Howdy, Stranger!

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

A hollow victory for the hollow crown? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited March 2023 in General
A hollow victory for the hollow crown? – politicalbetting.com

Britain is upping the amount of cash it pays France to deter migrants from crossing the Channel – but Britons are split on the principle of paying France to prevent small boat crossingsAll Britons: 39% support / 42% opposeCon voters: 43% / 48%https://t.co/wW1j0OPY7F pic.twitter.com/1tHZJ4xDZf

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926
    How much would President Macron charge to front Match of the Day?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926
    The Scottish subsample wonders if there is a paradox here. If the boats continue, then we are paying France for nothing, but if there are no more boats, then it proves France could have stopped them earlier. Either way, we've been mugged by the French.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,557
    (FPT)

    For some comparative data on refugees, you my want to look at this 2019 Pew report:
    https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/07/key-facts-about-refugees-to-the-u-s/

    "Even before the administration’s announcement, refugee resettlement in the U.S. had dropped to historic lows during Donald Trump’s presidency, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of State Department data. As a result, the U.S. is no longer the world’s top country for refugee admissions. It had previously led the world on this measure for decades, admitting more refugees each year than all other countries combined.
    . . .
    For much of the 20th century, U.S. public opinion polls showed fairly consistent disapproval of admitting large numbers of foreigners fleeing war and oppression, regardless of official government policy."

    So, until Trump, American leaders have been willing to accept large numbers of refugees -- in spite of the opposition of most of the public. We have been returning to that policy, now that he is out of office.

    Why is it that a nation composed largely of fairly recent immigrants, and with both the economic capacity and the space easily to accommodate them, is so determined to keep them out ?

    Do you approve of such a prejudice ?
  • How is cruelty measured?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,557
    Interesting detail on SVB.
    1) A CEO friend and I stopped by SVB’s Palo Alto office today just in time to see an FDIC employee taping a QR code to the door that led to a FAQ:

    https://fdic.gov/resources/resolutions/bank-failures/failed-bank-list/silicon-valley

    https://mobile.twitter.com/elatable/status/1634687606540886017

    The $250k of deposit insurance will be available Monday, and it sounds as though assets are being fairly rapidly liquidated.
    Bottom line might be a 30% haircut for depositors.
    They can thank Trump's rollback of banking regulation for that.

    Given SVB was considerably more exposed than any other bank, systemic risk looks quite low.
    The unrealised losses in banks' HTM bonds might mean some big hits to profits in less well capitalised banks which see significant withdrawals (eg US regional banks).
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    edited March 2023

    How is cruelty measured?

    Millithatchers are the most useful subdivision of the SI unit.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,007
    It looks pretty balanced to me, and fairly divided (as much as these things go) across the parties. Many voters don't like any of their taxes/money being sent overseas, but that's necessary in diplomacy.

    On the polling, the Ipsos-UK poll was very encouraging for Rishi on his GE2019 voters (don't forget all these announcements and moves will have been focus grouped first) and the objective is to shift DKs into the Tory camp and get his polling up from 23-25% to 30%+ by rallying his base:

    https://twitter.com/CameronGarrett_/status/1634543925351395328?t=OwdDCMZu_Y70ewZdcKyJjA&s=19
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,557
    Interesting that Leavers and Tories are the two groups with the largest numbers 'strongly opposed' to the bung.

    I'm not sure how much it means, though. Far more significant to the popularity of the policy will be the numbers crossing this year.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,557
    edited March 2023
    Further commentary on SVB.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/CorneliaLake/status/1634662054588973058
    ...and that is the real fear...given the velocity of money we just saw...with no action Monday morning, a solvent bank can go to, and then the game is really up and mass hysteria sets in.

    It is counterintuitively a good thing for bank confidence for $SIVB to have blown up through an obvious mistake. If we lose something solvent through a liquidity squeeze...oh boy. Note, that in the event a solvent bank has a liquidity failure the depositors, by definition, would be held whole, it would just be annoying...

    In 2008 if you had your money at a regional, you could rationalize that it was safer than a big bank (no subprime, derivs, etc). Here, EVERYONE knows that the big banks are 100% safe and questions whether theirs is. We need a circuit breaker and a pretty big one. ..
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926
    Nigelb said:

    Interesting detail on SVB.
    1) A CEO friend and I stopped by SVB’s Palo Alto office today just in time to see an FDIC employee taping a QR code to the door that led to a FAQ:

    https://fdic.gov/resources/resolutions/bank-failures/failed-bank-list/silicon-valley

    https://mobile.twitter.com/elatable/status/1634687606540886017

    The $250k of deposit insurance will be available Monday, and it sounds as though assets are being fairly rapidly liquidated.
    Bottom line might be a 30% haircut for depositors.
    They can thank Trump's rollback of banking regulation for that.

    Given SVB was considerably more exposed than any other bank, systemic risk looks quite low.
    The unrealised losses in banks' HTM bonds might mean some big hits to profits in less well capitalised banks which see significant withdrawals (eg US regional banks).

    The oddest detail of the tweet is surely "A CEO friend and I..." as if the CEO friend plays any part in what follows. Hopefully the Fed has acted in time, unlike when they let Lehmans fail 15 years ago. SBV was America's 16th biggest bank, not some mom-and-pop lender, and reputedly was used by many Silicon Valley companies, so there is a risk there to the American tech economy.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,051
    Nigelb said:

    Interesting that Leavers and Tories are the two groups with the largest numbers 'strongly opposed' to the bung.

    I'm not sure how much it means, though. Far more significant to the popularity of the policy will be the numbers crossing this year.

    I don't think it will make much difference. Last year at the same time of year there was a lot of excitement that the Rwanda plan had stopped the boats. Actually it was just unfavourable wind and sea conditions. Numbers were up over the year.

    The problem is enforcement, and this government has been much more willing to play to the gallery, than to actually enforce their new laws.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,087
    Nigelb said:

    Interesting that Leavers and Tories are the two groups with the largest numbers 'strongly opposed' to the bung.

    I'm not sure how much it means, though. Far more significant to the popularity of the policy will be the numbers crossing this year.

    I think that's right. If the boats stop (or, more realistically, the numbers are cut back to something a bit more manageable) then the salience of the story will decline and so will the grumbling about the cost of subsidising French law enforcement.

    It's worth remembering once again that support for the concept of asylum in theory amongst the electorate is high (hence the fact that there is little if any grumbling about letting in lots of Ukrainians and Hongkongers,) but support for the boat people in practice is not, and for good reason. The overwhelming majority of them are young men, most of those are demonstrably economic migrants (starting with the whole of the 42% of all the boat people whom, according to the most recent available figures, were Albanian,) and they're a security risk.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,557

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting detail on SVB.
    1) A CEO friend and I stopped by SVB’s Palo Alto office today just in time to see an FDIC employee taping a QR code to the door that led to a FAQ:

    https://fdic.gov/resources/resolutions/bank-failures/failed-bank-list/silicon-valley

    https://mobile.twitter.com/elatable/status/1634687606540886017

    The $250k of deposit insurance will be available Monday, and it sounds as though assets are being fairly rapidly liquidated.
    Bottom line might be a 30% haircut for depositors.
    They can thank Trump's rollback of banking regulation for that.

