Starmer dwarfs Sunak on the leadership front – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
I guess it was stupid on too many levels to bother answeringJosiasJessop said:
I can't recall if Ed Llewellyn had just led a major inquiry about the government? Had he?TheScreamingEagles said:
As I pointed out at the times to Big G and others, it was just like Ed Llewellyn moving from the Foreign Office to work for the Tories/Dave.JosiasJessop said:
Are you saying after what Labour did with the Shami sham, people were utterly wrong not to think this sniffed a little? Really?TheScreamingEagles said:
I know, I nearly the morning thread on this and embarrass those PBers who pimped the bullshit from Dan Hodges but I don't like to troll people.Stuartinromford said:Dan Hodges, please explain:
Sir Keir Starmer will be able to appoint Sue Gray as his chief of staff in the autumn after government advisers rejected calls for her to be banned from the role for more than a year.
The Times has been told the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba) has recommended Gray, a former senior civil servant, should take just six months’ gardening leave.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f74a67fe-03e1-11ee-b1f9-dbcd37af20fb?shareToken=9ef4df4b683fa16d231b818b673e1642
That it was some grand conspiracy was for morons and partisans.
And you didn't actually answer my question.1 -
It could easily have been avoided. They didn't care enough to avoid it.Foxy said:
It was a campaign meeting for a critical by-election in Hartlepool.tlg86 said:
Okay, I object to all of the politicians doing it. It may have been legal (I'm not sure how much campaigning was going on, to be honest), but just because something is legal, doesn't mean you have to do it. Labour were particularly hawkish about COVID. They didn't look like they were going above and beyond when it came to stopping the spread of the virus.RochdalePioneers said:
Its the same argument about essential workers being allowed to meet in person and most people not. Or some kids being allowed to stay in school whilst the majority both missed school and drove themselves and their parents up the wall.tlg86 said:
My objection to Starmer eating and boozing indoors wasn't that I thought it was a major public health risk. My objection was that on that same night, I was sat outside in the cold supporting my local pub and I was outside because he thought it was dangerous for me to be inside. But he didn't have any qualms about having a nice cosy meal indoors with people from outside his own household.Foxy said:
It is hard to sustain the argument that Beergate was a major public health risk in April 2021, but that lockdown* went on far too long.JosiasJessop said:
Beergat was wrong, for the reasons I've stated passim. It may not be *illegal* - and remember, even Starmer could not say that it was legal - but it was a stupid thing to do.Mexicanpete said:
Were you looking in the mirror when you made that last statement?JosiasJessop said:
If you are referring to me, I said that *if* Gray had had meetings with Labour before the report over a job, then it stunk to high heaven. Note the conditional.CorrectHorseBat said:The same people that insisted SKS was being dodgy around Sue Gray are the same people that insisted he was guilty when he ate a curry.
Perhaps it is that these people hate somebody so much that they're unable to see the wood for the trees
And as for currygate: again, Starmer could not say that he had not broken the law. That is from a big-brained lawyer who I believe voted for the relevant legislation. If he had his doubts, why didn't you (and that's going away from the utter stupidity of the event anyway).
Perhaps those people so keen to clear Labour of things hate other parties so much they're unable to see the wood for the trees...
You can't let Beergate go, despite what appeared to be rather a rigerous review by Durham Constabulary. It looks like you also can't accept that Gray was impartial, even though her report was the dampest of damp squibs and pretty much let Johnson off the hook.
I do accept Gray was impartial now; my comments are about why it was reasonable to feel it was sniffy *at that time*.
Aside from that, well done!
*lockdown wasn't all or nothing, it was graduated and restrictions being eased. When looking at the incidents that occurred, this is often ignored. Fortunately for SKS the Durham police realise this.
Meeting for work was either legal or it was illegal. And with campaigning it was legal - and all parties did it including PM Johnson. The idea that Starmer was doing something wrong is at best partisan hackery and at worst an obsessional grudge.
Do you think that Durham takeaway curry's are so good that they attract casual diners from London on a regular basis?0 -
Pretty much all these cryto businesses look like blatant scams, once enough time passes.TheScreamingEagles said:PBers may remember I mentioned in 2021 pretty much every UK bank decided to stop their customers use Binance, there was a reason.
The price of Bitcoin plunged after the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange and its founder were accused of a “web of deception” by US regulators.
The largest crypto token lost more than 3pc to fall below £21,000 as Binance and its chief executive Changpeng Zhao faced allegations of misusing investor funds, operating as an unregistered exchange and violating a slew of US securities laws.
The lawsuit filed by the SEC lists thirteen charges against the crypto trading platform — including mingling and diverting customer assets to an entity Mr Zhao owned called Sigma Chain.
The charges echo accusations levelled at the second largest cryptocurrency exchange, FTX, and its founder Sam Bankman-Fried after its collapse last year.
SEC chairman Gary Gensler in a written statement that Zhao and Binance “engaged in an extensive web of deception, conflicts of interest, lack of disclosure, and calculated evasion of the law”.
He added: “The public should beware of investing any of their hard-earned assets with or on these unlawful platforms.”
In a social media post, Binance said that it has been cooperating with the SEC’s investigation but said that the agency “chose to act unilaterally and litigate.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/06/06/ftse-100-markets-live-news-crypto-binance-live/0 -
You're not voting for Starmer and neither am I. So neither of us is pushing a desperately partisan position. So we're back to what I always try to do which is apply rules and standards evenly.JosiasJessop said:
Since I don't particularly have a political party, I doubt it's that. Which means you're insinuating it's an 'obsessional grudge'.RochdalePioneers said:
Its the same argument about essential workers being allowed to meet in person and most people not. Or some kids being allowed to stay in school whilst the majority both missed school and drove themselves and their parents up the wall.tlg86 said:
My objection to Starmer eating and boozing indoors wasn't that I thought it was a major public health risk. My objection was that on that same night, I was sat outside in the cold supporting my local pub and I was outside because he thought it was dangerous for me to be inside. But he didn't have any qualms about having a nice cosy meal indoors with people from outside his own household.Foxy said:
It is hard to sustain the argument that Beergate was a major public health risk in April 2021, but that lockdown* went on far too long.JosiasJessop said:
Beergat was wrong, for the reasons I've stated passim. It may not be *illegal* - and remember, even Starmer could not say that it was legal - but it was a stupid thing to do.Mexicanpete said:
Were you looking in the mirror when you made that last statement?JosiasJessop said:
If you are referring to me, I said that *if* Gray had had meetings with Labour before the report over a job, then it stunk to high heaven. Note the conditional.CorrectHorseBat said:The same people that insisted SKS was being dodgy around Sue Gray are the same people that insisted he was guilty when he ate a curry.
Perhaps it is that these people hate somebody so much that they're unable to see the wood for the trees
And as for currygate: again, Starmer could not say that he had not broken the law. That is from a big-brained lawyer who I believe voted for the relevant legislation. If he had his doubts, why didn't you (and that's going away from the utter stupidity of the event anyway).
Perhaps those people so keen to clear Labour of things hate other parties so much they're unable to see the wood for the trees...
You can't let Beergate go, despite what appeared to be rather a rigerous review by Durham Constabulary. It looks like you also can't accept that Gray was impartial, even though her report was the dampest of damp squibs and pretty much let Johnson off the hook.
I do accept Gray was impartial now; my comments are about why it was reasonable to feel it was sniffy *at that time*.
Aside from that, well done!
*lockdown wasn't all or nothing, it was graduated and restrictions being eased. When looking at the incidents that occurred, this is often ignored. Fortunately for SKS the Durham police realise this.
Meeting for work was either legal or it was illegal. And with campaigning it was legal - and all parties did it including PM Johnson. The idea that Starmer was doing something wrong is at best partisan hackery and at worst an obsessional grudge.
It really isn't. And if that is your claim, you might want to look in the mirror...
Either meeting to campaign was legal at that time or it was not. Labour, the Tories, my lot the LibDems - all parties carried out limited campaigning which involved people meeting and working. On the blue benches that notably included Gove and Johnson. On the red benches Starmer and Rayner.
The "scandal" is that Starmer was photographed with a beer in his hand. Johnson was also snapped with beer / wine in his hand (on multiple occasions when the rules were much stricter) and therefore apply the rules evenly and do Starmer.
That's people's gripe about Currygate. Except that the time was different and so were the rules. Labour managed to shat the bed in their response making it look properly shifty, but the "WAS RAYNER THERE?" furore was made funny because it was legal if she was.
The obsessional grudge bit is that you very repeatedly finger Starmer as wanting longer and harder lockdowns. That may be true, that may also justify the blinkered approach. Perhaps. But what you or I think doesn't matter - the law matters and despite weeks of Daily Heil screeching there was no smoke, never mind no fire.
And to really rub salt into the wound, Starmer's "If I am fined I will resign" positioning really boosted him. Bless him though, if anyone needed a political boost it was Sir Keith Donkey.0 -
It depends on time frame, I think. Asylum claim numbers have been broadly stable for some time, but the switch to boats is a phenomenon of the last few years, now that stowing away in lorries is more difficult.Roger said:Isn't there something weird about setting your own questions and then expecting to get marked on the answers?
The funny one for me that DWARFS the rest is 'stopping the boats'. I heard yesterday that only ONE IN TWENTY SIX asylum seekers arrive by boat!
So he has not only set himself a very silly test even passing it is pointless.0 -
The blowing up of this dam in Russian controlled southern Ukraine looks extremely serious0
-
Given the long-term devastating consequences that would have we should already have a credible plan of deterrence to dissuade Russia from taking that course of action. Unless that deterrence involves the Chinese - which is possible, because they were involved in convincing the Russians to dial back on the nuclear threats last autumn - then I'm not hearing much about it.Penddu2 said:Russians have clearly decided to blow the dam to block a secondary axis of the Ukrainian Counter Offensive - they can now redirect all of their troops in western Kherson to the main axis in Zaparozhia. I now think they will blow up Zaporizhia Nuclear power plant and use that as justiofication to withdraw all troops back to Donbass. The mother of all surrenders while salting the erath behind them.
0 -
It was within the rules at the time. They didn't need to avoid it.JosiasJessop said:
It could easily have been avoided. They didn't care enough to avoid it.Foxy said:
It was a campaign meeting for a critical by-election in Hartlepool.tlg86 said:
Okay, I object to all of the politicians doing it. It may have been legal (I'm not sure how much campaigning was going on, to be honest), but just because something is legal, doesn't mean you have to do it. Labour were particularly hawkish about COVID. They didn't look like they were going above and beyond when it came to stopping the spread of the virus.RochdalePioneers said:
Its the same argument about essential workers being allowed to meet in person and most people not. Or some kids being allowed to stay in school whilst the majority both missed school and drove themselves and their parents up the wall.tlg86 said:
My objection to Starmer eating and boozing indoors wasn't that I thought it was a major public health risk. My objection was that on that same night, I was sat outside in the cold supporting my local pub and I was outside because he thought it was dangerous for me to be inside. But he didn't have any qualms about having a nice cosy meal indoors with people from outside his own household.Foxy said:
It is hard to sustain the argument that Beergate was a major public health risk in April 2021, but that lockdown* went on far too long.JosiasJessop said:
Beergat was wrong, for the reasons I've stated passim. It may not be *illegal* - and remember, even Starmer could not say that it was legal - but it was a stupid thing to do.Mexicanpete said:
Were you looking in the mirror when you made that last statement?JosiasJessop said:
If you are referring to me, I said that *if* Gray had had meetings with Labour before the report over a job, then it stunk to high heaven. Note the conditional.CorrectHorseBat said:The same people that insisted SKS was being dodgy around Sue Gray are the same people that insisted he was guilty when he ate a curry.
