it will at least be shiny.
https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/developer-of-manchesters-19m-gold-tower-eyes-more-sites/
And quite a few renders I've seen are from perspectives impossible in real life unless you're airborne. Good architects are rare.
Where is it? Are we looking N / NE towards the St. Peter's Square there? Somewhere west of Oxford Road?
As I said, while I expected to hate it, I don't. And it's better than what's there at the moment (though there are new buildings in Manchester which are better than what was there before but still represent a regrettable missed opportunity, and in this area of town I would expect something else to come forward if this does not).
For me, it passes the test - but I can see why it's controversial.1 -
Off-topic but I note that your trust seems to have started or is supporting a food bank for their workersFoxy said:
Yes, given that all candidates have to support Brexit, it makes little difference that Mordaunt was supporting before the referendum, rather than later. She does at least come over as authentic.Nigel_Foremain said:
While I think her pronouncements on Brexit are out of alignment with my beliefs I hope it will be Mordaunt. We need a fresh broom. If she turns out to be crap, then Labour then deserve to win.Beibheirli_C said:
I think that any of this lot will be lightweights and it will be two more years of Johnsonian ineptness but without the entertainment factorNigel_Foremain said:
Oh no, she thinks she knows "the people's priorities". Sounds very like Johnson.williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
Brexit is no longer much of an issue in the Party, just degrees of support for tearing up an international treaty. That of course may not be the case with the rest of the country by GE 2024, with 2 more years of sunny uplands looking like a burnt out desert...
https://twitter.com/Leicnut/status/1546582460477079553
Nutrition Doc
@Leicnut
Very sad that there is now a necessity for a food bank at my Trust.
But highly commendable that
@Leic_hospital
is tackling the cost of living crisis for struggling employees.0 -
Yup, about 99% of the time when someone has a clear view on a complex topic it is because they haven't grasped the complexity. She may be in the other 1% but I'd need to see more evidence before abandoning my prior.DavidL said:
There is a clarity in the way she speaks that is admirable. But there is also a failure to recognise how complicated things are. She may well be leader one day but not, I think, this time. She needs more experience in bigger jobs first.numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
2 -
The field is on fire next to the train I’m on0
-
Johnson achieved Brexit, one of the biggest changes in postwar British politics and beat Corbyn tooCorrectHorseBattery said:
We can disagree about Blair/Cameron but you are spot on with Johnson.Richard_Tyndall said:
Johnson was the worst PM in my lifetime (which starts with Wilson in the mid sixties) - followed by Blair. Cameron had his flaws but he was miles better for this country than Blair who could never open his mouth without filling it with lies.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Johnson is the worst PM in British history. Absolutely no doubt about it. Achieved sod all.
But the problem is that we knew all this before he was elected. Against Corbyn I can get it but the Tory members voted for him prior to him running against Corbyn. They should be deeply ashamed for this behaviour.0 -
That’s a direct quote is that? Or a bit of projection by you?Foxy said:
By cut to benefits, police, courts, prisons and a payfreeze to NHS and other public sector staff...CorrectHorseBattery said:
Okay good that’s better! How will she tackle thesewilliamglenn said:
She just listed cost of living, health, crime, education, etc as the most important issues and said they should focus on governing rather than attacking Labour.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
0 -
Johnson got a withdrawal agreement through Parliament. He achieved more than May. He also had to deal with a global pandemic which took up a lot of government focus in the past 2.5 years.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We can disagree about Blair/Cameron but you are spot on with Johnson.Richard_Tyndall said:
Johnson was the worst PM in my lifetime (which starts with Wilson in the mid sixties) - followed by Blair. Cameron had his flaws but he was miles better for this country than Blair who could never open his mouth without filling it with lies.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Johnson is the worst PM in British history. Absolutely no doubt about it. Achieved sod all.
But the problem is that we knew all this before he was elected. Against Corbyn I can get it but the Tory members voted for him prior to him running against Corbyn. They should be deeply ashamed for this behaviour.
I agree that he was a terrible PM, but there are other angles to criticise him on rather than saying he didn’t achieve anything.1 -
Apart from Brexit this government has hardly been Thatcherite so fareek said:
Few Governments have a mandate to run anything except a centralist Government. This Government is the same it got permission to Brexit but only alongside a promise to invest up north for Levelling Up.HYUFD said:
Blair introduced a lot of socially liberal measures eg homosexual civil partnerships, the Human Rights Act etc plus introduced the minimum wage and devolution for Home Nations.YBarddCwsc said:
Blair is disappointing because he had a once-in-a-century opportunity in 1997. The Left may never get such a brilliant opportunity again to remake Britain.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We can agree that Cameron and Blair were infinitely better than Johnson yes. And until Brexit Cameron achievement wise wasn’t bad despite his moronic austerity.YBarddCwsc said:
It is not possible to assess Blair's achievements without allowing for the incredible hand of aces & picture cards he was dealt.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Taking that into account, Blair is not that much better than Cameron.