    Given SVB was considerably more exposed than any other bank, systemic risk looks quite low.
    The unrealised losses in banks' HTM bonds might mean some big hits to profits in less well capitalised banks which see significant withdrawals (eg US regional banks).

    The oddest detail of the tweet is surely "A CEO friend and I..." as if the CEO friend plays any part in what follows. Hopefully the Fed has acted in time, unlike when they let Lehmans fail 15 years ago. SBV was America's 16th biggest bank, not some mom-and-pop lender, and reputedly was used by many Silicon Valley companies, so there is a risk there to the American tech economy.
    SVB was a huge outlier, though, in terms both of the size of its unrealised bond losses (it expanded its capital base massively, right at the top of the market), and its depositor base (companies able and likely to move their money overnight).
    Nearly a quarter of all depositors' money was withdrawn on Thursday/Friday.

    It does serve as a warning of how quickly banks can fail now - a matter of a day or two, rather than weeks.
    Stress tests for banks with capital below $250bn, abolished by Trump, need to come back.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,557
    pigeon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting that Leavers and Tories are the two groups with the largest numbers 'strongly opposed' to the bung.

    I'm not sure how much it means, though. Far more significant to the popularity of the policy will be the numbers crossing this year.

    I think that's right. If the boats stop (or, more realistically, the numbers are cut back to something a bit more manageable) then the salience of the story will decline and so will the grumbling about the cost of subsidising French law enforcement...
    If the numbers don't drop significantly (hard to predict either way for now), it will be more than grumbling.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,051
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting detail on SVB.
    1) A CEO friend and I stopped by SVB’s Palo Alto office today just in time to see an FDIC employee taping a QR code to the door that led to a FAQ:

    https://fdic.gov/resources/resolutions/bank-failures/failed-bank-list/silicon-valley

    https://mobile.twitter.com/elatable/status/1634687606540886017

    The $250k of deposit insurance will be available Monday, and it sounds as though assets are being fairly rapidly liquidated.
    Bottom line might be a 30% haircut for depositors.
    They can thank Trump's rollback of banking regulation for that.

    Given SVB was considerably more exposed than any other bank, systemic risk looks quite low.
    The unrealised losses in banks' HTM bonds might mean some big hits to profits in less well capitalised banks which see significant withdrawals (eg US regional banks).

    The oddest detail of the tweet is surely "A CEO friend and I..." as if the CEO friend plays any part in what follows. Hopefully the Fed has acted in time, unlike when they let Lehmans fail 15 years ago. SBV was America's 16th biggest bank, not some mom-and-pop lender, and reputedly was used by many Silicon Valley companies, so there is a risk there to the American tech economy.
    SVB was a huge outlier, though, in terms both of the size of its unrealised bond losses (it expanded its capital base massively, right at the top of the market), and its depositor base (companies able and likely to move their money overnight).
    Nearly a quarter of all depositors' money was withdrawn on Thursday/Friday.

    It does serve as a warning of how quickly banks can fail now - a matter of a day or two, rather than weeks.
    Stress tests for banks with capital below $250bn, abolished by Trump, need to come back.
    Browsing my portfolio now, I think it might be a good time to pause and think while going to cash. For example I bought Standard Chartered at 439, and it currently stands at 739, so a healthy profit to take. In addition to SVB there is the geopolitical risk to East Asia exposure. Time to slim down a bit and show some caution.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    Given how politically unpopular it will be in France to stop refugees leaving is there any reason at all for the French not to fuck Sunak over this? In 18 months time he will be a minor historical footnote and question on the Chase. (Bradley Walsh: Remember, this gets you into the Final Chase with four thousand pounds. Who was the UK's only six stone Prime Minister?)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,051
    pigeon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting that Leavers and Tories are the two groups with the largest numbers 'strongly opposed' to the bung.

    I'm not sure how much it means, though. Far more significant to the popularity of the policy will be the numbers crossing this year.

    I think that's right. If the boats stop (or, more realistically, the numbers are cut back to something a bit more manageable) then the salience of the story will decline and so will the grumbling about the cost of subsidising French law enforcement.
    While it may not be popular with the base, paying the French to enforce is probably cost effective strategy, and neither is it performatively cruel in the way that offends Mr Lineker. After all, it was better security at the lorry parks that stopped the lorry stowaway arrivals, albeit by displacing them to boats instead.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited March 2023
    Stramash=An Uproar. A new word!

    From what I'm seeing the vast majority don't put refugees on boats very high on their list of concerns. So all it does is make Tory Ultras- who do -look weirder than usual.

    Rishi hasn't been a terrible PM. Much better than both his predecessors but all through his premiership he's been fighting a rearguard action trying to mitigate the damage his poisonous Home Secretary causes every time she's let out of her cage. Boris had J R-M and Mad Nad but he at least looked in control of them. Rishi looks spooked.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,557
    Tom Davie is a useless waffler and should resign.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/entertainment-arts-64895316
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,727
    ...
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,920
    Nigelb said:

    Tom Davie is a useless waffler and should resign.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/entertainment-arts-64895316

    Yes, and take Sharp with him.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 4,199
    Bit weird for certain people to get so precious about a football pundit comparing the language the government uses to Nazi propaganda when Boris Johnson said the EU is like Hitler. And quite a few people on here approvingly quote his concentration camp guard punishment beatings comparison.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 10,456
    edited March 2023
    So much for Leon and co re Lineker having made a huge mistake. The Govt last night announces it has nothing to do with them and is a BBC issue. A very short memory of who really kicked this off. The BBC this morning putting out feelers to Lineker.

    Hopefully this will be a lesson to all Govts, right and left, to not interfere in free speech.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited March 2023
    Nigelb said:

    Tom Davie is a useless waffler and should resign.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/entertainment-arts-64895316

    How many DGs have managed to make our most internationaly respected institution look so shabby.

    He absolutely has to go.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    edited March 2023
    Here's Andrew Neil sporting a tie from right wing think tank, the Adam Smith Institute, on the Daily Politics show in 2017 - not MOTD, an actual politics show

    The same think tank that wants to scrap the BBC licence fee and privatise the BBC

    He wasn't suspended

    #IStandWithGary


    https://twitter.com/russellengland/status/1634427676164227073?s=46
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766

    Here's Andrew Neil sporting a tie from right wing think tank, the Adam Smith Institute, on the Daily Politics show in 2017 - not MOTD, an actual politics show

    The same think tank that wants to scrap the BBC licence fee and privatise the BBC

    He wasn't suspended

    #IStandWithGary


    https://twitter.com/russellengland/status/1634427676164227073?s=46

    Sorry.