Perhaps it is that these people hate somebody so much that they're unable to see the wood for the trees
And as for currygate: again, Starmer could not say that he had not broken the law. That is from a big-brained lawyer who I believe voted for the relevant legislation. If he had his doubts, why didn't you (and that's going away from the utter stupidity of the event anyway).
Perhaps those people so keen to clear Labour of things hate other parties so much they're unable to see the wood for the trees...
You can't let Beergate go, despite what appeared to be rather a rigerous review by Durham Constabulary. It looks like you also can't accept that Gray was impartial, even though her report was the dampest of damp squibs and pretty much let Johnson off the hook.
I do accept Gray was impartial now; my comments are about why it was reasonable to feel it was sniffy *at that time*.
Aside from that, well done!
*lockdown wasn't all or nothing, it was graduated and restrictions being eased. When looking at the incidents that occurred, this is often ignored. Fortunately for SKS the Durham police realise this.
Meeting for work was either legal or it was illegal. And with campaigning it was legal - and all parties did it including PM Johnson. The idea that Starmer was doing something wrong is at best partisan hackery and at worst an obsessional grudge.
Do you think that Durham takeaway curry's are so good that they attract casual diners from London on a regular basis?3 -
It is implicit in your condemnation of Beergate. Like the drunk driver banned for a year demanding his neighbour also receives a ban because his tail light is out.JosiasJessop said:
When have I dismissed Partygate as 'trivial' ?Mexicanpete said:
Why can't you get past Beergate? An event which whilst it may not have been wise under the circumstances of the moment (a moment in 2021, and not at the height of the first, second or third lockdowns, let's not forget) didn't really appear to be illegal and a subsequent police investigation confirmed that.JosiasJessop said:
No, no and no. But that avoids the central point: the *utter coincidence* that Shami cleared the party, and she then gets ennobled. Labour have form for exactly this: "give me useful results from your inquiry and we'll help you."bondegezou said:
Was Shami a top civil servant? Was she any sort of civil servant? Did she come under the remit of ACOBA?JosiasJessop said:
Why is it irrelevant? Surely it's only irrelevant if there's no chance of any impropriety in such appointments - and as Shami showed, there is lots of room for impropriety.TheScreamingEagles said:
Because your question is irrelevant to the discussion.JosiasJessop said:
I can't recall if Ed Llewellyn had just led a major inquiry about the government? Had he?TheScreamingEagles said:
As I pointed out at the times to Big G and others, it was just like Ed Llewellyn moving from the Foreign Office to work for the Tories/Dave.JosiasJessop said:
Are you saying after what Labour did with the Shami sham, people were utterly wrong not to think this sniffed a little? Really?TheScreamingEagles said:
I know, I nearly the morning thread on this and embarrass those PBers who pimped the bullshit from Dan Hodges but I don't like to troll people.Stuartinromford said:Dan Hodges, please explain:
Sir Keir Starmer will be able to appoint Sue Gray as his chief of staff in the autumn after government advisers rejected calls for her to be banned from the role for more than a year.
The Times has been told the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba) has recommended Gray, a former senior civil servant, should take just six months’ gardening leave.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f74a67fe-03e1-11ee-b1f9-dbcd37af20fb?shareToken=9ef4df4b683fa16d231b818b673e1642
That it was some grand conspiracy was for morons and partisans.
And you didn't actually answer my question.
A top civil servant was repeatedly smeared by the likes of Dan Hodges and cheered by people on here.
That's a smear job.
Again, look at the conditional I put in my statement. That's important.
Partygate on the other hand, a series of events that you appear comfortable to dismiss as trivial, was slam-dunk illegal and 120 FPNs confirm that, including one for Sunak (who was ambushed by a cake) and Johnson who, evidence suggests, deserved several more. Now there was a police investigation without rigour.
Go on, find a post where I have.4 -
In other news: a large bridge under construction in India collapsed. For the second time. Quite a spectacular video:
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/16656738082655928340 -
Anyway in an hour or so the media are going to go all Harry, not only in court here, but ironically in court in the US at the same time over his visa application to grant his stay in US0
-
I posted that yesterday.JosiasJessop said:In other news: a large bridge under construction in India collapsed. For the second time. Quite a spectacular video:
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1665673808265592834
You'd think they'd have got new engineers in after the first time.1 -
The timing is remarkably coincidental to say the least. It would make sense on the face of it simply to slow an advance and allow redirection if their own forces. Involving the plant would be a remarkable admission of admitting the permanence of redirecting.Penddu2 said:Russians have clearly decided to blow the dam to block a secondary axis of the Ukrainian Counter Offensive - they can now redirect all of their troops in western Kherson to the main axis in Zaparozhia. I now think they will blow up Zaporizhia Nuclear power plant and use that as justiofication to withdraw all troops back to Donbass. The mother of all surrenders while salting the erath behind them.
The 'peace' brigade will be getting very noisy.0 -
I do wonder why Donkey had to avoid campaigning with aides when Boris was perfectly ok to be doing the same.Foxy said:
It was within the rules at the time. They didn't need to avoid it.JosiasJessop said:
It could easily have been avoided. They didn't care enough to avoid it.Foxy said:
It was a campaign meeting for a critical by-election in Hartlepool.tlg86 said:
Okay, I object to all of the politicians doing it. It may have been legal (I'm not sure how much campaigning was going on, to be honest), but just because something is legal, doesn't mean you have to do it. Labour were particularly hawkish about COVID. They didn't look like they were going above and beyond when it came to stopping the spread of the virus.RochdalePioneers said:
Its the same argument about essential workers being allowed to meet in person and most people not. Or some kids being allowed to stay in school whilst the majority both missed school and drove themselves and their parents up the wall.tlg86 said:
My objection to Starmer eating and boozing indoors wasn't that I thought it was a major public health risk. My objection was that on that same night, I was sat outside in the cold supporting my local pub and I was outside because he thought it was dangerous for me to be inside. But he didn't have any qualms about having a nice cosy meal indoors with people from outside his own household.Foxy said:
It is hard to sustain the argument that Beergate was a major public health risk in April 2021, but that lockdown* went on far too long.JosiasJessop said:
Beergat was wrong, for the reasons I've stated passim. It may not be *illegal* - and remember, even Starmer could not say that it was legal - but it was a stupid thing to do.Mexicanpete said:
Were you looking in the mirror when you made that last statement?JosiasJessop said:
If you are referring to me, I said that *if* Gray had had meetings with Labour before the report over a job, then it stunk to high heaven. Note the conditional.CorrectHorseBat said:The same people that insisted SKS was being dodgy around Sue Gray are the same people that insisted he was guilty when he ate a curry.
Perhaps it is that these people hate somebody so much that they're unable to see the wood for the trees
And as for currygate: again, Starmer could not say that he had not broken the law. That is from a big-brained lawyer who I believe voted for the relevant legislation. If he had his doubts, why didn't you (and that's going away from the utter stupidity of the event anyway).
Perhaps those people so keen to clear Labour of things hate other parties so much they're unable to see the wood for the trees...
You can't let Beergate go, despite what appeared to be rather a rigerous review by Durham Constabulary. It looks like you also can't accept that Gray was impartial, even though her report was the dampest of damp squibs and pretty much let Johnson off the hook.
I do accept Gray was impartial now; my comments are about why it was reasonable to feel it was sniffy *at that time*.
Aside from that, well done!
*lockdown wasn't all or nothing, it was graduated and restrictions being eased. When looking at the incidents that occurred, this is often ignored. Fortunately for SKS the Durham police realise this.
Meeting for work was either legal or it was illegal. And with campaigning it was legal - and all parties did it including PM Johnson. The idea that Starmer was doing something wrong is at best partisan hackery and at worst an obsessional grudge.
Do you think that Durham takeaway curry's are so good that they attract casual diners from London on a regular basis?
We have to apply the rules and standards equally or they are neither rules nor standards. Starmer having a beer and food whilst working legally campaigning is a Major Scandal. Boris having beers with aides whilst legally campaigning is nothing to see here. Apparently.
Do have to laugh though. Starmer said "I'll resign if I did wrong" and gained a major boost in his standings. Yet having had two PMs resign in big scandals and a third scandallously taking his own public enquiry to court to claim the right to decide what evidence can be looked at, we always get dragged back to the *real* scandal. Namely the failure to sink Donkey with the beergate fabrication.2 -
For some reason this received a lot of airtime on Irish radio this morning.Big_G_NorthWales said:Anyway in an hour or so the media are going to go all Harry, not only in court here, but ironically in court in the US at the same time over his visa application to grant his stay in US
0 -
Russia need to see that there are consequences for an act like this.kle4 said:
The timing is remarkably coincidental to say the least. It would make sense on the face of it simply to slow an advance and allow redirection if their own forces. Involving the plant would be a remarkable admission of admitting the permanence of redirecting.Penddu2 said:Russians have clearly decided to blow the dam to block a secondary axis of the Ukrainian Counter Offensive - they can now redirect all of their troops in western Kherson to the main axis in Zaparozhia. I now think they will blow up Zaporizhia Nuclear power plant and use that as justiofication to withdraw all troops back to Donbass. The mother of all surrenders while salting the erath behind them.
The 'peace' brigade will be getting very noisy.0 -
You're like the fan who's still arguing a penalty decision that went against your team, a year after they've been knocked out of the cup.JosiasJessop said:
It could easily have been avoided. They didn't care enough to avoid it.Foxy said:
It was a campaign meeting for a critical by-election in Hartlepool.tlg86 said:
Okay, I object to all of the politicians doing it. It may have been legal (I'm not sure how much campaigning was going on, to be honest), but just because something is legal, doesn't mean you have to do it. Labour were particularly hawkish about COVID. They didn't look like they were going above and beyond when it came to stopping the spread of the virus.RochdalePioneers said:
Its the same argument about essential workers being allowed to meet in person and most people not. Or some kids being allowed to stay in school whilst the majority both missed school and drove themselves and their parents up the wall.tlg86 said:
My objection to Starmer eating and boozing indoors wasn't that I thought it was a major public health risk. My objection was that on that same night, I was sat outside in the cold supporting my local pub and I was outside because he thought it was dangerous for me to be inside. But he didn't have any qualms about having a nice cosy meal indoors with people from outside his own household.Foxy said:
It is hard to sustain the argument that Beergate was a major public health risk in April 2021, but that lockdown* went on far too long.JosiasJessop said:
Beergat was wrong, for the reasons I've stated passim. It may not be *illegal* - and remember, even Starmer could not say that it was legal - but it was a stupid thing to do.Mexicanpete said:
Were you looking in the mirror when you made that last statement?JosiasJessop said:
If you are referring to me, I said that *if* Gray had had meetings with Labour before the report over a job, then it stunk to high heaven. Note the conditional.CorrectHorseBat said:The same people that insisted SKS was being dodgy around Sue Gray are the same people that insisted he was guilty when he ate a curry.