Both are clearly better than Boris.
Enormous good will, a huge majority, intelligent & talented -- Blair could & should have done so much more with all that.
However he won his big victories precisely because he was not a socialist Labour leader but a Liberal.
He had no mandate to lead a very leftwing government0 -
As previously suggested, ex-Remainer Truss might be the most ERG-friendly candidate owing to he work on FTAs for British cheese. Don't write her off until you see if JRM's endorsement influences the wider ERG.RochdalePioneers said:
JRM and GoNads to switch support at the last minute to Braverman to sink Truss at the first hurdle.numbertwelve said:
Guido has Penny, Rishi and Tugendhat over the magic 20. Truss is 1 short.Applicant said:
Only Sunak does, at present, but we'll see what happens when nominations close today.MISTY said:numbertwelve said:Kemi is an incredibly compelling speaker. I understand what she says isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of tea - but she is going to go far.
Does Bandenoch even have enough endorsements to make it to the second round?0 -
Mordaunt has received backing of David Davis2
-
On the other hand, I am certain that the number of MPs who have solemnly but privately pledged their undying support to each camp vastly exceeds the number of Tory MPs when added together.CorrectHorseBattery said:Sorry for the stupid question but I am sure the nominations are far short of the number of Tory MPs. Why?
3 -
That is what small state means, and she is an advocate of shrinking the state.CarlottaVance said:
That’s a direct quote is that? Or a bit of projection by you?Foxy said:
By cut to benefits, police, courts, prisons and a payfreeze to NHS and other public sector staff...CorrectHorseBattery said:
Okay good that’s better! How will she tackle thesewilliamglenn said:
She just listed cost of living, health, crime, education, etc as the most important issues and said they should focus on governing rather than attacking Labour.CorrectHorseBattery said:
She is literally insane. These issues are not important to anyone.williamglenn said:
Kemi: "Every quango leader should be sackable by a democratic minister."williamglenn said:Kemi: "My government will discard the priorities of Twitter and deliver on the people's priorities."
I am green on her. The Tories are daft enough to go for her.0 -
I'd say that I would quite like a blanket-except-for-through-routes 20mph - eg in London, except for Red Routes.FrancisUrquhart said:
Lets see, I bet its 20mph basically everywhere, as the argument will always be think of the kids...its like new temporary taxes, they only ever become permanent and go up.MattW said:
It isn't really a blanket policy, though:FrancisUrquhart said:Its not just the 20mph, its the blanket nature of the policy. Absolutely no need for it to be 20mph at 3am...the argument about runners or kids, there isn't any at that time.
The US system of having 30mph, then at certain times e.g. school times, its 20mph seems a perfectly sensible comprise.
The Welsh government have acknowledged the new lower limit won't be appropriate everywhere and local authorities can make exceptions, though not outside schools.
And the autonomy can only be increased in the process, I think.
Think about all the money that will no longer need to be spent on traffic calming, and cane be spent more usefully.
But the real future is segregation of modes, plus limiting motor-vehicles in shared spaces so that mixing is safe for others.0 -
An inferno or stubble burning?CorrectHorseBattery said:The field is on fire next to the train I’m on
0 -
Brexit wasn't Thatcherite. At all. The single market was Thatcherite: she essentially invented it.HYUFD said:
Apart from Brexit this government had hardly been Thatcherite so fareek said:
Few Governments have a mandate to run anything except a centralist Government. This Government is the same it got permission to Brexit but only alongside a promise to invest up north for Levelling Up.HYUFD said:
Blair introduced a lot of socially liberal measures eg homosexual civil partnerships, the Human Rights Act etc plus introduced the minimum wage and devolution for Home Nations.YBarddCwsc said:
Blair is disappointing because he had a once-in-a-century opportunity in 1997. The Left may never get such a brilliant opportunity again to remake Britain.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We can agree that Cameron and Blair were infinitely better than Johnson yes. And until Brexit Cameron achievement wise wasn’t bad despite his moronic austerity.YBarddCwsc said:
It is not possible to assess Blair's achievements without allowing for the incredible hand of aces & picture cards he was dealt.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Taking that into account, Blair is not that much better than Cameron.
Both are clearly better than Boris.
Enormous good will, a huge majority, intelligent & talented -- Blair could & should have done so much more with all that.
However he won his big victories precisely because he was not a socialist Labour leader but a Liberal.