    You think wearing an Adam Smith tie is equivalent to comparing the government of the day to Nazis?

    Personally, I'm disgusted that Lineker was suspended as a sports commentator for sale stupid (but not illegal) views.

    But the two incidence are not equivalent.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    I am gutted to have missed another Saturday night drunken bloodbath on pb.com. We normally dine en famille on a Saturday but I might have to put a stop to it so I can watch these drink soaked contretemps unwind in real time.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Survation/Sunday Times
    Sample size: 1,037
    Fieldwork: 8-10 March





  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,920
    Dura_Ace said:

    I am gutted to have missed another Saturday night drunken bloodbath on pb.com. We normally dine en famille on a Saturday but I might have to put a stop to it so I can watch these drink soaked contretemps unwind in real time.

    Me too. Are you able to provide a resume of the casualties?
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,287
    There is no such thing as free speech. It comes with a heavy price.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164

    Here's Andrew Neil sporting a tie from right wing think tank, the Adam Smith Institute, on the Daily Politics show in 2017 - not MOTD, an actual politics show

    The same think tank that wants to scrap the BBC licence fee and privatise the BBC

    He wasn't suspended

    #IStandWithGary


    https://twitter.com/russellengland/status/1634427676164227073?s=46

    Top trolling by Andrew Neil.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Same Survation poll:

    SNP 40% (-3)
    Lab 32% (+2)
    Con 18% (+1)
    LD 6% (nc)
    Grn 2% (+2)
    Alba 1% (+1)

    Baxtered (new boundaries):

    SNP 37 seats (-11)
    Lab 13 seats (+12)
    Con 5 seats (-1)
    LD 2 seats (nc)
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891

    Nigelb said:

    Tom Davie is a useless waffler and should resign.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/entertainment-arts-64895316

    Yes, and take Sharp with him.
    Sharpe is emblematic of everything that's rotten about this administration. I hope they keep him on.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I am gutted to have missed another Saturday night drunken bloodbath on pb.com. We normally dine en famille on a Saturday but I might have to put a stop to it so I can watch these drink soaked contretemps unwind in real time.

    Me too. Are you able to provide a resume of the casualties?
    Leon's on a ban and I assume only Isabel Oakeshott now has access to the relevant posts.
    What did he do this time?
  • I knew Tim Davie when he was a Sixth Former -- we were in the same Young Enterprise group and ended up at the same Cambridge College (though we were in different years and had nothing to do with each other there).

    In that Young Enterprise group in Croydon in 1983/1984, it was clear we were very different people with different views and different priorities. I don't think he liked me at all! But I respected him. Even then he was clear, determined and great at getting things done. It's come as no surprise he's had a stellar career since.

    Should he go? At this point, I don't think so. Someone's got to sort out this mess (a lot of which was not his fault). I think he's capable of doing so.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,955
    Roger said:

    Nigelb said:

    Tom Davie is a useless waffler and should resign.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/entertainment-arts-64895316

    How many DGs have managed to make our most internationaly respected institution look so shabby.

    He absolutely has to go.
    Previous DGs have not made the Beeb LOOK shabby; they have actually MADE it shabby.

    Decades back, it had a world-leading brand. If the BBC management had not been so backward looking, happy in their comfy licence fee poll tax, they might have actually seen the change coming at them, hard and fast.

    BBC management has been woeful, from at least the risible John Birt onwards.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    rcs1000 said:

    Here's Andrew Neil sporting a tie from right wing think tank, the Adam Smith Institute, on the Daily Politics show in 2017 - not MOTD, an actual politics show

    The same think tank that wants to scrap the BBC licence fee and privatise the BBC

    He wasn't suspended

    #IStandWithGary


    https://twitter.com/russellengland/status/1634427676164227073?s=46

    Sorry.

    You think wearing an Adam Smith tie is equivalent to comparing the government of the day to Nazis?

    Personally, I'm disgusted that Lineker was suspended as a sports commentator for sale stupid (but not illegal) views.

    But the two incidence are not equivalent.
    Wasn’t just the tie.

    Andrew Neil was allowed, for years, to attack Scottish independence & the SNP on his Twitter feed. Complaints were met with silence.

    https://twitter.com/childofalba/status/1634281404849704987?s=46
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,287
    Roger said:

    Nigelb said:

    Tom Davie is a useless waffler and should resign.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/entertainment-arts-64895316

    Yes, and take Sharp with him.
    Sharpe is emblematic of everything that's rotten about this administration. I hope they keep him on.
    Thank you Roger. We are all glad you comment as it's sure to be the wrong solution if you are supporting it You have history with getting it wrong.
  • Roger said:

    Nigelb said:

    Tom Davie is a useless waffler and should resign.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/entertainment-arts-64895316

    How many DGs have managed to make our most internationaly respected institution look so shabby.

    He absolutely has to go.
    Previous DGs have not made the Beeb LOOK shabby; they have actually MADE it shabby.

    Decades back, it had a world-leading brand. If the BBC management had not been so backward looking, happy in their comfy licence fee poll tax, they might have actually seen the change coming at them, hard and fast.

    BBC management has been woeful, from at least the risible John Birt onwards.
    Birt was the real disaster.

    He epitomised the old saying about accountants knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876
    Here’s a pretty good SVB explainer. It provides important context that shows why what’s happened doesn’t necessarily mean there’ll be a meltdown. It all depends on how jittery people are. My worry is that many have been looking for bear market triggers and this could be seen as one. On the bright side, if that is the case smart investors will pick up some real bargains over the next few weeks. As ever DYOR …
    https://twitter.com/spajw/status/1634823087832154112?s=46&t=rw5lNVUgmRPVyKpxfV_pPQ
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,955

    rcs1000 said:

    Here's Andrew Neil sporting a tie from right wing think tank, the Adam Smith Institute, on the Daily Politics show in 2017 - not MOTD, an actual politics show

    The same think tank that wants to scrap the BBC licence fee and privatise the BBC

    He wasn't suspended

    #IStandWithGary


    https://twitter.com/russellengland/status/1634427676164227073?s=46

    Sorry.

    You think wearing an Adam Smith tie is equivalent to comparing the government of the day to Nazis?

    Personally, I'm disgusted that Lineker was suspended as a sports commentator for sale stupid (but not illegal) views.

    But the two incidence are not equivalent.
    Wasn’t just the tie.

