The battle to find Starmer’s succesor as LOTO? – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
Oh give over. Manchester is many things but dull is not one of them.Nigel_Foremain said:
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.
But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume we're focusing on skyline.
What a skyline needs is a vantage point. Manchester's drawback is that it is flat: the high points tend to be far away, from which point the city is more indistinct. Liverpool has the great advantage here that its three most distinctive buildings are on the waterfront, which means that from the riverside, or from Wallasey, the city has a great skyline. From further away the three graces are a bit of a blur, but it also has Liverpool Cathedral, which is handsome and distinctive.
Manchester also has its three graces - the town hall, the library and the Midland Hotel - but nowhere to see them as a skyline. You can look down on them from the new buildings, but when you do that they're not a skyline, because the background isn't sky, it's city. So not a great start.
I do genuinely like the towers which have gone up at the bottom end of Deansgate. They're shiny and modern, but all buildings were at one stage; they're also of a scale to give a skyline from some surprising locations. I particularly enjoyed, yesterday, sitting a the front of a tram heading down Mosley Street with those in the background. And I particularly enjoyed last Tuesday walking down to the Castlefield Bowl with them in the background. And I particularly enjoy the view from Deansgate Tram Stop. They are spectacular and there is little like them outside London. They are visually striking, shiny, breathtaking, and actually attractive.
But I'd still concede that Manchester's skyline is a work in progress.0 -
Stubble burning has to be 'accidental' these days.wooliedyed said:
An inferno or stubble burning?CorrectHorseBattery said:The field is on fire next to the train I’m on
0 -
Dan’s view:
Now watched the launch speeches of the three candidates. Kemi Badenoch's was the best. Then Tom Tugendhat. Rishi the poorest.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1546810502327697409
Only saw part of Tugendhat’s speech (the BBC had to cut for the news), but of Kemi vs Rishi the former had more substance, the latter more platitudes.2 -
Last I checked, we had left the EU.CorrectHorseBattery said:
He didn’t achieve Brexit though.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.
If you want to look at a PM who really had zero achievements, it's easy - J. Gordon Brown.0 -
That's a bit revisionist. She opposed the Maastricht Treaty.Nigel_Foremain said:
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 -
Maybe they could do what they did in the NHS and call all support staff "teachers" . The support staff could then take degrees and refuse to do all the work they did as support staff because they are now too important to do that basic stuff.dixiedean said:
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.1 -
Badenoch as in ‘Wolf of’ is pronounced with an och. I notice some English commentators pronounce loch as lock, has Kemi fallen into step with them?BlancheLivermore said:I've been pronouncing it Badder-knock
Seems I'm wrong, and it's Bayder-knock0 -
Did he? What he did was win an election against Corbyn (something about which we all agree!). He then let Brexit go ahead along the lines of May's arrangements. And has hung around while the consequences of that unfurl.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 -
Wasn't that my point? In fact given how left wing Corbyn was it's possibly to argue that Boris won by being the more centralist candidate in 2019.HYUFD said:
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 government2 -
Road conditions in towns are generally that lower limits are appropriate.oxfordsimon said:
And without huge sums on enforcement, the roads will continue to be used at speeds that suit road conditionsMattW 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.
I'm sure that strong enforcement will be necessary until drivers are better educated, or the organisation of towns to keep rat-runners out of residential areas is more complete.
I followed up on your East Oxford link from the other day by the way, and the vandalism of the low traffic neighbourhood followed by gratuitous lawbreaking was a little shocking.1 -
Yeah, true. There is pressure for it to return though so 'accidental' is entirely possible!Flatlander said:
Stubble burning has to be 'accidental' these days.wooliedyed said:
An inferno or stubble burning?CorrectHorseBattery said:The field is on fire next to the train I’m on
0 -
Ted Heath took us into Europe so by that measure was the most influential prime minister of the modern era, until Boris (or was it Cameron?) took us out again.numbertwelve said:
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.
I still find it hard to weigh Boris against other prime ministers. Regardless of his policies, and I for one welcome that he is not an austerity-hawk and saw the value of public investment, it is hard to think of anyone anywhere in politics who lies so reflexively and so often. In that regard, Boris is Britain Trump.5 -
Dorries and Mogg formally endorse Truss outside No 10
https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1546794385828085763?s=20&t=T4uOHnLNGJ7XI85MWTQ0Qw0 -
Making quango leaders' jobs subject to the passing whim of ministers won't on its own improve that, though. It might well make it worse.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."
1 -
As a non-driver, it seems to me that lower speed limits make it harder for pedestrians.MattW said:
Road conditions in towns are generally that lower limits are appropriate.oxfordsimon said:
And without huge sums on enforcement, the roads will continue to be used at speeds that suit road conditionsMattW 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.
I'm sure that strong enforcement will be necessary until drivers are better educated, or the organisation of towns to keep rat-runners out of residential areas is more complete.
I followed up on your East Oxford link from the other day by the way, and the vandalism of the low traffic neighbourhood followed by gratuitous lawbreaking was a little shocking.0 -
Re Sunak, worth mentioning that apparently Ben Wallace has taken a loathing to RS over not answering an urgent request for extra funding.