Perhaps it is that these people hate somebody so much that they're unable to see the wood for the trees
And as for currygate: again, Starmer could not say that he had not broken the law. That is from a big-brained lawyer who I believe voted for the relevant legislation. If he had his doubts, why didn't you (and that's going away from the utter stupidity of the event anyway).
Perhaps those people so keen to clear Labour of things hate other parties so much they're unable to see the wood for the trees...
You can't let Beergate go, despite what appeared to be rather a rigerous review by Durham Constabulary. It looks like you also can't accept that Gray was impartial, even though her report was the dampest of damp squibs and pretty much let Johnson off the hook.
I do accept Gray was impartial now; my comments are about why it was reasonable to feel it was sniffy *at that time*.
Aside from that, well done!
*lockdown wasn't all or nothing, it was graduated and restrictions being eased. When looking at the incidents that occurred, this is often ignored. Fortunately for SKS the Durham police realise this.
Meeting for work was either legal or it was illegal. And with campaigning it was legal - and all parties did it including PM Johnson. The idea that Starmer was doing something wrong is at best partisan hackery and at worst an obsessional grudge.
Do you think that Durham takeaway curry's are so good that they attract casual diners from London on a regular basis?3 -
There's a video of an explosion allegedly filmed by Russia at the dam this morning. The explosion happens underwater, and near the person who was filming. It doesn't look that large (AIUI underwater explosions tend to be very visible above the surface due to the incompressibility of water) , but I suppose it could have caused a progressive collapse, or been one of several.LostPassword said:
Russia need to see that there are consequences for an act like this.kle4 said:
The timing is remarkably coincidental to say the least. It would make sense on the face of it simply to slow an advance and allow redirection if their own forces. Involving the plant would be a remarkable admission of admitting the permanence of redirecting.Penddu2 said:Russians have clearly decided to blow the dam to block a secondary axis of the Ukrainian Counter Offensive - they can now redirect all of their troops in western Kherson to the main axis in Zaparozhia. I now think they will blow up Zaporizhia Nuclear power plant and use that as justiofication to withdraw all troops back to Donbass. The mother of all surrenders while salting the erath behind them.
The 'peace' brigade will be getting very noisy.
https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/16659489740568739840 -
The Flintknappers Gazette has its man on the spot.Big_G_NorthWales said:Anyway in an hour or so the media are going to go all Harry, not only in court here, but ironically in court in the US at the same time over his visa application to grant his stay in US
0 -
Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=180 -
LOL. No. remember how long Labour went on about Thatcher, even after she had long been out of power? And Starmer and his decision-making is still of immediate relevance, given the odds are he's going to be our next PM (*). And how many people on here still go on about Johnson, even though he's out of power?Benpointer said:
You're like the fan who's still arguing a penalty decision that went against your team, a year after they've been knocked out of the cup.JosiasJessop said:
It could easily have been avoided. They didn't care enough to avoid it.Foxy said:
It was a campaign meeting for a critical by-election in Hartlepool.tlg86 said:
Okay, I object to all of the politicians doing it. It may have been legal (I'm not sure how much campaigning was going on, to be honest), but just because something is legal, doesn't mean you have to do it. Labour were particularly hawkish about COVID. They didn't look like they were going above and beyond when it came to stopping the spread of the virus.RochdalePioneers said:
Its the same argument about essential workers being allowed to meet in person and most people not. Or some kids being allowed to stay in school whilst the majority both missed school and drove themselves and their parents up the wall.tlg86 said:
My objection to Starmer eating and boozing indoors wasn't that I thought it was a major public health risk. My objection was that on that same night, I was sat outside in the cold supporting my local pub and I was outside because he thought it was dangerous for me to be inside. But he didn't have any qualms about having a nice cosy meal indoors with people from outside his own household.Foxy said:
It is hard to sustain the argument that Beergate was a major public health risk in April 2021, but that lockdown* went on far too long.JosiasJessop said:
Beergat was wrong, for the reasons I've stated passim. It may not be *illegal* - and remember, even Starmer could not say that it was legal - but it was a stupid thing to do.Mexicanpete said:
Were you looking in the mirror when you made that last statement?JosiasJessop said:
If you are referring to me, I said that *if* Gray had had meetings with Labour before the report over a job, then it stunk to high heaven. Note the conditional.CorrectHorseBat said:The same people that insisted SKS was being dodgy around Sue Gray are the same people that insisted he was guilty when he ate a curry.
Perhaps it is that these people hate somebody so much that they're unable to see the wood for the trees
And as for currygate: again, Starmer could not say that he had not broken the law. That is from a big-brained lawyer who I believe voted for the relevant legislation. If he had his doubts, why didn't you (and that's going away from the utter stupidity of the event anyway).
Perhaps those people so keen to clear Labour of things hate other parties so much they're unable to see the wood for the trees...
You can't let Beergate go, despite what appeared to be rather a rigerous review by Durham Constabulary. It looks like you also can't accept that Gray was impartial, even though her report was the dampest of damp squibs and pretty much let Johnson off the hook.
I do accept Gray was impartial now; my comments are about why it was reasonable to feel it was sniffy *at that time*.
Aside from that, well done!
*lockdown wasn't all or nothing, it was graduated and restrictions being eased. When looking at the incidents that occurred, this is often ignored. Fortunately for SKS the Durham police realise this.
Meeting for work was either legal or it was illegal. And with campaigning it was legal - and all parties did it including PM Johnson. The idea that Starmer was doing something wrong is at best partisan hackery and at worst an obsessional grudge.
Do you think that Durham takeaway curry's are so good that they attract casual diners from London on a regular basis?
(*) Or, if the Conservatives continue as they have been; Starmer will be the next-but four PM - in 2024... 0 -
The Tories set a low bar recently, but it's been limboed.
Oops! Austria’s Social Democrats announce wrong winner of leadership contest
Party announces one winner on Saturday, and another on Monday.
https://www.politico.eu/article/austria-social-party-democrats-announce-wrong-winner-of-leadership-contest/2 -
Good thing our emissions are below China on a per capita basis then. France must be expecting a rebate with it's nuclear use too quite honestly.Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=180 -
So I haven't. Partygate was wrong. But (whispers quietly): it's perfectly possible for *both* to be wrong.Mexicanpete said:
It is implicit in your condemnation of Beergate. Like the drunk driver banned for a year demanding his neighbour also receives a ban because his tail light is out.JosiasJessop said:
When have I dismissed Partygate as 'trivial' ?Mexicanpete said:
Why can't you get past Beergate? An event which whilst it may not have been wise under the circumstances of the moment (a moment in 2021, and not at the height of the first, second or third lockdowns, let's not forget) didn't really appear to be illegal and a subsequent police investigation confirmed that.JosiasJessop said:
No, no and no. But that avoids the central point: the *utter coincidence* that Shami cleared the party, and she then gets ennobled. Labour have form for exactly this: "give me useful results from your inquiry and we'll help you."bondegezou said:
Was Shami a top civil servant? Was she any sort of civil servant? Did she come under the remit of ACOBA?JosiasJessop said:
Why is it irrelevant? Surely it's only irrelevant if there's no chance of any impropriety in such appointments - and as Shami showed, there is lots of room for impropriety.TheScreamingEagles said:
Because your question is irrelevant to the discussion.JosiasJessop said:
I can't recall if Ed Llewellyn had just led a major inquiry about the government? Had he?TheScreamingEagles said:
As I pointed out at the times to Big G and others, it was just like Ed Llewellyn moving from the Foreign Office to work for the Tories/Dave.JosiasJessop said:
Are you saying after what Labour did with the Shami sham, people were utterly wrong not to think this sniffed a little? Really?TheScreamingEagles said:
I know, I nearly the morning thread on this and embarrass those PBers who pimped the bullshit from Dan Hodges but I don't like to troll people.Stuartinromford said:Dan Hodges, please explain:
Sir Keir Starmer will be able to appoint Sue Gray as his chief of staff in the autumn after government advisers rejected calls for her to be banned from the role for more than a year.
The Times has been told the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba) has recommended Gray, a former senior civil servant, should take just six months’ gardening leave.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f74a67fe-03e1-11ee-b1f9-dbcd37af20fb?shareToken=9ef4df4b683fa16d231b818b673e1642
That it was some grand conspiracy was for morons and partisans.
And you didn't actually answer my question.
A top civil servant was repeatedly smeared by the likes of Dan Hodges and cheered by people on here.
That's a smear job.
Again, look at the conditional I put in my statement. That's important.
Partygate on the other hand, a series of events that you appear comfortable to dismiss as trivial, was slam-dunk illegal and 120 FPNs confirm that, including one for Sunak (who was ambushed by a cake) and Johnson who, evidence suggests, deserved several more. Now there was a police investigation without rigour.
Go on, find a post where I have.0 -
Is there any virtue-signalling, idiotic waste of other people's money that Labour's activists and younger MP candidates WOULDN'T support?Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=182 -
That's not an explosion at the dam. It's downstream hours later - the floodwaters are washing mines around, apparently with enough force to detonate several. When the floodwaters recede this is going to be an additional hazard, as the Russians mined their side pretty heavily, and those mines will now be randomly distributed downstream.JosiasJessop said:
There's a video of an explosion allegedly filmed by Russia at the dam this morning. The explosion happens underwater, and near the person who was filming. It doesn't look that large (AIUI underwater explosions tend to be very visible above the surface due to the incompressibility of water) , but I suppose it could have caused a progressive collapse, or been one of several.LostPassword said:
Russia need to see that there are consequences for an act like this.kle4 said:
The timing is remarkably coincidental to say the least. It would make sense on the face of it simply to slow an advance and allow redirection if their own forces. Involving the plant would be a remarkable admission of admitting the permanence of redirecting.Penddu2 said:Russians have clearly decided to blow the dam to block a secondary axis of the Ukrainian Counter Offensive - they can now redirect all of their troops in western Kherson to the main axis in Zaparozhia. I now think they will blow up Zaporizhia Nuclear power plant and use that as justiofication to withdraw all troops back to Donbass. The mother of all surrenders while salting the erath behind them.