    Andrew Neil was allowed, for years, to attack Scottish independence & the SNP on his Twitter feed. Complaints were met with silence.

    https://twitter.com/childofalba/status/1634281404849704987?s=46
    Must really hurt that the Scottish people are coming round to his viewpoint....
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: heard some radio snippets the other day from Red Bull, essentially having both drivers put in slower lap times because there was no need to go full tilt. They were still, both, over a pit stop ahead of Alonso, in third.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Permit me an observation on the controversy surrounding @GaryLineker's view on immigration and asylum as expressed in his now notorious tweet. I worked in the BBC's Editorial Complaints Unit for around a decade, adjudicating on complaints that there had been breaches

    https://twitter.com/andybell2000/status/1634208918564904962?s=46

    I note that BBC News immediately asked him for an interview.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    rcs1000 said:

    Here's Andrew Neil sporting a tie from right wing think tank, the Adam Smith Institute, on the Daily Politics show in 2017 - not MOTD, an actual politics show

    The same think tank that wants to scrap the BBC licence fee and privatise the BBC

    He wasn't suspended

    #IStandWithGary


    https://twitter.com/russellengland/status/1634427676164227073?s=46

    Sorry.

    You think wearing an Adam Smith tie is equivalent to comparing the government of the day to Nazis?

    Personally, I'm disgusted that Lineker was suspended as a sports commentator for sale stupid (but not illegal) views.

    But the two incidence are not equivalent.
    Wasn’t just the tie.

    Andrew Neil was allowed, for years, to attack Scottish independence & the SNP on his Twitter feed. Complaints were met with silence.

    https://twitter.com/childofalba/status/1634281404849704987?s=46
    Must really hurt that the Scottish people are coming round to his viewpoint....
    Huh?

    New Scottish Independence poll, Find Out Now 1 - 9 Mar (changes vs 11 - 18 Jan):

    Yes ~ 50% (-2)
    No ~ 46% (+2)
    Don't Know ~ 4% (+1)

    Excluding Don't Knows (/ vs 2014):
    Yes ~ 52% (-2 / +7)
    No ~ 48% (+2 / -7)




    https://twitter.com/ballotboxscot/status/1634314764598890499?s=46
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,007
    Labour supporting Matthew Syed comes out in favour of what Rishi is trying to do here, saying the treaties should be rewritten across the West and, indeed, arguing there should be an absolute cap on numbers - and critical of liberal-thinking on the issue. He thinks this would legitimately allow a higher number to be admitted. He does think language and tone is important too:

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/our-asylum-system-has-been-rigged-for-decades-its-time-for-real-action-r3vtk3ggq
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,080

    Roger said:

    Nigelb said:

    Tom Davie is a useless waffler and should resign.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/entertainment-arts-64895316

    How many DGs have managed to make our most internationaly respected institution look so shabby.

    He absolutely has to go.
    Previous DGs have not made the Beeb LOOK shabby; they have actually MADE it shabby.

    Decades back, it had a world-leading brand. If the BBC management had not been so backward looking, happy in their comfy licence fee poll tax, they might have actually seen the change coming at them, hard and fast.

    BBC management has been woeful, from at least the risible John Birt onwards.
    Birt was the real disaster.

    He epitomised the old saying about accountants knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing.
    Though Birt was a TV person who had made actual programmes and directly managed programme making. Even in the bits of what he did that were madness, there was method and experience.

    Davie doesn't even have that, which is may be why he has messed up the manager/talent relationship so much.

    And whilst the license fee is absurd and may not work for much longer, nobody has come up with a better way of funding public service broadcasting.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 4,746
    Sunak is proving himself to be quite a strategist
    He is doing things that are popular and unpopular at the same time in order to get things done.
    Simultaneously he is both pleasing and annoying specific voting groups, IE the pre-europeans and the Faragists.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876
    SVB made some very bad calls. These will adversely affect, perhaps terminally, what are fundamentally a lot of good tech businesses. What it hasn’t done, though, is make dodgy calls on stuff built on quicksand, as so many did in 2008. That is a very important difference.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Clear lead for “Don’t know”….




  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    edited March 2023

    rcs1000 said:

    Here's Andrew Neil sporting a tie from right wing think tank, the Adam Smith Institute, on the Daily Politics show in 2017 - not MOTD, an actual politics show

    The same think tank that wants to scrap the BBC licence fee and privatise the BBC

    He wasn't suspended

    #IStandWithGary


    https://twitter.com/russellengland/status/1634427676164227073?s=46

    Sorry.

    You think wearing an Adam Smith tie is equivalent to comparing the government of the day to Nazis?

    Personally, I'm disgusted that Lineker was suspended as a sports commentator for sale stupid (but not illegal) views.

    But the two incidence are not equivalent.
    Wasn’t just the tie.

    Andrew Neil was allowed, for years, to attack Scottish independence & the SNP on his Twitter feed. Complaints were met with silence.

    https://twitter.com/childofalba/status/1634281404849704987?s=46
    Must really hurt that the Scottish people are coming round to his viewpoint....
    Huh?

    New Scottish Independence poll, Find Out Now 1 - 9 Mar (changes vs 11 - 18 Jan):

    Yes ~ 50% (-2)
    No ~ 46% (+2)
    Don't Know ~ 4% (+1)

    Excluding Don't Knows (/ vs 2014):
    Yes ~ 52% (-2 / +7)
    No ~ 48% (+2 / -7)




    https://twitter.com/ballotboxscot/status/1634314764598890499?s=46
    Sudden shift, or outlier?



    https://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/how-would-you-vote-in-the-in-a-scottish-independence-referendum-if-held-now-ask/?removed
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708
    If it cuts the number of boats crossing the Channel it will have been worth it for Sunak
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    Clear lead for “Don’t know”….




    I would imagine that DK largely - but not exclusively - corresponds to Unionist voters.

    For example it’s notable that when pollsters ask respondents who would make the best PM, Sunak or Starmer, the DK figure is always higher in Scotland. A large percentage obviously want to say “Neither” but are not presented with that option.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,701

    Roger said:

    Nigelb said:

    Tom Davie is a useless waffler and should resign.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/entertainment-arts-64895316

    How many DGs have managed to make our most internationaly respected institution look so shabby.

    He absolutely has to go.
    Previous DGs have not made the Beeb LOOK shabby; they have actually MADE it shabby.

    Decades back, it had a world-leading brand. If the BBC management had not been so backward looking, happy in their comfy licence fee poll tax, they might have actually seen the change coming at them, hard and fast.

    BBC management has been woeful, from at least the risible John Birt onwards.
    Birt was the real disaster.

    He epitomised the old saying about accountants knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing.
    Though Birt was a TV person who had made actual programmes and directly managed programme making. Even in the bits of what he did that were madness, there was method and experience.

    Davie doesn't even have that, which is may be why he has messed up the manager/talent relationship so much.

    And whilst the license fee is absurd and may not work for much longer, nobody has come up with a better way of funding public service broadcasting.
    We need to decide exactly what pub,in service broadcasting is. A lot,of the BBC output really isn’t.

    It is a channel that pumps out generic drama, soaps, panel shows and competes for sports rights or not ? I’d say no.

    Is it the network of local radio stations ? Possibly.

    Is it national radio,stations that compete with commercial rivals. Again I’d say no.