I'm reminded of it because RS has just refused to commit to Defence spending as 2.5% of GDP.
Will that lead Wallace to come out and say something? *
* please yes1 -
Nobody knows, but it is only Brexiteers who claim she would have been in favour of Brexit and that is about as honest as Boris Johnson. One of her greatest creations was the single market. The fact that she would sacrifice that achievement seems very unlikely. She was definitely a sceptic, but that does not make her a headbanger.williamglenn said:
That's a bit revisionist. She opposed the Maastricht Treaty.Nigel_Foremain said:
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 government
( actually maybe we have a new verb here: " I am so sorry I did not intend to mislead or Boris Johnson to you")0 -
Yes, our SMT do what they can for employees having a hard time.eek said:
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.2 -
At least two of the things she talked about were precisely the latter.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."
0 -
Bizarre they are saying Liz is a "true" Brexiteer when she voted Remain? Penny actually was a Brexiteer but doesn't get the endorsement.HYUFD said:Dorries and Mogg formally endorse Truss outside No 10
https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1546794385828085763?s=20&t=T4uOHnLNGJ7XI85MWTQ0Qw
Bet she's quite relieved not to though...3 -
The equivalent is the tower of Manchester's Town Hall, which is a Victorian masterpiece.eek said:
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.
Will Alsop proposed some characteristically quirky scheme a decade or so back whereby the maximum height of buildings would follow some increasing line as you moved away from the Town Hall, which would result in a ring of high rise buildings around a low rise centre - which seems to be sort of what we're getting anyway.
But in general I'm quite happy for Manchester to look increasingly like an American city. There are some buildings that need to be retained, and finding old and valuable buildings nestling among the shiny modernism will be a treat for future architectural tourists - but otherwise, bring the skyscrapers on.0 -
For me it's the combination of lying alongside the obvious (in retrospect) approach of only doing things when there are zero other options left.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Ted Heath took us into Europe so by that measure was the most influential prime minister of the modern era, until Boris (or was it Cameron?) took us out again.numbertwelve said:
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.
I still find it hard to weigh Boris against other prime ministers. Regardless of his policies, and I for one welcome that he is not an austerity-hawk and saw the value of public investment, it is hard to think of anyone anywhere in politics who lies so reflexively and so often. In that regard, Boris is Britain Trump.0 -
Only sampled, but Kemi sounds fluent but really quite extreme Ayn Rand type (perhaps that's what Tories want?), Rishi projecting the experienced common sense flavour quite well.CarlottaVance said:Dan’s view:
Now watched the launch speeches of the three candidates. Kemi Badenoch's was the best. Then Tom Tugendhat. Rishi the poorest.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1546810502327697409
Only saw part of Tugendhat’s speech (the BBC had to cut for the news), but of Kemi vs Rishi the former had more substance, the latter more platitudes.1 -
It makes one shudderHYUFD said:Dorries and Mogg formally endorse Truss outside No 10
https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1546794385828085763?s=20&t=T4uOHnLNGJ7XI85MWTQ0Qw1 -
Thatcher's Bruges speech made clear her Euroscepticism by the end of her premiershipNigel_Foremain said:
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 government1 -
Very surprised Raab backed Rishi. (I see Gavin Williamson has too). With the wonder twins JRM and Nads plumping for Truss feels like a push to stop Mordaunt getting into the final two.0
-
I think English people only say och 'properly' when we're mimicking Scots!Theuniondivvie said:
Badenoch as in ‘Wolf of’ is pronounced with an och. I notice some English commentators pronounce loch as lock, has Keri fallen into step with them?BlancheLivermore said:I've been pronouncing it Badder-knock
Seems I'm wrong, and it's Bayder-knock
We tend not to say 'r' right either; I much prefer hearing Scots say my surname0 -
But the EEC Single Market that Thatcher was proud of, in her words a single market larger than the United States, no longer exists.Nigel_Foremain said:
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 government2 -
In Naples there are both internal and external shutters. I think we should have them on houses here. They save on heating bills. We never had any heating in the house in Naples in winter. Vests, hot water bottles and blankets over knees for the oldsters were the norm.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.2 -
I must admit to quite liking La Defence. My father worked there for three years in the Eighties, but protecting the skyline of Paris is a different ballgame to Manchester.eek said:
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.0 -
If only we had tried to reform it. Now we’ve left and we’ll be dealing with it regardless.BartholomewRoberts said:
But the EEC Single Market that Thatcher was proud of, in her words a single market larger than the United States, no longer exists.Nigel_Foremain said:
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 government0 -
If Boris is an American president, it is not Trump; it is Nixon.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Ted Heath took us into Europe so by that measure was the most influential prime minister of the modern era, until Boris (or was it Cameron?) took us out again.numbertwelve said:
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.
I still find it hard to weigh Boris against other prime ministers. Regardless of his policies, and I for one welcome that he is not an austerity-hawk and saw the value of public investment, it is hard to think of anyone anywhere in politics who lies so reflexively and so often. In that regard, Boris is Britain Trump.