The 'peace' brigade will be getting very noisy.
https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/16659489740568739843 -
He wasn't sure it was within the rules.Foxy said:
It was within the rules at the time. They didn't need to avoid it.JosiasJessop said:
It could easily have been avoided. They didn't care enough to avoid it.Foxy said:
It was a campaign meeting for a critical by-election in Hartlepool.tlg86 said:
Okay, I object to all of the politicians doing it. It may have been legal (I'm not sure how much campaigning was going on, to be honest), but just because something is legal, doesn't mean you have to do it. Labour were particularly hawkish about COVID. They didn't look like they were going above and beyond when it came to stopping the spread of the virus.RochdalePioneers said:
Its the same argument about essential workers being allowed to meet in person and most people not. Or some kids being allowed to stay in school whilst the majority both missed school and drove themselves and their parents up the wall.tlg86 said:
My objection to Starmer eating and boozing indoors wasn't that I thought it was a major public health risk. My objection was that on that same night, I was sat outside in the cold supporting my local pub and I was outside because he thought it was dangerous for me to be inside. But he didn't have any qualms about having a nice cosy meal indoors with people from outside his own household.Foxy said:
It is hard to sustain the argument that Beergate was a major public health risk in April 2021, but that lockdown* went on far too long.JosiasJessop said:
Beergat was wrong, for the reasons I've stated passim. It may not be *illegal* - and remember, even Starmer could not say that it was legal - but it was a stupid thing to do.Mexicanpete said:
Were you looking in the mirror when you made that last statement?JosiasJessop said:
If you are referring to me, I said that *if* Gray had had meetings with Labour before the report over a job, then it stunk to high heaven. Note the conditional.CorrectHorseBat said:The same people that insisted SKS was being dodgy around Sue Gray are the same people that insisted he was guilty when he ate a curry.
Perhaps it is that these people hate somebody so much that they're unable to see the wood for the trees
And as for currygate: again, Starmer could not say that he had not broken the law. That is from a big-brained lawyer who I believe voted for the relevant legislation. If he had his doubts, why didn't you (and that's going away from the utter stupidity of the event anyway).
Perhaps those people so keen to clear Labour of things hate other parties so much they're unable to see the wood for the trees...
You can't let Beergate go, despite what appeared to be rather a rigerous review by Durham Constabulary. It looks like you also can't accept that Gray was impartial, even though her report was the dampest of damp squibs and pretty much let Johnson off the hook.
I do accept Gray was impartial now; my comments are about why it was reasonable to feel it was sniffy *at that time*.
Aside from that, well done!
*lockdown wasn't all or nothing, it was graduated and restrictions being eased. When looking at the incidents that occurred, this is often ignored. Fortunately for SKS the Durham police realise this.
Meeting for work was either legal or it was illegal. And with campaigning it was legal - and all parties did it including PM Johnson. The idea that Starmer was doing something wrong is at best partisan hackery and at worst an obsessional grudge.
Do you think that Durham takeaway curry's are so good that they attract casual diners from London on a regular basis?0 -
The impression I got was that most arrive by plane or ship and don't return. The derring do of stowing away on lorries or boarding rubber boats was something that worked for the cameras on news programs but was not particularly significant in preventing illegal immigration which seems to be the governments obsession.Foxy said:
It depends on time frame, I think. Asylum claim numbers have been broadly stable for some time, but the switch to boats is a phenomenon of the last few years, now that stowing away in lorries is more difficult.Roger said:Isn't there something weird about setting your own questions and then expecting to get marked on the answers?
The funny one for me that DWARFS the rest is 'stopping the boats'. I heard yesterday that only ONE IN TWENTY SIX asylum seekers arrive by boat!
So he has not only set himself a very silly test even passing it is pointless.0 -
Thanks. Slightly curious how the guy managed to run out to film it at exactly the right point.LostPassword said:
That's not an explosion at the dam. It's downstream hours later - the floodwaters are washing mines around, apparently with enough force to detonate several. When the floodwaters recede this is going to be an additional hazard, as the Russians mined their side pretty heavily, and those mines will now be randomly distributed downstream.JosiasJessop said:
There's a video of an explosion allegedly filmed by Russia at the dam this morning. The explosion happens underwater, and near the person who was filming. It doesn't look that large (AIUI underwater explosions tend to be very visible above the surface due to the incompressibility of water) , but I suppose it could have caused a progressive collapse, or been one of several.LostPassword said:
Russia need to see that there are consequences for an act like this.kle4 said:
The timing is remarkably coincidental to say the least. It would make sense on the face of it simply to slow an advance and allow redirection if their own forces. Involving the plant would be a remarkable admission of admitting the permanence of redirecting.Penddu2 said:Russians have clearly decided to blow the dam to block a secondary axis of the Ukrainian Counter Offensive - they can now redirect all of their troops in western Kherson to the main axis in Zaparozhia. I now think they will blow up Zaporizhia Nuclear power plant and use that as justiofication to withdraw all troops back to Donbass. The mother of all surrenders while salting the erath behind them.
The 'peace' brigade will be getting very noisy.
https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/16659489740568739840 -
The politics are different. Attacking Thatcher was to attack the Thatcherites who made up the bulk of the Conservative Party, as well as her policies. Starmer and Blair do not have that same iconic value. That is also why no-one complains much about Ted Heath or Sir Alec Douglas-Home.JosiasJessop said:
LOL. No. remember how long Labour went on about Thatcher, even after she had long been out of power? And Starmer and his decision-making is still of immediate relevance, given the odds are he's going to be our next PM (*). And how many people on here still go on about Johnson, even though he's out of power?Benpointer said:
You're like the fan who's still arguing a penalty decision that went against your team, a year after they've been knocked out of the cup.JosiasJessop said:
It could easily have been avoided. They didn't care enough to avoid it.Foxy said:
It was a campaign meeting for a critical by-election in Hartlepool.tlg86 said:
Okay, I object to all of the politicians doing it. It may have been legal (I'm not sure how much campaigning was going on, to be honest), but just because something is legal, doesn't mean you have to do it. Labour were particularly hawkish about COVID. They didn't look like they were going above and beyond when it came to stopping the spread of the virus.RochdalePioneers said:
Its the same argument about essential workers being allowed to meet in person and most people not. Or some kids being allowed to stay in school whilst the majority both missed school and drove themselves and their parents up the wall.tlg86 said:
My objection to Starmer eating and boozing indoors wasn't that I thought it was a major public health risk. My objection was that on that same night, I was sat outside in the cold supporting my local pub and I was outside because he thought it was dangerous for me to be inside. But he didn't have any qualms about having a nice cosy meal indoors with people from outside his own household.Foxy said:
It is hard to sustain the argument that Beergate was a major public health risk in April 2021, but that lockdown* went on far too long.JosiasJessop said:
Beergat was wrong, for the reasons I've stated passim. It may not be *illegal* - and remember, even Starmer could not say that it was legal - but it was a stupid thing to do.Mexicanpete said:
Were you looking in the mirror when you made that last statement?JosiasJessop said:
If you are referring to me, I said that *if* Gray had had meetings with Labour before the report over a job, then it stunk to high heaven. Note the conditional.CorrectHorseBat said:The same people that insisted SKS was being dodgy around Sue Gray are the same people that insisted he was guilty when he ate a curry.
Perhaps it is that these people hate somebody so much that they're unable to see the wood for the trees
And as for currygate: again, Starmer could not say that he had not broken the law. That is from a big-brained lawyer who I believe voted for the relevant legislation. If he had his doubts, why didn't you (and that's going away from the utter stupidity of the event anyway).
Perhaps those people so keen to clear Labour of things hate other parties so much they're unable to see the wood for the trees...
You can't let Beergate go, despite what appeared to be rather a rigerous review by Durham Constabulary. It looks like you also can't accept that Gray was impartial, even though her report was the dampest of damp squibs and pretty much let Johnson off the hook.
I do accept Gray was impartial now; my comments are about why it was reasonable to feel it was sniffy *at that time*.
Aside from that, well done!
*lockdown wasn't all or nothing, it was graduated and restrictions being eased. When looking at the incidents that occurred, this is often ignored. Fortunately for SKS the Durham police realise this.
Meeting for work was either legal or it was illegal. And with campaigning it was legal - and all parties did it including PM Johnson. The idea that Starmer was doing something wrong is at best partisan hackery and at worst an obsessional grudge.
Do you think that Durham takeaway curry's are so good that they attract casual diners from London on a regular basis?
(*) Or, if the Conservatives continue as they have been; Starmer will be the next-but four PM - in 2024...2 -
*Checks the article*Pulpstar said:
Good thing our emissions are below China on a per capita basis then. France must be expecting a rebate with it's nuclear use too quite honestly.Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=18
Hold on, China is receiving cash in this scenario and we're err paying...
It also includes New Zealand in the 'global north'...0 -
I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=201 -
Probably notFishing said:
Is there any virtue-signalling, idiotic waste of other people's money that Labour's activists and younger MP candidates WOULDN'T support?Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=18
0 -
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=201 -
He was sure it was within the rules. He used to be DPP so he does have a good understanding of the law and our legal system. But laws do get interpreted, so he was clear that if they found he was wrong he would go. The other guy *was* wrong, repeatedly, about rules he created. Yet its clearly a conspiracy against him.JosiasJessop said:
He wasn't sure it was within the rules.Foxy said:
It was within the rules at the time. They didn't need to avoid it.JosiasJessop said:
It could easily have been avoided. They didn't care enough to avoid it.Foxy said:
It was a campaign meeting for a critical by-election in Hartlepool.tlg86 said:
Okay, I object to all of the politicians doing it. It may have been legal (I'm not sure how much campaigning was going on, to be honest), but just because something is legal, doesn't mean you have to do it. Labour were particularly hawkish about COVID. They didn't look like they were going above and beyond when it came to stopping the spread of the virus.RochdalePioneers said:
Its the same argument about essential workers being allowed to meet in person and most people not. Or some kids being allowed to stay in school whilst the majority both missed school and drove themselves and their parents up the wall.tlg86 said:
My objection to Starmer eating and boozing indoors wasn't that I thought it was a major public health risk. My objection was that on that same night, I was sat outside in the cold supporting my local pub and I was outside because he thought it was dangerous for me to be inside. But he didn't have any qualms about having a nice cosy meal indoors with people from outside his own household.Foxy said:
It is hard to sustain the argument that Beergate was a major public health risk in April 2021, but that lockdown* went on far too long.JosiasJessop said:
Beergat was wrong, for the reasons I've stated passim. It may not be *illegal* - and remember, even Starmer could not say that it was legal - but it was a stupid thing to do.Mexicanpete said:
Were you looking in the mirror when you made that last statement?JosiasJessop said:
If you are referring to me, I said that *if* Gray had had meetings with Labour before the report over a job, then it stunk to high heaven. Note the conditional.CorrectHorseBat said:The same people that insisted SKS was being dodgy around Sue Gray are the same people that insisted he was guilty when he ate a curry.
Perhaps it is that these people hate somebody so much that they're unable to see the wood for the trees
And as for currygate: again, Starmer could not say that he had not broken the law. That is from a big-brained lawyer who I believe voted for the relevant legislation. If he had his doubts, why didn't you (and that's going away from the utter stupidity of the event anyway).