    Rolling 24 hour news. Maybe

    BBC Three innit. Nope

    World service. Yes

    I think the Public service element needs to be defined and funded and the commercial side of the BBC just spun off and competes for,it’s funding with other broadcasters.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,708

    Clear lead for “Don’t know”….




    Or Forbes, despite the fact the vast majority of SNP MPs and MPs have endorsed Yousaf
  • kjhkjh Posts: 10,456

    There is no such thing as free speech. It comes with a heavy price.

    Of course there is such a thing as free speech. There are some limits, the obvious being you shouldn't be allowed to shout fire in the theatre.

    And the most important time to defend free speech is when you don't like what is being said.

    Honestly some people here from the socially conservative right seem to have more in common with the old USSR or Putin's Russia in their views on censorship.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,415
    been away for a week or two. Seems I have missed a political row evolving into not being able to enjoy ' its a game of two halves' punditry on a game of football - Sort of the opposite of the Butterfly Effect
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    Taz said:

    Roger said:

    Nigelb said:

    Tom Davie is a useless waffler and should resign.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/entertainment-arts-64895316

    How many DGs have managed to make our most internationaly respected institution look so shabby.

    He absolutely has to go.
    Previous DGs have not made the Beeb LOOK shabby; they have actually MADE it shabby.

    Decades back, it had a world-leading brand. If the BBC management had not been so backward looking, happy in their comfy licence fee poll tax, they might have actually seen the change coming at them, hard and fast.

    BBC management has been woeful, from at least the risible John Birt onwards.
    Birt was the real disaster.

    He epitomised the old saying about accountants knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing.
    Though Birt was a TV person who had made actual programmes and directly managed programme making. Even in the bits of what he did that were madness, there was method and experience.

    Davie doesn't even have that, which is may be why he has messed up the manager/talent relationship so much.

    And whilst the license fee is absurd and may not work for much longer, nobody has come up with a better way of funding public service broadcasting.
    We need to decide exactly what pub,in service broadcasting is. A lot,of the BBC output really isn’t.

    It is a channel that pumps out generic drama, soaps, panel shows and competes for sports rights or not ? I’d say no.

    Is it the network of local radio stations ? Possibly.

    Is it national radio,stations that compete with commercial rivals. Again I’d say no.

    Rolling 24 hour news. Maybe

    BBC Three innit. Nope

    World service. Yes

    I think the Public service element needs to be defined and funded and the commercial side of the BBC just spun off and competes for,it’s funding with other broadcasters.
    NPR in the US is pretty much the only American radio worth listening to, but the quality of the content is marred by endless references to sponsors and frequent fundraising drives which take up as much airtime and create as many breaks as would adverts.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,113

    Dura_Ace said:

    I am gutted to have missed another Saturday night drunken bloodbath on pb.com. We normally dine en famille on a Saturday but I might have to put a stop to it so I can watch these drink soaked contretemps unwind in real time.

    Me too. Are you able to provide a resume of the casualties?
    One thing that will please DA was HYUFD trying to prove the massive popularity of naming a Duke of Edinburgh in Scotland by adducing polling that showed royalism collapsing in Scotland. Astonishing figures - desire for royalty is plainly a minority pursuit.
  • Morning all! So it seems clear now that (a) Lineker will be reinstated and (b) Tory stooges imposed on the BBC will be resigning.

    Which means we are going to be opened up to an awful lot of coverage about just how - and why - the Conservative Party is so desperate to corrupt the BBC. And what kind of threat a tweeting sports presenter really would have been to a policy which as claimed was robust and popular.

    As soon as Sunak said "he's great isn't he? Nothing to do with the government" it was clear the Tories had conceded and were in retreat. What a fiasco.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,287
    kjh said:

    There is no such thing as free speech. It comes with a heavy price.

    Of course there is such a thing as free speech. There are some limits, the obvious being you shouldn't be allowed to shout fire in the theatre.

    And the most important time to defend free speech is when you don't like what is being said.

    Honestly some people here from the socially conservative right seem to have more in common with the old USSR or Putin's Russia in their views on censorship.
    Thanks Mike.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540

    Clear lead for “Don’t know”….




    I would imagine that DK largely - but not exclusively - corresponds to Unionist voters.

    For example it’s notable that when pollsters ask respondents who would make the best PM, Sunak or Starmer, the DK figure is always higher in Scotland. A large percentage obviously want to say “Neither” but are not presented with that option.
    There is a view among some SNP supporters that Forbes support is “coming from Unionists because she doesn’t want independence”. Meanwhile, Mr Kelly, late of this parish has been doing some polling:

    Regardless of which party or parties you intend to vote for in future elections, which of the three candidates do you think would be the best First Minister of Scotland? (Scot Goes Pop / Panelbase, 7th-10th March 2023)

    Kate Forbes: 33% (+10)
    Humza Yousaf: 18% (+3)
    Ash Regan: 10% (+3)
    Don't Know: 36% (-13)


    If the remaining Don't Knows are stripped out, this is how the state of play looks -

    Kate Forbes: 53% (+5)
    Humza Yousaf: 30% (-)
    Ash Regan: 17% (+3)


    https://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2023/03/exclusive-scot-goes-pop-panelbase-poll.html?m=1
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Nigelb said:

    Interesting detail on SVB.
    1) A CEO friend and I stopped by SVB’s Palo Alto office today just in time to see an FDIC employee taping a QR code to the door that led to a FAQ:

    https://fdic.gov/resources/resolutions/bank-failures/failed-bank-list/silicon-valley

    https://mobile.twitter.com/elatable/status/1634687606540886017

    The $250k of deposit insurance will be available Monday, and it sounds as though assets are being fairly rapidly liquidated.
    Bottom line might be a 30% haircut for depositors.
    They can thank Trump's rollback of banking regulation for that.

    Given SVB was considerably more exposed than any other bank, systemic risk looks quite low.
    The unrealised losses in banks' HTM bonds might mean some big hits to profits in less well capitalised banks which see significant withdrawals (eg US regional banks).

    SVB UK has been caught up in it because the parent fucked up but essentially there's a pretty well capitalised bank up for grabs here, thank fuck for ring fencing. Hunt needs to announce bridging finance for all of the companies caught up in SVB UK until a buyer is found. The rumours are that the Bank of London is looking to buy the whole book but after the the while Lloyds/HBOS saga they'd be mad not to due proper due diligence.

    Aiui something like 400 startups used SVB UK, around half solely. A further 100 or so used SVB US and might genuinely be underwater on Monday with only a $250k payout and a 30-40% haircut on the rest. Hopefully not too many companies fail and can raise more money from investors or the US government steps in and covers the losses.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    HYUFD said:

    If it cuts the number of boats crossing the Channel it will have been worth it for Sunak

    You Tories are just playing classic dog-whistle politics. The reality is that asylum seekers are super low compared to most of Europe.