I can't remember who made this obersvation a couple of weeks ago but I thought it was very good.0 -
And the Single Market wasn't the EU. This is the myth perpetuated by Europhiles - that the EU was nothing more than a big trading partnership. If it had been then we would never have left.Nigel_Foremain said:
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 government
The EU was and is big, centralised Government, remote from the people which operates only to perpetuate itself and further its own aims with little or no regard for the individual. It is the very antithesis of everything Thatcher believed in. Indeed the philosophers and thinkers she admired such as Hayek were deeply sceptical of the European project.6 -
Conhome next Tory leader playoff survey finds Truss beats Sunak 51% to 34% but Badenoch beats Truss 52% to 34% and Mordaunt beats Truss 61% to 33%
https://conservativehome.com/2022/07/12/next-tory-leader-run-offs-third-liz-truss/?utm_campaign=twitter&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitter0 -
That's the saddest thing about Paul Staines. I strongly suspect that he doesn't regret enjoying himself in the rave scene but now he's turned into a priggish martinet (for thee, not for himself) who probably scaring any young aspiring politician to live their 20s like a monk.Sandpit said:
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 -
The rest want to back the winner whoever it is, but have no idea who it's going to be.CorrectHorseBattery said:Sorry for the stupid question but I am sure the nominations are far short of the number of Tory MPs. Why?
0 -
"When the facts change, I change my mind".HYUFD said:
Thatcher's Bruges speech made clear her Euroscepticism by the end of her premiershipNigel_Foremain said:
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 government
Thatcher was right to support her vision of an EEC Single Market, but that vision was killed decades ago. Instead what emerged was not as she envisioned a single market of nations combined larger than the United States, but instead a nascent political federation with a market considerably smaller than the USA.3 -
I’ll be accused now of wanting to rejoin. Not got any interest in that now we’ve gone. We need to create a solution that actually works, which isn’t what we’ve got now.2
-
Must confess that confused me too. Any Scot would pronounce och softly as in loch rather than as in ock. But she seems to be an ock.Theuniondivvie said:
Badenoch as in ‘Wolf of’ is pronounced with an och. I notice some English commentators pronounce loch as lock, has Kemi fallen into step with them?BlancheLivermore said:I've been pronouncing it Badder-knock
Seems I'm wrong, and it's Bayder-knock0 -
If you have a southern seat, vulnerable to the Lib-Dems, you'd probably go for Rishi thinking he'll give you the best chance to still be an MP after 2024kle4 said:Very surprised Raab backed Rishi. (I see Gavin Williamson has too). With the wonder twins JRM and Nads plumping for Truss feels like a push to stop Mordaunt getting into the final two.
0 -
I can see a case for Kemi, a case for Penny and maybe a case for Tom (reluctantly). I can see no other cases in this luggage room.5
-
We tried to reform it and were roundly ignored.CorrectHorseBattery said:
If only we had tried to reform it. Now we’ve left and we’ll be dealing with it regardless.BartholomewRoberts said:
But the EEC Single Market that Thatcher was proud of, in her words a single market larger than the United States, no longer exists.Nigel_Foremain said:
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 government6 -
On this I agree with you completely.CorrectHorseBattery said:I’ll be accused now of wanting to rejoin. Not got any interest in that now we’ve gone. We need to create a solution that actually works, which isn’t what we’ve got now.
0 -
One day there will be computers and robots powerful enough and intelligent enough to do 95% of jobs. Will this be a good thing? Maybe it'll leave most people without a purpose in life.0
-
Actually we produced dozens of proposals for reform of various parts down the years, at IGCs, meetings of the Council of Ministers and at working level. A few were agreed, but generally they were trashed. I know what I'm talking about on this, as I was a small cog in this machine for a while.CorrectHorseBattery said:
If only we had tried to reform it. Now we’ve left and we’ll be dealing with it regardless.BartholomewRoberts said:
But the EEC Single Market that Thatcher was proud of, in her words a single market larger than the United States, no longer exists.Nigel_Foremain said:
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 government4 -
The Conservatives would normally have a majority amongst the over 65s. But old people are like elephants -they won't forget the parties. Even after two years the Conservatives will be linked with Johnson with the added "benefit" of high inflation and unaffordable energy and fuel costs. Whoever is their leader they will have to perform spectacularly to even get close next GE.0
-
"He wanted the European Parliament to be the democratic body of the Community, he wanted the Commission to be the Executive and he wanted the Council of Ministers to be the Senate"...BartholomewRoberts said:
"When the facts change, I change my mind".HYUFD said:
Thatcher's Bruges speech made clear her Euroscepticism by the end of her premiershipNigel_Foremain said:
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 government
Thatcher was right to support her vision of an EEC Single Market, but that vision was killed decades ago. Instead what emerged was not as she envisioned a single market of nations combined larger than the United States, but instead a nascent political federation with a market considerably smaller than the USA.1 -
I'd be interested to hear why - seriously?DecrepiterJohnL said:
As a non-driver, it seems to me that lower speed limits make it harder for pedestrians.MattW said:
Road conditions in towns are generally that lower limits are appropriate.oxfordsimon said:
And without huge sums on enforcement, the roads will continue to be used at speeds that suit road conditionsMattW 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.