Perhaps those people so keen to clear Labour of things hate other parties so much they're unable to see the wood for the trees...
You can't let Beergate go, despite what appeared to be rather a rigerous review by Durham Constabulary. It looks like you also can't accept that Gray was impartial, even though her report was the dampest of damp squibs and pretty much let Johnson off the hook.
I do accept Gray was impartial now; my comments are about why it was reasonable to feel it was sniffy *at that time*.
Aside from that, well done!
*lockdown wasn't all or nothing, it was graduated and restrictions being eased. When looking at the incidents that occurred, this is often ignored. Fortunately for SKS the Durham police realise this.
Meeting for work was either legal or it was illegal. And with campaigning it was legal - and all parties did it including PM Johnson. The idea that Starmer was doing something wrong is at best partisan hackery and at worst an obsessional grudge.
Do you think that Durham takeaway curry's are so good that they attract casual diners from London on a regular basis?
The harsh reality for the Tories and for those who provide them succour is that has Starmer been fingered for currygate and had to fall on his sword, the spotlight would immediately shine on Johnson. Who already had a load of likely breeches under investigation and who had been caught doing the exact same thing as Starmer during that election campaign. They wouldn't have liked that part, and the spinning would have been hilarious to watch. Its almost a pity we missed out.3 -
There will be thousands of people filming thousands of hours of footage of the floodwaters. Not that unlikely for some of them to catch mines exploding in this way. There are several other similar videos.JosiasJessop said:
Thanks. Slightly curious how the guy managed to run out to film it at exactly the right point.LostPassword said:
That's not an explosion at the dam. It's downstream hours later - the floodwaters are washing mines around, apparently with enough force to detonate several. When the floodwaters recede this is going to be an additional hazard, as the Russians mined their side pretty heavily, and those mines will now be randomly distributed downstream.JosiasJessop said:
There's a video of an explosion allegedly filmed by Russia at the dam this morning. The explosion happens underwater, and near the person who was filming. It doesn't look that large (AIUI underwater explosions tend to be very visible above the surface due to the incompressibility of water) , but I suppose it could have caused a progressive collapse, or been one of several.LostPassword said:
Russia need to see that there are consequences for an act like this.kle4 said:
The timing is remarkably coincidental to say the least. It would make sense on the face of it simply to slow an advance and allow redirection if their own forces. Involving the plant would be a remarkable admission of admitting the permanence of redirecting.Penddu2 said:Russians have clearly decided to blow the dam to block a secondary axis of the Ukrainian Counter Offensive - they can now redirect all of their troops in western Kherson to the main axis in Zaparozhia. I now think they will blow up Zaporizhia Nuclear power plant and use that as justiofication to withdraw all troops back to Donbass. The mother of all surrenders while salting the erath behind them.
The 'peace' brigade will be getting very noisy.
https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1665948974056873984
https://twitter.com/COUPSURE/status/16659623899115520000 -
Just surprising that he *ran out* at exactly the right moment. Not impossible, but surprising.LostPassword said:
There will be thousands of people filming thousands of hours of footage of the floodwaters. Not that unlikely for some of them to catch mines exploding in this way. There are several other similar videos.JosiasJessop said:
Thanks. Slightly curious how the guy managed to run out to film it at exactly the right point.LostPassword said:
That's not an explosion at the dam. It's downstream hours later - the floodwaters are washing mines around, apparently with enough force to detonate several. When the floodwaters recede this is going to be an additional hazard, as the Russians mined their side pretty heavily, and those mines will now be randomly distributed downstream.JosiasJessop said:
There's a video of an explosion allegedly filmed by Russia at the dam this morning. The explosion happens underwater, and near the person who was filming. It doesn't look that large (AIUI underwater explosions tend to be very visible above the surface due to the incompressibility of water) , but I suppose it could have caused a progressive collapse, or been one of several.LostPassword said:
Russia need to see that there are consequences for an act like this.kle4 said:
The timing is remarkably coincidental to say the least. It would make sense on the face of it simply to slow an advance and allow redirection if their own forces. Involving the plant would be a remarkable admission of admitting the permanence of redirecting.Penddu2 said:Russians have clearly decided to blow the dam to block a secondary axis of the Ukrainian Counter Offensive - they can now redirect all of their troops in western Kherson to the main axis in Zaparozhia. I now think they will blow up Zaporizhia Nuclear power plant and use that as justiofication to withdraw all troops back to Donbass. The mother of all surrenders while salting the erath behind them.
The 'peace' brigade will be getting very noisy.
https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1665948974056873984
https://twitter.com/COUPSURE/status/1665962389911552000
It would have been more plausible had he been filming for some time, because he had been looking at the flow and saw a mine drifting past.1 -
...
So if we take into account MoE Sunak is ahead? Yay!HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=200 -
Water levels reportedly still rising, and the flood will last for about 72 hours.
The following settlements are completely or partially flooded: Tyahynka, Lvove, Odradokamyanka in Beryslav district, Ivanivka, Mykilske Tokarivka, Poniativka, Bilozerka, and the Ostrov neighborhood of Kherson in Kherson district...
https://twitter.com/oleg_veretskiy/status/16659628624586792960 -
The Soviets did the same to the Dnieper dam during Barbarossa. 20,000 killed including a large number of their own soldiers.Nigelb said:Water levels reportedly still rising, and the flood will last for about 72 hours.
The following settlements are completely or partially flooded: Tyahynka, Lvove, Odradokamyanka in Beryslav district, Ivanivka, Mykilske Tokarivka, Poniativka, Bilozerka, and the Ostrov neighborhood of Kherson in Kherson district...
https://twitter.com/oleg_veretskiy/status/1665962862458679296
It will also presumably destroy a lot of bridges downstream.0 -
Blamed on a “technical error by a colleague with an Excel table”.Nigelb said:The Tories set a low bar recently, but it's been limboed.
Oops! Austria’s Social Democrats announce wrong winner of leadership contest
Party announces one winner on Saturday, and another on Monday.
https://www.politico.eu/article/austria-social-party-democrats-announce-wrong-winner-of-leadership-contest/
If only Rishi Sunak had been there.4 -
Beavers were spotted in Kherson. There are a lot of beavers in that area, their habitat has been destroyed...
https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/16659798958291517440 -
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase1 -
Ashcroft reckons Boris holds Uxbridge.
https://conservativehome.com/2023/06/06/lord-ashcroft-my-new-poll-suggests-that-johnson-would-win-a-by-election-in-uxbridge-and-south-ruislip/
I think he's probably wrong.0 -
Voters, on the other hand....Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.1 -
Guys, have we got a new project for you....Nigelb said:Beavers were spotted in Kherson. There are a lot of beavers in that area, their habitat has been destroyed...
https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/16659798958291517443 -
More seriously, the ecology of the region could take years to recover. The dam has been there for nearly seventy years, and the landscape has adapted accordingly.MarqueeMark said:
Guys, have we got a new project for you....Nigelb said:Beavers were spotted in Kherson. There are a lot of beavers in that area, their habitat has been destroyed...
https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/16659798958291517441 -
Apart from anything else, if he was there he wouldn't be PM and we could finally get rid of that lunatic Braverman.Chris said:
Blamed on a “technical error by a colleague with an Excel table”.Nigelb said:The Tories set a low bar recently, but it's been limboed.
Oops! Austria’s Social Democrats announce wrong winner of leadership contest
Party announces one winner on Saturday, and another on Monday.
https://www.politico.eu/article/austria-social-party-democrats-announce-wrong-winner-of-leadership-contest/
If only Rishi Sunak had been there.1 -
Choking to death in a gas chamber, in the company of hundreds of panicking people, must be among the very worst of deaths.Nigelb said:A remarkable story, and so few of these voices still around.
At 12, I was in Auschwitz. My parents and seven siblings were murdered. Here is how I built a life
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2023/jun/06/at-12-i-was-in-auschwitz-my-parents-and-seven-siblings-were-murdered-here-is-how-i-built-a-life
...Decades later, he was a witness in the war crimes trial of the Auschwitz guard Oskar Gröning. “In walks a frail, old man with a walking frame, one nurse either side. What was the first thought I had?” His answer is pity.
He does not claim an exceptional gift for compassion. When he is asked by schoolchildren: “Do you hate the Germans?” he replies: “Why do you say ‘the Germans’? Who were my guards? Hungarians, Ukrainians, Poles, French, Estonians.” If he went down that road, he says, he would end up hating everyone. “No, I think what I hate is what human beings allow themselves to do.”
This should not be misread as a state of philosophical calm. Perl is clear and frank that he is haunted by that year of his life. He describes a visit to Sandringham: “You’ve got a beautiful garden with a wire fence and forests at the back. What do you think the first thing came to my mind?” The subcamp of Dachau, fenced off in the middle of a forest, where Perl was held nearly 80 years ago...
“We knew they were dead once the screaming stopped.”0 -
Cash is not pointless.
The rescue vehicle which came to mend my damaged wheel wanted paying in cash, which I did. A very nice man, recommended by husband's insurer - Adrian Flux. Eventually got home at 2:30 am.
Pretty scary sitting on hard shoulder with lorries thundering past. God knows what it'd have been like on a so-called "smart" motorway.16 -
Are we meant to apologise for the Industrial Revolution?Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=181 -
The R & W figures don’t seem to bad for Sunak.HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
However, if the Tories did pull off a 1992 type result, subsequent local elections would be total carnage for the party.1 -
The tendency towards reducing reliance on China is interesting.
Korea's export dependency on China dips below 20%
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=352367
...KITA said Korea's dependence on exports to China decreased consistently from 26.8 percent in 2018 to 22.8 percent in 2022 and dropped further to 19.5 percent in the first quarter of this year...
...While exports to China fell by 4.4 percent last year, exports to markets excluding China increased by 9.6 percent. In the first quarter of this year, exports to China decreased by 29.8 percent, while exports to markets excluding China declined only by 6.8 percent...
0 -
They've looked liked scams from the off tbf; crypto, nfts, shady forex stuff, all of it. I dare say, as with all such bubbles and manias a few people have made out of it pretty well, but plenty of others have not - all the while supporting a financial infrastructure that is an absolute gift to criminals.kle4 said:
Pretty much all these cryto businesses look like blatant scams, once enough time passes.TheScreamingEagles said:PBers may remember I mentioned in 2021 pretty much every UK bank decided to stop their customers use Binance, there was a reason.
The price of Bitcoin plunged after the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange and its founder were accused of a “web of deception” by US regulators.
The largest crypto token lost more than 3pc to fall below £21,000 as Binance and its chief executive Changpeng Zhao faced allegations of misusing investor funds, operating as an unregistered exchange and violating a slew of US securities laws.
The lawsuit filed by the SEC lists thirteen charges against the crypto trading platform — including mingling and diverting customer assets to an entity Mr Zhao owned called Sigma Chain.