  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,480
    edited March 2023
    Morning all.

    It's indeed true that Birt had experience of TV, like Greg Dyke. But the crtical fact is that he signed over , almost, the entire restructurng of the BBC to an outside body, in the shape of McKinsey's.

    Nothing like that's happened to the BBC before, or since.

    Davie is simply a continuation of this more commercial ethos, nothing new or particularly different, or necessarily that much more incompetent on the creative front than Dyke, who wasn't terrible. But he's shown poor judgement over this row and affair.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,113

    Permit me an observation on the controversy surrounding @GaryLineker's view on immigration and asylum as expressed in his now notorious tweet. I worked in the BBC's Editorial Complaints Unit for around a decade, adjudicating on complaints that there had been breaches

    https://twitter.com/andybell2000/status/1634208918564904962?s=46

    I note that BBC News immediately asked him for an interview.

    Ooh, that's a very nicely done putdown. And that's even assuming he is an "employee". When, as one of us commented yesterday, the BBC keep trying to prove in court that he is not in fact an "employee" in order to save on NI etc etc.
  • Good morning

    On topic

    Conservative against by 48/43 indicates there are still those who do not want to pay any share to France

    Labour against by 41/39 shows there are some pragmatists in Labour

    Leave against 51/40 is the same as the conservatives

    Lib Dems in favour 51/33 affirms their pro EU credentials

    Remain in favour 43/37 same as Lib Dems

    Maybe I am turning into a Lib Dem as I want a closer relationship with the EU and applaud Sunak's agreement on the WF and also on the new entente cordial including the sharing of the costs over three years with France
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,051
    On top of the money paid to Macron, it would probably help if we financially supported the EU interdiction of migrant boats in the Med and Aegean. The further upstream the better.

  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,129
    edited March 2023
    Lineker’s policy of spreading hatred of the government uses immeasurable hyperbole and weasel words not dissimilar to those employed by usurpers looking to foment rebellion against democratically elected governments through the ages
  • HYUFD said:

    If it cuts the number of boats crossing the Channel it will have been worth it for Sunak

    You Tories are just playing classic dog-whistle politics. The reality is that asylum seekers are super low compared to most of Europe.


    The proposed number for the asylum seeker cap will be zero. Britain is full, we have all these starving veterans, let's look after our own etc.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,113
    edited March 2023

    HYUFD said:

    If it cuts the number of boats crossing the Channel it will have been worth it for Sunak

    You Tories are just playing classic dog-whistle politics. The reality is that asylum seekers are super low compared to most of Europe.


    HYUFD:" If it cuts the number of boats crossing the Channel it will have been worth it for Sunak"

    me:
    - no specific target for the cut
    - no time period (so, fort instance, HYUFD could claim it was Mr Sunak rather than, say, bad weather)
    - no consideration of it being *our* money
    - logically, HYUFD thinks spending £550m (as agreed so far) is worth it if it reduces the total by one boat
    - and, as always, always, whether it is good for the Tory Party, not the UK
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,542
    French and UK interests aren't aligned on cross Channel migration. France doesn't want migrants turning up in Calais on their way to the UK, but if they do come France is happy for them to be the UK's problem and not stay around.

    The original Le Touquet deal was for extra policing in exchange for the UK accepting a proportion of asylum cases from France but it never really happened. On the other hand Macron unlike some other French politicians wants to keep the arrangement going. Maybe the money helps.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,701
    How does the U.K. get a piece of this action ? Will the chancellor do something in the budget to attract investment in clean energy.

    https://twitter.com/economics/status/1634828582718435329?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    edited March 2023
    HYUFD said:

    Clear lead for “Don’t know”….




    Or Forbes, despite the fact the vast majority of SNP MPs and MPs have endorsed Yousaf
    This could get really awkward:

    SNP Leadership Election Endorsements, state of play at 11pm on 11th of March. 3 candidates, 106 endorsements available.

    Candidate: Backers (MSPs/MPs)

    Yousaf: 50 (32/18)
    Forbes: 14 (11/3)
    Regan: 1 (0/1)
    None Yet: 37 (14/23)
    None: 4 (4/0)

    https://ballotbox.scot/scottish-parliament/snp-leadership-election-2023

    …Yousaf now has the backing of a majority of the possible MSPs; 32 of 61, which is 33 of 64 inclusive of the leadership candidates.


    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1634692615785332736?s=20

    Interesting that MPs are being slower with their endorsements than MSPs.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,701

    rcs1000 said:

    Here's Andrew Neil sporting a tie from right wing think tank, the Adam Smith Institute, on the Daily Politics show in 2017 - not MOTD, an actual politics show

    The same think tank that wants to scrap the BBC licence fee and privatise the BBC

    He wasn't suspended

    #IStandWithGary


    https://twitter.com/russellengland/status/1634427676164227073?s=46

    Sorry.

    You think wearing an Adam Smith tie is equivalent to comparing the government of the day to Nazis?

    Personally, I'm disgusted that Lineker was suspended as a sports commentator for sale stupid (but not illegal) views.

    But the two incidence are not equivalent.
    Sorry, Robert, but you're misunderstanding the premise of the BBC action against Lineker.
    He wasn't removed for comparing the govt to Nazis (nor did he do that, so you need to go back to what was said), he was removed for breaching impartiality.
    On those terms, Neil's action is *exactly* equivalent.
    He may not have done it directly but the implication is clear re the Nazis.
  • This coming week will highlight the SVB crisis, Sunak, Biden and Albanese meeting tomorrow re AUKUS, and the budget on Wednesday

    And hopefully common sense will break out over BBC v Lineker
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Good morning

    On topic

    Conservative against by 48/43 indicates there are still those who do not want to pay any share to France

    Labour against by 41/39 shows there are some pragmatists in Labour

    Leave against 51/40 is the same as the conservatives

    Lib Dems in favour 51/33 affirms their pro EU credentials

    Remain in favour 43/37 same as Lib Dems

    Maybe I am turning into a Lib Dem as I want a closer relationship with the EU and applaud Sunak's agreement on the WF and also on the new entente cordial including the sharing of the costs over three years with France

    You’ve not been a Tory for some time. You would be far happier as a LibDem.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    HYUFD said:

    Clear lead for “Don’t know”….