I'm sure that strong enforcement will be necessary until drivers are better educated, or the organisation of towns to keep rat-runners out of residential areas is more complete.
I followed up on your East Oxford link from the other day by the way, and the vandalism of the low traffic neighbourhood followed by gratuitous lawbreaking was a little shocking.1 -
Theres no logic to it. When they like someone being a former remainer is ok, if they don't then they are a remainer traitor even if they voted leaveGIN1138 said:
Bizarre they are saying Liz is a "true" Brexiteer when she voted Remain? Penny actually was a Brexiteer but doesn't get the endorsement.HYUFD said:Dorries and Mogg formally endorse Truss outside No 10
https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1546794385828085763?s=20&t=T4uOHnLNGJ7XI85MWTQ0Qw
Bet she's quite relieved not to though...0 -
Reforms would have to be substantial to reverse the damage the EU has inflicted that has taken European economies from being larger than the USA in Thatcher's day, to considerably smaller than it today.CorrectHorseBattery said:
If only we had tried to reform it. Now we’ve left and we’ll be dealing with it regardless.BartholomewRoberts said:
But the EEC Single Market that Thatcher was proud of, in her words a single market larger than the United States, no longer exists.Nigel_Foremain said:
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 government
Cameron proposed some modest reforms. They were rejected. That's why I switched from Remain to Leave, the project was unreformable. Sometimes you just have to cut your losses.4 -
They can all run for the Tory party leadership.Andy_JS said:One day there will be computers and robots powerful enough and intelligent enough to do 95% of jobs. Will this be a good thing? Maybe it'll leave most people without a purpose in life.
1 -
Rishi looks like the candidate for fiscal ConservativesMrEd said:Re Sunak, worth mentioning that apparently Ben Wallace has taken a loathing to RS over not answering an urgent request for extra funding.
I'm reminded of it because RS has just refused to commit to Defence spending as 2.5% of GDP.
Will that lead Wallace to come out and say something? *
* please yes
Many of the others look like irresponsible Right Wing Nutters0 -
FFS. I was a "Eurosceptic", so was William Hague, David Cameron, George Osborne and many others. It doesn't make you want to self harm your own country, which was what we believed (and are being proven correct). Euroscepticism does not equal being a leaver. You can be Eurosceptic and not believe that we want to take UK back to the 1950s.HYUFD said:
Thatcher's Bruges speech made clear her Euroscepticism by the end of her premiershipNigel_Foremain said:
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 government
Thatcher never said we should divorce from the EU. She had plenty of opportunity to threaten it. She was not that stupid. That had to be left to the band of pigmies that look at things more simplistically.2 -
Nixon had no charisma unlike Johnson and Trump but was more intellectual than both and was actually pretty centrist establishment on most issues even if corrupt. Nixon personality wise was closer to Gordon BrownCookie said:
If Boris is an American president, it is not Trump; it is Nixon.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Ted Heath took us into Europe so by that measure was the most influential prime minister of the modern era, until Boris (or was it Cameron?) took us out again.numbertwelve said:
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.
I still find it hard to weigh Boris against other prime ministers. Regardless of his policies, and I for one welcome that he is not an austerity-hawk and saw the value of public investment, it is hard to think of anyone anywhere in politics who lies so reflexively and so often. In that regard, Boris is Britain Trump.
I can't remember who made this obersvation a couple of weeks ago but I thought it was very good.1 -
Eventually they will probably replace us and become the dominant species on the planet...Andy_JS said:One day there will be computers and robots powerful enough and intelligent enough to do 95% of jobs. Will this be a good thing? Maybe it'll leave most people without a purpose in life.
1 -
They are to Tory MPsCorrectHorseBattery 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 -
She stopped being PM before the critical point.Nigel_Foremain said:
FFS. I was a "Eurosceptic", so was William Hague, David Cameron, George Osborne and many others. It doesn't make you want to self harm your own country, which was what we believed (and are being proven correct). Euroscepticism does not equal being a leaver. You can be Eurosceptic and not believe that we want to take UK back to the 1950s.HYUFD said:
Thatcher's Bruges speech made clear her Euroscepticism by the end of her premiershipNigel_Foremain said:
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 government
Thatcher never said we should divorce from the EU. She had plenty of opportunity to threaten it. She was not that stupid. That had to be left to the band of pigmies that look at things more simplistically.0 -
Others seem to believe in the magic money tree they accused Corbyn of believing in.bigjohnowls said:
Rishi looks like the candidate for fiscal ConservativesMrEd said:Re Sunak, worth mentioning that apparently Ben Wallace has taken a loathing to RS over not answering an urgent request for extra funding.
I'm reminded of it because RS has just refused to commit to Defence spending as 2.5% of GDP.