The charges echo accusations levelled at the second largest cryptocurrency exchange, FTX, and its founder Sam Bankman-Fried after its collapse last year.
SEC chairman Gary Gensler in a written statement that Zhao and Binance “engaged in an extensive web of deception, conflicts of interest, lack of disclosure, and calculated evasion of the law”.
He added: “The public should beware of investing any of their hard-earned assets with or on these unlawful platforms.”
In a social media post, Binance said that it has been cooperating with the SEC’s investigation but said that the agency “chose to act unilaterally and litigate.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/06/06/ftse-100-markets-live-news-crypto-binance-live/
It's all essentially promising (entirely unproductive) money-for-nothing, which is always a scam giveaway. What makes me saddest is that it adds nothing useful to the world - it just appeals to greed, laziness and FOMO and promises capital without effort or production. If you want that, do it like a gentleman and place well-considered bets.
I'm glad the shine is coming off a bit now.1 -
I wouldn't be surprised actually, the Tories held Hillingdon council last year even while losing traditional Tory bastions in London like Westminster and Barnet councils and Hillingdon also voted 56% Leave ie well above the UK and English average.Pulpstar said:Ashcroft reckons Boris holds Uxbridge.
https://conservativehome.com/2023/06/06/lord-ashcroft-my-new-poll-suggests-that-johnson-would-win-a-by-election-in-uxbridge-and-south-ruislip/
I think he's probably wrong.
Uxbridge is now probably safer for Boris than switching back to Henley would be, Henley voted Remain and the LDs and Residents won a landslide there in the South Oxfordshire local elections in May1 -
As would the 2029 election.Sean_F said:
The R & W figures don’t seem to bad for Sunak.HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
However, if the Tories did pull off a 1992 type result, subsequent local elections would be total carnage for the party.
The great tragedy for Major was winning a tiny majority. Had he won a big majority, e.g. the 77 UNS predicted, he would have had more seats to play with and party discipline could have been more strictly enforced. They would probably still have lost in 1997 but it would have been a defeat not a rout.
Had he got a hung Parliament, Labour would likely have taken power but he would probably have been kept on as party leader and after twelve months Labour would have been out, taking all the blame for Black Wednesday and he'd have been set up for ten years.
Sunak does not want the same fate.1 -
I read somewhere recently Apple is absolutely scrambling for new factories in Anywhere But China.Nigelb said:The tendency towards reducing reliance on China is interesting.
Korea's export dependency on China dips below 20%
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=352367
...KITA said Korea's dependence on exports to China decreased consistently from 26.8 percent in 2018 to 22.8 percent in 2022 and dropped further to 19.5 percent in the first quarter of this year...
...While exports to China fell by 4.4 percent last year, exports to markets excluding China increased by 9.6 percent. In the first quarter of this year, exports to China decreased by 29.8 percent, while exports to markets excluding China declined only by 6.8 percent...0 -
You implied this was not your first blowout. More than one seems like rather a lot. Have you had your tyres checked?Cyclefree said:Cash is not pointless.
The rescue vehicle which came to mend my damaged wheel wanted paying in cash, which I did. A very nice man, recommended by husband's insurer - Adrian Flux. Eventually got home at 2:30 am.
Pretty scary sitting on hard shoulder with lorries thundering past. God knows what it'd have been like on a so-called "smart" motorway.0 -
Good morning, everyone.
Mr. F, the idea of climate reparations is fucking insane.
"Hey, let's sign up to be on the hook for hundreds of billions. That'll never piss off the electorate and cause a massive backlash for a party that will tear up that bullshit deal, will it?"
Especially great that we'd be a payer and China would be a recipient.1 -
While China's CO2 emissions per capita have now overtaken those of the UK, the UK is, per capita, still responsible for far more of the excess CO2 in the atmosphere due to its long history of CO2 emissions.Pulpstar said:
Good thing our emissions are below China on a per capita basis then. France must be expecting a rebate with it's nuclear use too quite honestly.Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=180 -
Is reducing exports a good or bad thing?Nigelb said:The tendency towards reducing reliance on China is interesting.
Korea's export dependency on China dips below 20%
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=352367
...KITA said Korea's dependence on exports to China decreased consistently from 26.8 percent in 2018 to 22.8 percent in 2022 and dropped further to 19.5 percent in the first quarter of this year...
...While exports to China fell by 4.4 percent last year, exports to markets excluding China increased by 9.6 percent. In the first quarter of this year, exports to China decreased by 29.8 percent, while exports to markets excluding China declined only by 6.8 percent...0 -
Lol, yes. Apparently the error was found when a journalist queried an inconsistency. Oops.Chris said:
Blamed on a “technical error by a colleague with an Excel table”.Nigelb said:The Tories set a low bar recently, but it's been limboed.
Oops! Austria’s Social Democrats announce wrong winner of leadership contest
Party announces one winner on Saturday, and another on Monday.
https://www.politico.eu/article/austria-social-party-democrats-announce-wrong-winner-of-leadership-contest/
If only Rishi Sunak had been there.
The backdrop is interesting too. The Social Democrats have been pondering how to deal with an unlikely resurgence of the almost-dead Communist Party, who got 0.7% at the last election but recently won two state elections with a mixture of LibDem tactics (relentless focusing on local issues) and personal austerity (their councillors donate most of their pay to food banks and other local voluntary services). On the back of that, their national polling shot up to 6-8%.
What to do? Babler, who won the Social Democrat vote after the recount, seems to be a hard leftist who makes Corbyn sounds moderate. But the Social Democrats have problems on the centrist flank too, and it seems unlikely that Babler and the comic chaos surrounding his election will help there. Overall it's good news for the far right FPO and the Christian Democrat OVP - maybe also for the centrist NEOS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Austrian_legislative_election2 -
I don't dispute that is a likely outcome, although I even suspect a few more Tory holds. But the seats? That seems odd. Bridgend stays Tory?HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase0 -
I'd guess more likely he'd find himself a nice safe seat elsewhere where he doesn't have to do any actual work. It's an interesting poll though, and ought to serve as a warning to Labour against pursuing a vindictive decapitation strategy here, and wasting their resources. I'd place it as a C-tier target, i.e. will swing in a landslide.Pulpstar said:Ashcroft reckons Boris holds Uxbridge.
https://conservativehome.com/2023/06/06/lord-ashcroft-my-new-poll-suggests-that-johnson-would-win-a-by-election-in-uxbridge-and-south-ruislip/
I think he's probably wrong.
Of course we'd all like to see his stupid blubbing face, but I don't think he'd even stick around to see himself lose.0 -
So the direction of our investment should be in cleaning up the mess - by driving a transition to green energy - rather than handing over £dollah in reparations. Especially when some of the beneficiaries will be the people who are currently the worst polluters.FeersumEnjineeya said:
While China's CO2 emissions per capita have now overtaken those of the UK, the UK is, per capita, still responsible for far more of the excess CO2 in the atmosphere due to its long history of CO2 emissions.Pulpstar said:
Good thing our emissions are below China on a per capita basis then. France must be expecting a rebate with it's nuclear use too quite honestly.Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=181 -
Bridgend was 55% LeaveMexicanpete said:
I don't dispute that is a likely outcome, although I even suspect a few more Tory holds. But the seats? That seems odd. Bridgend stays Tory?HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase0 -
Eyes on the big prize Sean. Eyes on the prize!Sean_F said:
The R & W figures don’t seem to bad for Sunak.HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
However, if the Tories did pull off a 1992 type result, subsequent local elections would be total carnage for the party.
PS. LOTO Burgon will also be shipping council seats to the Tories.0 -
Yes, I think this is about right.HYUFD said:
I wouldn't be surprised actually, the Tories held Hillingdon council last year even while losing traditional Tory bastions in London like Westminster and Barnet councils and Hillingdon also voted 56% Leave ie well above the UK and English average.Pulpstar said:Ashcroft reckons Boris holds Uxbridge.
https://conservativehome.com/2023/06/06/lord-ashcroft-my-new-poll-suggests-that-johnson-would-win-a-by-election-in-uxbridge-and-south-ruislip/
I think he's probably wrong.
Uxbridge is now probably safer for Boris than switching back to Henley would be, Henley voted Remain and the LDs and Residents won a landslide there in the South Oxfordshire local elections in May2 -
isn’t it rather that S. Korea’s exports have increased so that the shares of China is less?DecrepiterJohnL said:
Is reducing exports a good or bad thing?Nigelb said:The tendency towards reducing reliance on China is interesting.
Korea's export dependency on China dips below 20%
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=352367
...KITA said Korea's dependence on exports to China decreased consistently from 26.8 percent in 2018 to 22.8 percent in 2022 and dropped further to 19.5 percent in the first quarter of this year...
...While exports to China fell by 4.4 percent last year, exports to markets excluding China increased by 9.6 percent. In the first quarter of this year, exports to China decreased by 29.8 percent, while exports to markets excluding China declined only by 6.8 percent...1 -
It'll never happen.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Mr. F, the idea of climate reparations is fucking insane.
"Hey, let's sign up to be on the hook for hundreds of billions. That'll never piss off the electorate and cause a massive backlash for a party that will tear up that bullshit deal, will it?"
Especially great that we'd be a payer and China would be a recipient.
(Good morning!)0 -
FPO ahead there, looks like Austria another continental European nation swinging rightNickPalmer said:
Lol, yes. Apparently the error was found when a journalist queried an inconsistency. Oops.Chris said:
Blamed on a “technical error by a colleague with an Excel table”.Nigelb said:The Tories set a low bar recently, but it's been limboed.
Oops! Austria’s Social Democrats announce wrong winner of leadership contest
Party announces one winner on Saturday, and another on Monday.
https://www.politico.eu/article/austria-social-party-democrats-announce-wrong-winner-of-leadership-contest/
If only Rishi Sunak had been there.
The backdrop is interesting too. The Social Democrats have been pondering how to deal with an unlikely resurgence of the almost-dead Communist Party, who got 0.7% at the last election but recently won two state elections with a mixture of LibDem tactics (relentless focusing on local issues) and personal austerity (their councillors donate most of their pay to food banks and other local voluntary services). On the back of that, their national polling shot up to 6-8%.
What to do? Babler, who won the Social Democrat vote after the recount, seems to be a hard leftist who makes Corbyn sounds moderate. But the Social Democrats have problems on the centrist flank too, and it seems unlikely that Babler and the comic chaos surrounding his election will help there. Overall it's good news for the far right FPO and the Christian Democrat OVP - maybe also for the centrist NEOS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Austrian_legislative_election0 -
In that case Steve Kinnock is in big trouble in Port Talbot!HYUFD said:
Bridgend was 55% LeaveMexicanpete said:
I don't dispute that is a likely outcome, although I even suspect a few more Tory holds. But the seats? That seems odd. Bridgend stays Tory?HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
PS I believe you might still be fighting the 2019 General Election.1 -
Was a nice rogan josh was involved? That would have been the smoking gun you needed eh Josias?JosiasJessop said:
Are you saying after what Labour did with the Shami sham, people were utterly wrong not to think this sniffed a little? Really?TheScreamingEagles said:
I know, I nearly the morning thread on this and embarrass those PBers who pimped the bullshit from Dan Hodges but I don't like to troll people.Stuartinromford said:Dan Hodges, please explain:
Sir Keir Starmer will be able to appoint Sue Gray as his chief of staff in the autumn after government advisers rejected calls for her to be banned from the role for more than a year.