    Or Forbes, despite the fact the vast majority of SNP MPs and MPs have endorsed Yousaf
    Hardly unusual for elected legislators and party members to be out of step during leadership contests. Johnson and Corbyn spring to mind, but there are hundreds of examples worldwide.
  • Jonathan said:

    Good morning

    On topic

    Conservative against by 48/43 indicates there are still those who do not want to pay any share to France

    Labour against by 41/39 shows there are some pragmatists in Labour

    Leave against 51/40 is the same as the conservatives

    Lib Dems in favour 51/33 affirms their pro EU credentials

    Remain in favour 43/37 same as Lib Dems

    Maybe I am turning into a Lib Dem as I want a closer relationship with the EU and applaud Sunak's agreement on the WF and also on the new entente cordial including the sharing of the costs over three years with France

    You’ve not been a Tory for some time. You would be far happier as a LibDem.
    Am I to wear that badge with pride ?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,583

    rcs1000 said:

    Here's Andrew Neil sporting a tie from right wing think tank, the Adam Smith Institute, on the Daily Politics show in 2017 - not MOTD, an actual politics show

    The same think tank that wants to scrap the BBC licence fee and privatise the BBC

    He wasn't suspended

    #IStandWithGary


    https://twitter.com/russellengland/status/1634427676164227073?s=46

    Sorry.

    You think wearing an Adam Smith tie is equivalent to comparing the government of the day to Nazis?

    Personally, I'm disgusted that Lineker was suspended as a sports commentator for sale stupid (but not illegal) views.

    But the two incidence are not equivalent.
    Sorry, Robert, but you're misunderstanding the premise of the BBC action against Lineker.
    He wasn't removed for comparing the govt to Nazis (nor did he do that, so you need to go back to what was said), he was removed for breaching impartiality.
    On those terms, Neil's action is *exactly* equivalent.
    I remember those good old uncomplicated days when a soon to be aspiring Parliamentary candidate for Henley on Thames was given the HIGNFY gig. It's not like the BBC was unaware of said columnist's political colours.

    Ah, happy days!

    (Arguably that decision was the springboard for a career that shaped politics a decade or so later).
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,701

    Morning all! So it seems clear now that (a) Lineker will be reinstated and (b) Tory stooges imposed on the BBC will be resigning.

    Which means we are going to be opened up to an awful lot of coverage about just how - and why - the Conservative Party is so desperate to corrupt the BBC. And what kind of threat a tweeting sports presenter really would have been to a policy which as claimed was robust and popular.

    As soon as Sunak said "he's great isn't he? Nothing to do with the government" it was clear the Tories had conceded and were in retreat. What a fiasco.

    Whether the policy is robust or not remains to be seen but polling numbers do show it to have support.

    Political interference in the BBC. Would never have happened in the halcyon days of non political appointees John Birt and Gavyn Davies.

    Birt’s impact on the BBC was far more malign than any Tory.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    HYUFD said:

    Clear lead for “Don’t know”….




    Or Forbes, despite the fact the vast majority of SNP MPs and MPs have endorsed Yousaf
    This could get really awkward:

    SNP Leadership Election Endorsements, state of play at 11pm on 11th of March. 3 candidates, 106 endorsements available.

    Candidate: Backers (MSPs/MPs)

    Yousaf: 50 (32/18)
    Forbes: 14 (11/3)
    Regan: 1 (0/1)
    None Yet: 37 (14/23)
    None: 4 (4/0)

    https://ballotbox.scot/scottish-parliament/snp-leadership-election-2023

    …Yousaf now has the backing of a majority of the possible MSPs; 32 of 61, which is 33 of 64 inclusive of the leadership candidates.


    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1634692615785332736?s=20

    Interesting that MPs are being slower with their endorsements than MSPs.
    MSPs and MPs have exactly the same number of votes as any other member, including me: one.
  • Morning all.

    It's indeed true that Birt had experience of TV, like Greg Dyke. But the crtical fact is that he signed over , almost, the entire restructurng of the BBC to an outside body, in the shape of McKinsey's.

    Nothing like that's happened to the BBC before, or since.

    Davie is simply a continuation of this more commercial ethos, nothing new or particularly different, or necessarily that much more incompetent on the creative front than Dyke, who wasn't terrible. But he's shown poor judgement over this row and affair.

    Davie is different - there is an explicit political aim which wasn't there before. After all, if you are a party where all you have left in the talk is culture wars and attempt 13 to sink the migrants, you can't be left exposed to the impartial national broadcaster holding up a mirror showing that you aren't speaking for most of the country.

    Owning GBeebies and Talk TV and the Daily Mail isn't enough - you need to shut down sanity and reason hence appointing stooges to run the BBC. Where it has gone so spectacularly wrong is that the Tory stooges had to suspect Lineker because he wasn't impartial. Too big a leap even for people in this post-truth world...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,729
    edited March 2023
    It's really quite impressive that the government have managed to make the whole 'Illegal Asylum Policy' not about the fact that it's illegal, or stupid, or that it won't work, or the appalling lack of judgement and common sense displayed by the worst Home Secretary this country has ever had - a field that includes Grant Shapps and Jacqui Smith.

    They've made it instead about one of the country's most popular TV presenters criticising it for being Nazi like (yes, he did in effect say that) and being suspended as a result so live sport is either binned or going out without commentary.

    Thereby guaranteeing his views gain maximum traction and the policy becomes wildly unpopular for reasons that are nothing to do with the uselessness of said policy.

    I don't know what the Devil charged Starmer for his soul, but I'm still thinking he was swindled.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,876

    Labour supporting Matthew Syed comes out in favour of what Rishi is trying to do here, saying the treaties should be rewritten across the West and, indeed, arguing there should be an absolute cap on numbers - and critical of liberal-thinking on the issue. He thinks this would legitimately allow a higher number to be admitted. He does think language and tone is important too:

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/our-asylum-system-has-been-rigged-for-decades-its-time-for-real-action-r3vtk3ggq

    It’s an interesting article with something for everyone.

    There may be some of the pearl clutching liberals calling for open borders he talks about, but they have no power and no means of securing power. So the juxtaposition he creates doesn’t actually exist in the real world.

    The real world issue is will the government’s plan work? The answer is almost certainly no. What may work, as Matthew says, is detailed, sustained international cooperation. The one thing that is pretty much guaranteed not to get that is what the Tory right, including Suella Braverman, has made very clear it wants - the UK pulling out of the ECHR and/or the UNHCR. So Sunak will have a very important choice to make in a few months time when the small boats keep coming.

    And, yes, as Syed says, language matters a lot. If you want a national consensus rather than dividing lines you don’t use words like invasion and accuse those who don’t agree with you of betraying Britain.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    The Sunday Rawnsley, earlier than usual as the nation prepares for a day of doggie-excitement…

    Tories are having a debate among themselves about whether they can somehow contrive to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat or are doomed to be chewed up and spat out by angry voters whenever the next election comes.

    Senior Labour people are not arguing about whether we are reliving the run-up to ’97. That’s because none of them think they have a chance of replicating the 179-seat majority won by Tony Blair. Thanks to the dismal legacy of the last election, its worst result since 1935, Labour has a vast mountain to scale. It probably requires a swing of 12% to get over the line – a bigger shift than the 10% achieved by Mr Blair. Everyone of significance in today’s Labour hierarchy is haunted by the spectre of ’92.