Will that lead Wallace to come out and say something? *
* please yes
Many of the others look like irresponsible Right Wing Nutters2 -
Used to happen with sparks from steam trains.Flatlander said:
Stubble burning has to be 'accidental' these days.wooliedyed said:
An inferno or stubble burning?CorrectHorseBattery said:The field is on fire next to the train I’m on
0 -
The EC of the Thatcher era was not the EU of Cameron.Nigel_Foremain said:
FFS. I was a "Eurosceptic", so was William Hague, David Cameron, George Osborne and many others. It doesn't make you want to self harm your own country, which was what we believed (and are being proven correct). Euroscepticism does not equal being a leaver. You can be Eurosceptic and not believe that we want to take UK back to the 1950s.HYUFD said:
Thatcher's Bruges speech made clear her Euroscepticism by the end of her premiershipNigel_Foremain said:
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 government
Thatcher never said we should divorce from the EU. She had plenty of opportunity to threaten it. She was not that stupid. That had to be left to the band of pigmies that look at things more simplistically.2 -
I was just saying in another place that the modern Conservative Party seems to have totally abandoned the traditional principles of the Paternalist Right where the Landlord, in exchange for the maintenance and concentration of wealth and power, looks after the peasants. Instead, they seem to be taking the part of the Wicked Mill Owner.NickPalmer said:
Only sampled, but Kemi sounds fluent but really quite extreme Ayn Rand type (perhaps that's what Tories want?), Rishi projecting the experienced common sense flavour quite well.CarlottaVance said:Dan’s view:
Now watched the launch speeches of the three candidates. Kemi Badenoch's was the best. Then Tom Tugendhat. Rishi the poorest.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1546810502327697409
Only saw part of Tugendhat’s speech (the BBC had to cut for the news), but of Kemi vs Rishi the former had more substance, the latter more platitudes.
Traditionally, the Left decries them both, of course, but I'd rather have one than t'other.5 -
Ha, I hadn’t realised Badenoch was her married name. Badenoch is quite an unusual surname even in Scotland; hubby is one Hamish Badenoch, bet he pronounce it with a ch.BlancheLivermore said:
I think English people only say och 'properly' when we're mimicking Scots!Theuniondivvie said:
Badenoch as in ‘Wolf of’ is pronounced with an och. I notice some English commentators pronounce loch as lock, has Keri fallen into step with them?BlancheLivermore said:I've been pronouncing it Badder-knock
Seems I'm wrong, and it's Bayder-knock
We tend not to say 'r' right either; I much prefer hearing Scots say my surname0 -
NEW: Tory big beast David Davis comes out for Penny Mordaunt in Tory leadership contest.
Former cabinet minister tells @BethRigby she is "most likely to beat Rishi Sunak".
Looking increasingly likely that Liz Truss & Penny Mordaunt will battle it out to take on Rishi Sunak.2 -
I just wish that for the Deansgate Hilton's exterior they had picked a colour others than "half finished grey". The whole building looks like the development stopped partway through. There was a slightly crazy building (on Bridge St????) just down from the Freemason's Hall. It looked like coloured Jenga bricks sticking out at all anglesCookie said:
Oh give over. Manchester is many things but dull is not one of them.Nigel_Foremain said:
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.
But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume we're focusing on skyline.
What a skyline needs is a vantage point. Manchester's drawback is that it is flat: the high points tend to be far away, from which point the city is more indistinct. Liverpool has the great advantage here that its three most distinctive buildings are on the waterfront, which means that from the riverside, or from Wallasey, the city has a great skyline. From further away the three graces are a bit of a blur, but it also has Liverpool Cathedral, which is handsome and distinctive.
Manchester also has its three graces - the town hall, the library and the Midland Hotel - but nowhere to see them as a skyline. You can look down on them from the new buildings, but when you do that they're not a skyline, because the background isn't sky, it's city. So not a great start.
I do genuinely like the towers which have gone up at the bottom end of Deansgate. They're shiny and modern, but all buildings were at one stage; they're also of a scale to give a skyline from some surprising locations. I particularly enjoyed, yesterday, sitting a the front of a tram heading down Mosley Street with those in the background. And I particularly enjoyed last Tuesday walking down to the Castlefield Bowl with them in the background. And I particularly enjoy the view from Deansgate Tram Stop. They are spectacular and there is little like them outside London. They are visually striking, shiny, breathtaking, and actually attractive.
But I'd still concede that Manchester's skyline is a work in progress. 0 -
It’s a lot worse nowadays for any aspiring politicians, when everyone on a night out takes a camera with them and puts the photos online immediately.DM_Andy said:
That's the saddest thing about Paul Staines. I strongly suspect that he doesn't regret enjoying himself in the rave scene but now he's turned into a priggish martinet (for thee, not for himself) who probably scaring any young aspiring politician to live their 20s like a monk.Sandpit said:
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/
Hanging out with someone who would become a scurrilous tabloid journalist, could be the least of their problems.0 -
She said we should be in an EEC Single Market that was bigger than the USA.Nigel_Foremain said:
FFS. I was a "Eurosceptic", so was William Hague, David Cameron, George Osborne and many others. It doesn't make you want to self harm your own country, which was what we believed (and are being proven correct). Euroscepticism does not equal being a leaver. You can be Eurosceptic and not believe that we want to take UK back to the 1950s.HYUFD said:
Thatcher's Bruges speech made clear her Euroscepticism by the end of her premiershipNigel_Foremain said:
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 government
Thatcher never said we should divorce from the EU. She had plenty of opportunity to threaten it. She was not that stupid. That had to be left to the band of pigmies that look at things more simplistically.