The Times has been told the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba) has recommended Gray, a former senior civil servant, should take just six months’ gardening leave.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f74a67fe-03e1-11ee-b1f9-dbcd37af20fb?shareToken=9ef4df4b683fa16d231b818b673e16420 -
Vast swathes of Ukraine have become an environmental disaster.Nigelb said:
More seriously, the ecology of the region could take years to recover. The dam has been there for nearly seventy years, and the landscape has adapted accordingly.MarqueeMark said:
Guys, have we got a new project for you....Nigelb said:Beavers were spotted in Kherson. There are a lot of beavers in that area, their habitat has been destroyed...
https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/16659798958291517441 -
+2 seat to LDs is almost certainly wrong. I'd guess as many as +20, nearly all coming from current Tory holds.Mexicanpete said:
I don't dispute that is a likely outcome, although I even suspect a few more Tory holds. But the seats? That seems odd. Bridgend stays Tory?HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
Also to note it lists Bury South as changing hands, when effectively it already has.0 -
Probably not given he held it in 2019 but Sunak still leads amongst Leavers as preferred PMMexicanpete said:
In that case Steve Kinnock is in big trouble in Port Talbot!HYUFD said:
Bridgend was 55% LeaveMexicanpete said:
I don't dispute that is a likely outcome, although I even suspect a few more Tory holds. But the seats? That seems odd. Bridgend stays Tory?HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase0 -
Reparations is a pretty loaded term, but it does seem fair that those countries that have put the most CO2 into the atmosphere should also be bearing the brunt of efforts to curb emissions, which means helping other countries to industrialise much more cleanly than we did.RochdalePioneers said:
So the direction of our investment should be in cleaning up the mess - by driving a transition to green energy - rather than handing over £dollah in reparations. Especially when some of the beneficiaries will be the people who are currently the worst polluters.FeersumEnjineeya said:
While China's CO2 emissions per capita have now overtaken those of the UK, the UK is, per capita, still responsible for far more of the excess CO2 in the atmosphere due to its long history of CO2 emissions.Pulpstar said:
Good thing our emissions are below China on a per capita basis then. France must be expecting a rebate with it's nuclear use too quite honestly.Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=181 -
..
War crimes? Bloody woke rubbish, back to the good old days when such activities were seen as heroic and you could call your dog what you want.TheScreamingEagles said:
Talking about Desert Storm, the Americans thought about blowing up the dams on the Tigris and Euphrates rivers if the Iraqis used WMD in Desert Storm.CarlottaVance said:Russia blowing up the dam is going to have severe consequences. The act equates to the use of weapons of mass destruction under international law.
------
"Dams like the Dnipro dam in Nova Kahkovka are protected by the laws of war and the Geneva convention. Destroying it would be considered a weapon of mass destruction and an indiscriminate war crime. Article 56 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides:
'Works and installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population. Other military objectives located at or in the vicinity of these works or installations shall not be made the object of attack if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population.'
Model of the worse case attached.
SOURCE: https://cornucopia.se/2022/10/worst-case-modelling-for-nova-kakhovka-dam-break/
https://twitter.com/igorsushko/status/1665940031381594112?s=20
Colin Powell said they stopped when they realised it would cause more damage than nuking Baghdad and realised they would likely face war crimes charges.1 -
Brexit has now been done though. Honestly I don't think Leave/Remain is going to be a helpful predictor in this coming election.HYUFD said:
Bridgend was 55% LeaveMexicanpete said:
I don't dispute that is a likely outcome, although I even suspect a few more Tory holds. But the seats? That seems odd. Bridgend stays Tory?HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase1 -
They have previous on this tbf.HYUFD said:
FPO ahead there, looks like Austria another continental European nation swinging rightNickPalmer said:
Lol, yes. Apparently the error was found when a journalist queried an inconsistency. Oops.Chris said:
Blamed on a “technical error by a colleague with an Excel table”.Nigelb said:The Tories set a low bar recently, but it's been limboed.
Oops! Austria’s Social Democrats announce wrong winner of leadership contest
Party announces one winner on Saturday, and another on Monday.
https://www.politico.eu/article/austria-social-party-democrats-announce-wrong-winner-of-leadership-contest/
If only Rishi Sunak had been there.
The backdrop is interesting too. The Social Democrats have been pondering how to deal with an unlikely resurgence of the almost-dead Communist Party, who got 0.7% at the last election but recently won two state elections with a mixture of LibDem tactics (relentless focusing on local issues) and personal austerity (their councillors donate most of their pay to food banks and other local voluntary services). On the back of that, their national polling shot up to 6-8%.
What to do? Babler, who won the Social Democrat vote after the recount, seems to be a hard leftist who makes Corbyn sounds moderate. But the Social Democrats have problems on the centrist flank too, and it seems unlikely that Babler and the comic chaos surrounding his election will help there. Overall it's good news for the far right FPO and the Christian Democrat OVP - maybe also for the centrist NEOS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Austrian_legislative_election1 -
He might have been aware of another mine going off moments earlier?JosiasJessop said:
Thanks. Slightly curious how the guy managed to run out to film it at exactly the right point.LostPassword said:
That's not an explosion at the dam. It's downstream hours later - the floodwaters are washing mines around, apparently with enough force to detonate several. When the floodwaters recede this is going to be an additional hazard, as the Russians mined their side pretty heavily, and those mines will now be randomly distributed downstream.JosiasJessop said:
There's a video of an explosion allegedly filmed by Russia at the dam this morning. The explosion happens underwater, and near the person who was filming. It doesn't look that large (AIUI underwater explosions tend to be very visible above the surface due to the incompressibility of water) , but I suppose it could have caused a progressive collapse, or been one of several.LostPassword said:
Russia need to see that there are consequences for an act like this.kle4 said:
The timing is remarkably coincidental to say the least. It would make sense on the face of it simply to slow an advance and allow redirection if their own forces. Involving the plant would be a remarkable admission of admitting the permanence of redirecting.Penddu2 said:Russians have clearly decided to blow the dam to block a secondary axis of the Ukrainian Counter Offensive - they can now redirect all of their troops in western Kherson to the main axis in Zaparozhia. I now think they will blow up Zaporizhia Nuclear power plant and use that as justiofication to withdraw all troops back to Donbass. The mother of all surrenders while salting the erath behind them.
The 'peace' brigade will be getting very noisy.
https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/16659489740568739840 -
Yes. Despite the losses, the Conservatives still have a sizeable councillor base. A repeat of the mid-90’s would see them lose almost every county council, plus about half the 2,500 seats they won on May 4th.ydoethur said:
As would the 2029 election.Sean_F said:
The R & W figures don’t seem to bad for Sunak.HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
However, if the Tories did pull off a 1992 type result, subsequent local elections would be total carnage for the party.
The great tragedy for Major was winning a tiny majority. Had he won a big majority, e.g. the 77 UNS predicted, he would have had more seats to play with and party discipline could have been more strictly enforced. They would probably still have lost in 1997 but it would have been a defeat not a rout.
Had he got a hung Parliament, Labour would likely have taken power but he would probably have been kept on as party leader and after twelve months Labour would have been out, taking all the blame for Black Wednesday and he'd have been set up for ten years.
Sunak does not want the same fate.
0 -
Vietnam grew 8% last year, for example.Miklosvar said:
I read somewhere recently Apple is absolutely scrambling for new factories in Anywhere But China.Nigelb said:The tendency towards reducing reliance on China is interesting.
Korea's export dependency on China dips below 20%
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=352367
...KITA said Korea's dependence on exports to China decreased consistently from 26.8 percent in 2018 to 22.8 percent in 2022 and dropped further to 19.5 percent in the first quarter of this year...
...While exports to China fell by 4.4 percent last year, exports to markets excluding China increased by 9.6 percent. In the first quarter of this year, exports to China decreased by 29.8 percent, while exports to markets excluding China declined only by 6.8 percent...
Developed economies like Japan ought also to benefit, as semiconductor supply chains are rerouted away from China.
The world will still trade with them, obviously. But there's a real effort to reduce dependency by the major free world economies.2 -
"But they voted leave". Yes. Because they wanted to get away from EU corruption and incompetence and invest money into the NHS and their community. So why will voters vote for a grossly corrupt and incompetent government which is starving both the NHS and their communities of cash whilst lining their own pockets?Mexicanpete said:
In that case Steve Kinnock is in big trouble in Port Talbot!HYUFD said:
Bridgend was 55% LeaveMexicanpete said:
I don't dispute that is a likely outcome, although I even suspect a few more Tory holds. But the seats? That seems odd. Bridgend stays Tory?HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
PS I believe you might still be fighting the 2019 General Election.4 -
Industrialisation, however, was a blessing. It took the world out of the 17th century.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Reparations is a pretty loaded term, but it does seem fair that those countries that have put the most CO2 into the atmosphere should also be bearing the brunt of efforts to curb emissions, which means helping other countries to industrialise much more cleanly than we did.RochdalePioneers said:
So the direction of our investment should be in cleaning up the mess - by driving a transition to green energy - rather than handing over £dollah in reparations. Especially when some of the beneficiaries will be the people who are currently the worst polluters.FeersumEnjineeya said:
While China's CO2 emissions per capita have now overtaken those of the UK, the UK is, per capita, still responsible for far more of the excess CO2 in the atmosphere due to its long history of CO2 emissions.Pulpstar said:
Good thing our emissions are below China on a per capita basis then. France must be expecting a rebate with it's nuclear use too quite honestly.Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=18
1 -
The PB Curried Toy Soldiers are out on a big training exercise today.1
-
Austria’s politicians make ours look like saints.HYUFD said:
FPO ahead there, looks like Austria another continental European nation swinging rightNickPalmer said:
Lol, yes. Apparently the error was found when a journalist queried an inconsistency. Oops.Chris said:
Blamed on a “technical error by a colleague with an Excel table”.Nigelb said:The Tories set a low bar recently, but it's been limboed.
Oops! Austria’s Social Democrats announce wrong winner of leadership contest
Party announces one winner on Saturday, and another on Monday.
https://www.politico.eu/article/austria-social-party-democrats-announce-wrong-winner-of-leadership-contest/
If only Rishi Sunak had been there.
The backdrop is interesting too. The Social Democrats have been pondering how to deal with an unlikely resurgence of the almost-dead Communist Party, who got 0.7% at the last election but recently won two state elections with a mixture of LibDem tactics (relentless focusing on local issues) and personal austerity (their councillors donate most of their pay to food banks and other local voluntary services). On the back of that, their national polling shot up to 6-8%.