    There’s sense to having a direction-setting framework for a 10-year plan of renewal, but Labour MPs don’t pretend that “mission-driven government” cuts through with many voters. By the time of the election, they will need a fistful of crisp and credible offers that they can sell on doorsteps and in TV studios. It is not hard to find members of Labour’s high command who use the word “soft” to describe their party’s support. “The deal isn’t clinched,” says one of their number. “Not anywhere near clinched.”

    The next election will not be an exact rerun of ’97 nor a rehash of ’92. History rarely repeats itself so neatly. But there are enduring lessons from both. Labour fails when its opponents have an opening to depict the party as unsafe with office. Labour succeeds when it has persuaded the country that it can be trusted with government and that it has compelling ideas to use power to make Britain a better country. Not one or the other, but both



  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,704

    rcs1000 said:

    Here's Andrew Neil sporting a tie from right wing think tank, the Adam Smith Institute, on the Daily Politics show in 2017 - not MOTD, an actual politics show

    The same think tank that wants to scrap the BBC licence fee and privatise the BBC

    He wasn't suspended

    #IStandWithGary


    https://twitter.com/russellengland/status/1634427676164227073?s=46

    Sorry.

    You think wearing an Adam Smith tie is equivalent to comparing the government of the day to Nazis?

    Personally, I'm disgusted that Lineker was suspended as a sports commentator for sale stupid (but not illegal) views.

    But the two incidence are not equivalent.
    Sorry, Robert, but you're misunderstanding the premise of the BBC action against Lineker.
    He wasn't removed for comparing the govt to Nazis (nor did he do that, so you need to go back to what was said), he was removed for breaching impartiality.
    On those terms, Neil's action is *exactly* equivalent.
    Exactly read my post at 8.28 with an actual bbc complaints response about Andrew Neil Cut and paste time.

    The Chair and the DG need to go
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,080
    MaxPB said:

    Also on SVB UK, if Hunt does nothing around 300 perfectly viable startups will be looking at the abyss because they can't make payroll and up to 20k highly paid and productive jobs will disappear from the economy. He's got to step in tomorrow and ensure access to finance is available until the SVB UK book has been purchased. It is absolutely imperative, if he doesn't the UK will take a big hit to its reputation for stable business conditions, if he does it will be greatly enhanced, especially if the sale of the SVB UK book goes smoothly because of ring fencing and UK capital regulations.

    How many pounds for how much time, roughly?

    It's clearly the sort of thing government should be doing, as cash machine of last resort, but quite a few recent decisions seem motivated by spending as little as possible today, whatever the consequences down the line.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Carnyx said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I am gutted to have missed another Saturday night drunken bloodbath on pb.com. We normally dine en famille on a Saturday but I might have to put a stop to it so I can watch these drink soaked contretemps unwind in real time.

    Me too. Are you able to provide a resume of the casualties?
    One thing that will please DA was HYUFD trying to prove the massive popularity of naming a Duke of Edinburgh in Scotland by adducing polling that showed royalism collapsing in Scotland. Astonishing figures - desire for royalty is plainly a minority pursuit.
    Let the British Establishment get on with it. They have zero “feel” for Scottish society and thus make elementary, unforced errors again and again.

    “Duke of Edinburgh”? OMFG.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,262
    edited March 2023
    I can't see what the problem is. As far as I can tell Neil wasn't criticising the government, so he couldn't possibly be accused of being impartial.

    See also:
    Nomia Iqbal: "Would Lineker have been removed if he supported government's policy? If he'd replied to Suella Braverman to say 'I support your migrant policy, I back it, it's brilliant', he would be taking an opinion. Would you have removed him for that?"
    Tim Davie: "I'm not going to go through all the hypotheticals of the past"
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,729
    MaxPB said:

    Also on SVB UK, if Hunt does nothing around 300 perfectly viable startups will be looking at the abyss because they can't make payroll and up to 20k highly paid and productive jobs will disappear from the economy. He's got to step in tomorrow and ensure access to finance is available until the SVB UK book has been purchased. It is absolutely imperative, if he doesn't the UK will take a big hit to its reputation for stable business conditions, if he does it will be greatly enhanced, especially if the sale of the SVB UK book goes smoothly because of ring fencing and UK capital regulations.

    It's Hunt. What do you expect to happen?
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,349
    Fans support their teams, not the pundits. They may not be as popular as they suspect. See how quickly they turn on managers. I'm no fan of the BBC. They cost us £160 a year and advertise more than any other channel - even if they are incessant adverts for their own products.

    A group of rich non-taxpayers who have a high opinion of themselves aren't natural sympathy-gatherers. One thing the BBC has managed is to avoid too much obvious bias despite their natural lefty tendencies. If Lineker forces this to be different, why are we paying for them?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,729

    Carnyx said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I am gutted to have missed another Saturday night drunken bloodbath on pb.com. We normally dine en famille on a Saturday but I might have to put a stop to it so I can watch these drink soaked contretemps unwind in real time.

    Me too. Are you able to provide a resume of the casualties?
    One thing that will please DA was HYUFD trying to prove the massive popularity of naming a Duke of Edinburgh in Scotland by adducing polling that showed royalism collapsing in Scotland. Astonishing figures - desire for royalty is plainly a minority pursuit.
    Let the British Establishment get on with it. They have zero “feel” for Scottish society and thus make elementary, unforced errors again and again.

    “Duke of Edinburgh”? OMFG.
    Never had you down as such an arch-royalist that you consider the Duke of Edinburgh your God, but I suppose you do live in Sweden.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    rcs1000 said:

    Here's Andrew Neil sporting a tie from right wing think tank, the Adam Smith Institute, on the Daily Politics show in 2017 - not MOTD, an actual politics show

    The same think tank that wants to scrap the BBC licence fee and privatise the BBC

    He wasn't suspended

    #IStandWithGary


    https://twitter.com/russellengland/status/1634427676164227073?s=46

    Sorry.

    You think wearing an Adam Smith tie is equivalent to comparing the government of the day to Nazis?

    Personally, I'm disgusted that Lineker was suspended as a sports commentator for sale stupid (but not illegal) views.

    But the two incidence are not equivalent.
    Sorry, Robert, but you're misunderstanding the premise of the BBC action against Lineker.
    He wasn't removed for comparing the govt to Nazis (nor did he do that, so you need to go back to what was said), he was removed for breaching impartiality.
    On those terms, Neil's action is *exactly* equivalent.
    It’s hardly news that the BBC are a bunch of Establishment stooges, but it’s lovely to see them illustrating it so clearly and loudly.
  • Break you wife's nose and get a knighthood. Speak out for refugees and get the sack. What has Tory Britain become

    Outrageous to describe Sir soon Stanley Johnson as a wife beater. Who here hasn't broken their wife's nose? Typical whining leftie behaviour and how marvellous that the BBC shut down that particular line of argument so that none of us are talking about it any more.

    Wife beaters deserve a knighthood? Vote Conservative.
This discussion has been closed.