That doesn't exist and didn't exist even pre Brexit.
What about the European Union do you think is the root of the problem as to why pre-EU it's constituent nations were in Thatcher's day bigger than the USA, but in our day it's now considerably smaller than it?
If the EU was anything other than a failure, you'd expect Europe's lead over America to have been expanded, not reversed.1 -
How has it changed since?Cyclefree said:
In Naples there are both internal and external shutters. I think we should have them on houses here. They save on heating bills. We never had any heating in the house in Naples in winter. Vests, hot water bottles and blankets over knees for the oldsters were the norm.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.
Here the change has been revolutionary.
At that time (assuming around 1965-1970) only a small number of people in the UK had central heating, for example, and the average winter running temperature of a UK house would be 12-14C, as compared to 18-21C now.0 -
Yes, but we decided on a sledgehammer as the alternative. There was a middle path, but we ended up with the worst of both. It is my belief that Mrs T, had she supported it at all (which there is no evidence for ) would have wanted to preserve membership of the single market, and she would have found a way.Richard_Tyndall said:
We tried to reform it and were roundly ignored.CorrectHorseBattery said:
If only we had tried to reform it. Now we’ve left and we’ll be dealing with it regardless.BartholomewRoberts said:
But the EEC Single Market that Thatcher was proud of, in her words a single market larger than the United States, no longer exists.Nigel_Foremain said:
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 government0 -
How are you BJO?bigjohnowls said:
Rishi looks like the candidate for fiscal ConservativesMrEd said:Re Sunak, worth mentioning that apparently Ben Wallace has taken a loathing to RS over not answering an urgent request for extra funding.
I'm reminded of it because RS has just refused to commit to Defence spending as 2.5% of GDP.
Will that lead Wallace to come out and say something? *
* please yes
Many of the others look like irresponsible Right Wing Nutters
You back on Labour now Johnson is off?
0 -
The safety issue is exaggerated by the cycling lobby. That is not to say that there are no safety issues when it comes to the interaction between two wheeled vehicles and those with 4 or more.MattW said:
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.
But the number of cycling fatalities has been falling in the UK for a long time even though cycling has been increasing.
The cycling lobby here in Oxford almost seem to relish a tragic accident. One of their number collects old bikes, sprays them white and ties them up next to the site of the accident within hours.
Road deaths should never be exploited for political gain. It is ghoulish.
Improved road safety is more about education and enforcement than it is about creating new segregation.
I appreciate that there are good drivers and bad drivers. There are good cyclists and bad cyclists.
A couple of times a week, I drive someone into central Oxford so they can get to work. Mobility issues preventing them from getting there without a vehicle. On each trip, I always see a number of cyclists jumping red lights, using mobile phones whilst cycling, wearing headphones and so forth. All of which comprise their safety. But in the event of an accident, the vehicle driver will now be assumed liable.
If cycling is to be given greater prominence in terms of road planning, cyclists will have to be subject to greater scrutiny in terms of their of own responsibilities. A complete ban on the use of mobile devices/headphones would be a start. Proper cycling education would seem desirable along with a requirement for a certain type of light, reflective clothing and helmets
Road use should be about respect, responsibility and governed by fair enforcement.
No one wants road deaths. Everyone has their part to play in this.
0 -
Pedestrians cross the road in gaps in the traffic. If cars slow down, as in the rain, they close up which makes it harder to cross the road. 20mph zones have the same effect.MattW said:
I'd be interested to hear why - seriously?DecrepiterJohnL said:
As a non-driver, it seems to me that lower speed limits make it harder for pedestrians.MattW said:
Road conditions in towns are generally that lower limits are appropriate.oxfordsimon said:
And without huge sums on enforcement, the roads will continue to be used at speeds that suit road conditionsMattW 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.
I'm sure that strong enforcement will be necessary until drivers are better educated, or the organisation of towns to keep rat-runners out of residential areas is more complete.
I followed up on your East Oxford link from the other day by the way, and the vandalism of the low traffic neighbourhood followed by gratuitous lawbreaking was a little shocking.1 -
Terrible result for Rishi. Truss is the one I’d assumed he had the best chance against.HYUFD said:Conhome next Tory leader playoff survey finds Truss beats Sunak 51% to 34% but Badenoch beats Truss 52% to 34% and Mordaunt beats Truss 61% to 33%
https://conservativehome.com/2022/07/12/next-tory-leader-run-offs-third-liz-truss/?utm_campaign=twitter&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitter1 -
Not sure the former exceeds the latter.bigjohnowls said:
Rishi looks like the candidate for fiscal ConservativesMrEd said:Re Sunak, worth mentioning that apparently Ben Wallace has taken a loathing to RS over not answering an urgent request for extra funding.