He had no mandate to lead a very leftwing government3 -
Voters themselves rejected AV in 2011ClippP said:
But he did have a mandate to introduce AV Plus, and he failed miserably on that.HYUFD said:
Blair introduced a lot of socially liberal measures eg homosexual civil partnerships, the Human Rights Act etc plus introduced the minimum wage and devolution for Home Nations.YBarddCwsc said:
Blair is disappointing because he had a once-in-a-century opportunity in 1997. The Left may never get such a brilliant opportunity again to remake Britain.CorrectHorseBattery said:
We can agree that Cameron and Blair were infinitely better than Johnson yes. And until Brexit Cameron achievement wise wasn’t bad despite his moronic austerity.YBarddCwsc said:
It is not possible to assess Blair's achievements without allowing for the incredible hand of aces & picture cards he was dealt.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Taking that into account, Blair is not that much better than Cameron.
Both are clearly better than Boris.
Enormous good will, a huge majority, intelligent & talented -- Blair could & should have done so much more with all that.
However he won his big victories precisely because he was not a socialist Labour leader but a Liberal.
He had no mandate to lead a very leftwing government
He was a Blairite more than anything. Certainly not a Liberal.0 -
He didn’t achieve Brexit though. Brexit is broken. Not that the candidates are talking about it.HYUFD said:
Johnson achieved Brexit, one of the biggest changes in postwar British politics and beat Corbyn tooCorrectHorseBattery said:
We can disagree about Blair/Cameron but you are spot on with Johnson.Richard_Tyndall said:
Johnson was the worst PM in my lifetime (which starts with Wilson in the mid sixties) - followed by Blair. Cameron had his flaws but he was miles better for this country than Blair who could never open his mouth without filling it with lies.CorrectHorseBattery said:
ROFL Cameron and Johnson don’t have a candle on Blair. He did actual levelling up and actual positive change.BartholomewRoberts said:
We've had 2 better PM's than Blair already since then. Cameron and Boris.CorrectHorseBattery said:Still waiting for a better PM than Blair. He left office in 2007…
But if you're wanting a better Labour PM, you might need to wait until Labour are popular again. Perhaps Starmer's successor might do it?
Johnson and Cameron divided the country and oversaw the largest stagnation in society in 100 years.
Johnson is the worst PM in British history. Absolutely no doubt about it. Achieved sod all.
But the problem is that we knew all this before he was elected. Against Corbyn I can get it but the Tory members voted for him prior to him running against Corbyn. They should be deeply ashamed for this behaviour.0 -
I suspect it's already too late for that for Manchester - Equally what exactly is the Manchester equivalent to the Eiffel Tower or even La Défense.DecrepiterJohnL said:
London has the most interesting buildings in the country but overall it's a mess. Manchester needs to decide quickly whether it wants to follow London or Paris, where most buildings are half a dozen storeys high and you can see the Eiffel Tower from a distance. Not sure why we should be able to guess Amir Khan is involved.Beibheirli_C said:
I have to say, I prefer Liverpool's skyline. There are some really interesting buildings around the city centreCookie said:
It's the colour of it which is dividing opinion.Beibheirli_C said:
It is up near Piccadilly Station, between it and Great Ancoats St. Up there, anything new built would be an improvement and bring the place on a bit. Ancoats itself has had a lot of redevelopment and it looks better for itPro_Rata said:
That's not offensive and quite like the part octagon shaping. And it's not that tall really.Nigelb said:
That is quite deliberate, I think.Leon said:
Boring, I'm afraid - to my mind. Also, 96% of planned buildings look better in the render than in reality, so that will get worseCookie said:Off thread, but do other posters have a view on this proposed tower in Manchester:
You will not be surprised to learn that Amir Khan is involved.
To my surprise, despite trying, I don't hate it. (I hope I'm not unduly influenced in this by the fact that Sam Wheeler, the Momentum largely anti-development councillor for this part of the city centre, does hate it.) I think the higher the building, the more reflective it needs to be, particularly in a city where sunshine isn't a given, and it will at least be shiny.
https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/developer-of-manchesters-19m-gold-tower-eyes-more-sites/
And quite a few renders I've seen are from perspectives impossible in real life unless you're airborne. Good architects are rare.
Where is it? Are we looking N / NE towards the St. Peter's Square there? Somewhere west of Oxford Road?
As I said, while I expected to hate it, I don't. And it's better than what's there at the moment (though there are new buildings in Manchester which are better than what was there before but still represent a regrettable missed opportunity, and in this area of town I would expect something else to come forward if this does not).
For me, it passes the test - but I can see why it's controversial.1
This discussion has been closed.