I'm reminded of it because RS has just refused to commit to Defence spending as 2.5% of GDP.
Will that lead Wallace to come out and say something? *
* please yes
Many of the others look like irresponsible Right Wing Nutters0 -
yawnBartholomewRoberts said:
She said we should be in an EEC Single Market that was bigger than the USA.Nigel_Foremain said:
FFS. I was a "Eurosceptic", so was William Hague, David Cameron, George Osborne and many others. It doesn't make you want to self harm your own country, which was what we believed (and are being proven correct). Euroscepticism does not equal being a leaver. You can be Eurosceptic and not believe that we want to take UK back to the 1950s.HYUFD said:
Thatcher's Bruges speech made clear her Euroscepticism by the end of her premiershipNigel_Foremain said:
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 government
Thatcher never said we should divorce from the EU. She had plenty of opportunity to threaten it. She was not that stupid. That had to be left to the band of pigmies that look at things more simplistically.
That doesn't exist and didn't exist even pre Brexit.
What about the European Union do you think is the root of the problem as to why pre-EU it's constituent nations were in Thatcher's day bigger than the USA, but in our day it's now considerably smaller than it?
If the EU was anything other than a failure, you'd expect Europe's lead over America to have been expanded, not reversed.0 -
One thing I would like the next PM to do is to place the various ethics advisors on a statutory footing, reporting to Parliament and give them the power to initiate investigations independently (with a proper professional team of investigators not civil servants doing this off the side of their desks). If they could get cross-party backing for these changes, so much the better.4
-
Conhome playoff survey finds Mordaunt beats Sunak 58% to 31% and Truss beats Sunak 51% to 34%
https://conservativehome.com/2022/07/12/next-tory-leader-run-offs-sixth-rishi-sunak/0 -
It is developing a Central Business District sort of skyline, like several US cities, like Australian cities, like Chinese cities.Cookie said:
Oh give over. Manchester is many things but dull is not one of them.Nigel_Foremain said:
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.
But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume we're focusing on skyline.
What a skyline needs is a vantage point. Manchester's drawback is that it is flat: the high points tend to be far away, from which point the city is more indistinct. Liverpool has the great advantage here that its three most distinctive buildings are on the waterfront, which means that from the riverside, or from Wallasey, the city has a great skyline. From further away the three graces are a bit of a blur, but it also has Liverpool Cathedral, which is handsome and distinctive.
Manchester also has its three graces - the town hall, the library and the Midland Hotel - but nowhere to see them as a skyline. You can look down on them from the new buildings, but when you do that they're not a skyline, because the background isn't sky, it's city. So not a great start.
I do genuinely like the towers which have gone up at the bottom end of Deansgate. They're shiny and modern, but all buildings were at one stage; they're also of a scale to give a skyline from some surprising locations. I particularly enjoyed, yesterday, sitting a the front of a tram heading down Mosley Street with those in the background. And I particularly enjoyed last Tuesday walking down to the Castlefield Bowl with them in the background. And I particularly enjoy the view from Deansgate Tram Stop. They are spectacular and there is little like them outside London. They are visually striking, shiny, breathtaking, and actually attractive.
But I'd still concede that Manchester's skyline is a work in progress.
In as much as that it is a bit generic, but the large towers are pretty well spread out, from NOMA to Trafford to Salford to Piccadilly so get on amy hill a few miles away and they form an interesting scatter, rather than the clump that looms at you looking over at the square mile from Tower Bridge or from the quick fit garage in Shoreditch.
I descended from Denshaw into Shaw the other week and the view from the ridge above Shaw is something.
So, in terms of planning, Manchester more than anything wants to look at placement, spread, and bits of recognisable features at the topping out points of its broadly square towers. It wants to present vistas from the many vantages a few miles distant.1 -
Bloomberg
Heathrow caps passengers numbers to 100,000 a day until 11 September
0 -
Is ConHome a good representation of the Tory membership?0
-
All chief whips since '15 (excrpt heaton harris who stays neutral) backing RS. Suggests for him at least there is no obvious premiership ending skeleton the whips know of1
-
That's an odd date to choose.Big_G_NorthWales said:Bloomberg
Heathrow caps passengers numbers to 100,000 a day until 11 September0 -
Why would the robots pay? No taxation without representation after all...HYUFD said:
It also would make a UBI funded by a robot tax inevitableAndy_JS said:One day there will be computers and robots powerful enough and intelligent enough to do 95% of jobs. Will this be a good thing? Maybe it'll leave most people without a purpose in life.
0 -
Second Sunday of September.williamglenn said:
That's an odd date to choose.Big_G_NorthWales said:Bloomberg
Heathrow caps passengers numbers to 100,000 a day until 11 September0 -
(OT)
Now on my random twitter follows - Threatening Music Notation.
https://twitter.com/ThreatNotation/status/1544469740986441728
Makes a change from cats.0 -
You really are an optimist. But if ever there was a moment they might be pressured into such an idea it is now.Cyclefree said:One thing I would like the next PM to do is to place the various ethics advisors on a statutory footing, reporting to Parliament and give them the power to initiate investigations independently (with a proper professional team of investigators not civil servants doing this off the side of their desks). If they could get cross-party backing for these changes, so much the better.
0 -
We're all goin' on a summer holidayBig_G_NorthWales said:Bloomberg
Heathrow caps passengers numbers to 100,000 a day until 11 September
No more workin' for a week or two
Fun and laughter on a summer holiday
No more worries for me or you
For a week or two....in Bognor.0 -
I can believe it. Do we think he can recover amongst members once it gets going?HYUFD said:Conhome playoff survey finds Mordaunt beats Sunak 58% to 31% and Truss beats Sunak 51% to 34%
https://conservativehome.com/2022/07/12/next-tory-leader-run-offs-sixth-rishi-sunak/0 -
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EQNQqwFK-OM&fbclid=IwAR3ULIpwaPKZwe4yRR27sZDDudosbRYrtAUpa_vwdC-4yhzXjhtZXLjdTO4&fs=e&s=clAndy_JS said:One day there will be computers and robots powerful enough and intelligent enough to do 95% of jobs. Will this be a good thing? Maybe it'll leave most people without a purpose in life.
0 -
And two months from today (or yesterday).tlg86 said:
Second Sunday of September.williamglenn said:
That's an odd date to choose.Big_G_NorthWales said:Bloomberg
Heathrow caps passengers numbers to 100,000 a day until 11 September0 -
We are going to Lossiemouth my wife's family homeFrancisUrquhart said:
We're all going on a summer holiday....to Bognor.Big_G_NorthWales said:Bloomberg
Heathrow caps passengers numbers to 100,000 a day until 11 September
Might be a lot of noisy flying from RAF Lossiemouth1 -
12 - 14 is a bit cool I think, 15 C needed to keep damp away ?MattW said:
How has it changed since?Cyclefree said:
In Naples there are both internal and external shutters. I think we should have them on houses here. They save on heating bills. We never had any heating in the house in Naples in winter. Vests, hot water bottles and blankets over knees for the oldsters were the norm.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.
Here the change has been revolutionary.
At that time (assuming around 1965-1970) only a small number of people in the UK had central heating, for example, and the average winter running temperature of a UK house would be 12-14C, as compared to 18-21C now.
Ours is set to 17 for the little one. Might move it back to 16 in a few years.0 -
Pleasantly sunny down on the Island, though the strike dates for the Red Funnel look awkward.FrancisUrquhart said:
We're all goin' on a summer holidayBig_G_NorthWales said:Bloomberg
Heathrow caps passengers numbers to 100,000 a day until 11 September
No more workin' for a week or two
Fun and laughter on a summer holiday
No more worries for me or you
For a week or two....in Bognor.0 -
And 10 days past our 5th grandchild 's due dateDecrepiterJohnL said:
And two months from today (or yesterday).tlg86 said:
Second Sunday of September.williamglenn said:
That's an odd date to choose.Big_G_NorthWales said:Bloomberg
Heathrow caps passengers numbers to 100,000 a day until 11 September0 -
This would be the stagnation that has led to record low unemployment?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.1 -
It’s a pointless counter factual. She was in favour of a single market in a world where the then EC was smaller and either we could veto, or we’d be the entity pushing for change anyway.Nigel_Foremain said:
Nobody knows, but it is only Brexiteers who claim she would have been in favour of Brexit and that is about as honest as Boris Johnson. One of her greatest creations was the single market. The fact that she would sacrifice that achievement seems very unlikely. She was definitely a sceptic, but that does not make her a headbanger.williamglenn said:
That's a bit revisionist. She opposed the Maastricht Treaty.Nigel_Foremain said:
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 government
( actually maybe we have a new verb here: " I am so sorry I did not intend to mislead or Boris Johnson to you")
We can’t know how she’d have approached 2016 but we do know that she never support increased QMV and she disliked the strengthening of the EU institutions. It’s not a stretch to think she wouldn’t exactly have led the Remain Campaign.
1 -
🤮HYUFD said:Conhome playoff survey finds Mordaunt beats Sunak 58% to 31% and Truss beats Sunak 51% to 34%
https://conservativehome.com/2022/07/12/next-tory-leader-run-offs-sixth-rishi-sunak/
There is not enough get Truss going in for my liking.
Since Sunday when my dad said he is backing Sunak but is convinced Truss is winning it I have had a 🤢 feeling.
As this is a betting site, we have to tell the betting world Truss is next PM?
I’m praying for Penny, to knock Truss out last two, but European land war and economic crisis no time for a novice is going to count against Penny isn’t it 😩2 -
Andy Street backing Hunt.
Unfortunately, he hasn't got a vote.0 -
Later peeps!0
-
Former Shapps supporter Mark Pritchard has tweeted support for Liz Truss.0
This discussion has been closed.