What to do? Babler, who won the Social Democrat vote after the recount, seems to be a hard leftist who makes Corbyn sounds moderate. But the Social Democrats have problems on the centrist flank too, and it seems unlikely that Babler and the comic chaos surrounding his election will help there. Overall it's good news for the far right FPO and the Christian Democrat OVP - maybe also for the centrist NEOS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Austrian_legislative_election1 -
The first quarter recession clearly isn't. Diversifying away from China is.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Is reducing exports a good or bad thing?Nigelb said:The tendency towards reducing reliance on China is interesting.
Korea's export dependency on China dips below 20%
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=352367
...KITA said Korea's dependence on exports to China decreased consistently from 26.8 percent in 2018 to 22.8 percent in 2022 and dropped further to 19.5 percent in the first quarter of this year...
...While exports to China fell by 4.4 percent last year, exports to markets excluding China increased by 9.6 percent. In the first quarter of this year, exports to China decreased by 29.8 percent, while exports to markets excluding China declined only by 6.8 percent...1 -
Exactly. We need to be developing, manufacturing and exporting next gen green technologies. We industrialised much if the world through our inventiveness and industrial might - we've reduced ourselves to a fraction of that but still have brains and creativity.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Reparations is a pretty loaded term, but it does seem fair that those countries that have put the most CO2 into the atmosphere should also be bearing the brunt of efforts to curb emissions, which means helping other countries to industrialise much more cleanly than we did.RochdalePioneers said:
So the direction of our investment should be in cleaning up the mess - by driving a transition to green energy - rather than handing over £dollah in reparations. Especially when some of the beneficiaries will be the people who are currently the worst polluters.FeersumEnjineeya said:
While China's CO2 emissions per capita have now overtaken those of the UK, the UK is, per capita, still responsible for far more of the excess CO2 in the atmosphere due to its long history of CO2 emissions.Pulpstar said:
Good thing our emissions are below China on a per capita basis then. France must be expecting a rebate with it's nuclear use too quite honestly.Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=180 -
What do you think it is now?HYUFD said:
Bridgend was 55% LeaveMexicanpete said:
I don't dispute that is a likely outcome, although I even suspect a few more Tory holds. But the seats? That seems odd. Bridgend stays Tory?HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase1 -
He did not say it as within the rules. He said he was unsure. If there was the doubt, why do it?RochdalePioneers said:
He was sure it was within the rules. He used to be DPP so he does have a good understanding of the law and our legal system. But laws do get interpreted, so he was clear that if they found he was wrong he would go. The other guy *was* wrong, repeatedly, about rules he created. Yet its clearly a conspiracy against him.JosiasJessop said:
He wasn't sure it was within the rules.Foxy said:
It was within the rules at the time. They didn't need to avoid it.JosiasJessop said:
It could easily have been avoided. They didn't care enough to avoid it.Foxy said:
It was a campaign meeting for a critical by-election in Hartlepool.tlg86 said:
Okay, I object to all of the politicians doing it. It may have been legal (I'm not sure how much campaigning was going on, to be honest), but just because something is legal, doesn't mean you have to do it. Labour were particularly hawkish about COVID. They didn't look like they were going above and beyond when it came to stopping the spread of the virus.RochdalePioneers said:
Its the same argument about essential workers being allowed to meet in person and most people not. Or some kids being allowed to stay in school whilst the majority both missed school and drove themselves and their parents up the wall.tlg86 said:
My objection to Starmer eating and boozing indoors wasn't that I thought it was a major public health risk. My objection was that on that same night, I was sat outside in the cold supporting my local pub and I was outside because he thought it was dangerous for me to be inside. But he didn't have any qualms about having a nice cosy meal indoors with people from outside his own household.Foxy said:
It is hard to sustain the argument that Beergate was a major public health risk in April 2021, but that lockdown* went on far too long.JosiasJessop said:
Beergat was wrong, for the reasons I've stated passim. It may not be *illegal* - and remember, even Starmer could not say that it was legal - but it was a stupid thing to do.Mexicanpete said:
Were you looking in the mirror when you made that last statement?JosiasJessop said:
If you are referring to me, I said that *if* Gray had had meetings with Labour before the report over a job, then it stunk to high heaven. Note the conditional.CorrectHorseBat said:The same people that insisted SKS was being dodgy around Sue Gray are the same people that insisted he was guilty when he ate a curry.
Perhaps it is that these people hate somebody so much that they're unable to see the wood for the trees
And as for currygate: again, Starmer could not say that he had not broken the law. That is from a big-brained lawyer who I believe voted for the relevant legislation. If he had his doubts, why didn't you (and that's going away from the utter stupidity of the event anyway).
Perhaps those people so keen to clear Labour of things hate other parties so much they're unable to see the wood for the trees...
You can't let Beergate go, despite what appeared to be rather a rigerous review by Durham Constabulary. It looks like you also can't accept that Gray was impartial, even though her report was the dampest of damp squibs and pretty much let Johnson off the hook.
I do accept Gray was impartial now; my comments are about why it was reasonable to feel it was sniffy *at that time*.
Aside from that, well done!
*lockdown wasn't all or nothing, it was graduated and restrictions being eased. When looking at the incidents that occurred, this is often ignored. Fortunately for SKS the Durham police realise this.
Meeting for work was either legal or it was illegal. And with campaigning it was legal - and all parties did it including PM Johnson. The idea that Starmer was doing something wrong is at best partisan hackery and at worst an obsessional grudge.
Do you think that Durham takeaway curry's are so good that they attract casual diners from London on a regular basis?
The harsh reality for the Tories and for those who provide them succour is that has Starmer been fingered for currygate and had to fall on his sword, the spotlight would immediately shine on Johnson. Who already had a load of likely breeches under investigation and who had been caught doing the exact same thing as Starmer during that election campaign. They wouldn't have liked that part, and the spinning would have been hilarious to watch. Its almost a pity we missed out.
I've never mentioned 'the other guy', or a 'conspiracy'. Stop inventing stuff.1 -
They do say that Austria's greatest achievement was convincing the world that Hitler was German and Beethoven was Austrian.Ghedebrav said:
They have previous on this tbf.HYUFD said:
FPO ahead there, looks like Austria another continental European nation swinging rightNickPalmer said:
Lol, yes. Apparently the error was found when a journalist queried an inconsistency. Oops.Chris said:
Blamed on a “technical error by a colleague with an Excel table”.Nigelb said:The Tories set a low bar recently, but it's been limboed.
Oops! Austria’s Social Democrats announce wrong winner of leadership contest
Party announces one winner on Saturday, and another on Monday.
https://www.politico.eu/article/austria-social-party-democrats-announce-wrong-winner-of-leadership-contest/
If only Rishi Sunak had been there.
The backdrop is interesting too. The Social Democrats have been pondering how to deal with an unlikely resurgence of the almost-dead Communist Party, who got 0.7% at the last election but recently won two state elections with a mixture of LibDem tactics (relentless focusing on local issues) and personal austerity (their councillors donate most of their pay to food banks and other local voluntary services). On the back of that, their national polling shot up to 6-8%.
What to do? Babler, who won the Social Democrat vote after the recount, seems to be a hard leftist who makes Corbyn sounds moderate. But the Social Democrats have problems on the centrist flank too, and it seems unlikely that Babler and the comic chaos surrounding his election will help there. Overall it's good news for the far right FPO and the Christian Democrat OVP - maybe also for the centrist NEOS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Austrian_legislative_election2 -
You really are making an absolute fool of yourself on this. It was a work meeting, they had some food after a very long day. That was it.JosiasJessop said:
It could easily have been avoided. They didn't care enough to avoid it.Foxy said:
It was a campaign meeting for a critical by-election in Hartlepool.tlg86 said:
Okay, I object to all of the politicians doing it. It may have been legal (I'm not sure how much campaigning was going on, to be honest), but just because something is legal, doesn't mean you have to do it. Labour were particularly hawkish about COVID. They didn't look like they were going above and beyond when it came to stopping the spread of the virus.RochdalePioneers said:
Its the same argument about essential workers being allowed to meet in person and most people not. Or some kids being allowed to stay in school whilst the majority both missed school and drove themselves and their parents up the wall.tlg86 said:
My objection to Starmer eating and boozing indoors wasn't that I thought it was a major public health risk. My objection was that on that same night, I was sat outside in the cold supporting my local pub and I was outside because he thought it was dangerous for me to be inside. But he didn't have any qualms about having a nice cosy meal indoors with people from outside his own household.Foxy said:
It is hard to sustain the argument that Beergate was a major public health risk in April 2021, but that lockdown* went on far too long.JosiasJessop said:
Beergat was wrong, for the reasons I've stated passim. It may not be *illegal* - and remember, even Starmer could not say that it was legal - but it was a stupid thing to do.Mexicanpete said:
Were you looking in the mirror when you made that last statement?JosiasJessop said:
If you are referring to me, I said that *if* Gray had had meetings with Labour before the report over a job, then it stunk to high heaven. Note the conditional.CorrectHorseBat said:The same people that insisted SKS was being dodgy around Sue Gray are the same people that insisted he was guilty when he ate a curry.
Perhaps it is that these people hate somebody so much that they're unable to see the wood for the trees
And as for currygate: again, Starmer could not say that he had not broken the law. That is from a big-brained lawyer who I believe voted for the relevant legislation. If he had his doubts, why didn't you (and that's going away from the utter stupidity of the event anyway).
Perhaps those people so keen to clear Labour of things hate other parties so much they're unable to see the wood for the trees...
You can't let Beergate go, despite what appeared to be rather a rigerous review by Durham Constabulary. It looks like you also can't accept that Gray was impartial, even though her report was the dampest of damp squibs and pretty much let Johnson off the hook.
I do accept Gray was impartial now; my comments are about why it was reasonable to feel it was sniffy *at that time*.
Aside from that, well done!
*lockdown wasn't all or nothing, it was graduated and restrictions being eased. When looking at the incidents that occurred, this is often ignored. Fortunately for SKS the Durham police realise this.
Meeting for work was either legal or it was illegal. And with campaigning it was legal - and all parties did it including PM Johnson. The idea that Starmer was doing something wrong is at best partisan hackery and at worst an obsessional grudge.
Do you think that Durham takeaway curry's are so good that they attract casual diners from London on a regular basis?0 -
It’s just as well we didn’t have leaders who shrank from doing what needed to be done in WWII.Theuniondivvie said:..
War crimes? Bloody woke rubbish, back to the good old days when such activities were seen as heroic and you could call your dog what you want.TheScreamingEagles said:
Talking about Desert Storm, the Americans thought about blowing up the dams on the Tigris and Euphrates rivers if the Iraqis used WMD in Desert Storm.CarlottaVance said:Russia blowing up the dam is going to have severe consequences. The act equates to the use of weapons of mass destruction under international law.
------
"Dams like the Dnipro dam in Nova Kahkovka are protected by the laws of war and the Geneva convention. Destroying it would be considered a weapon of mass destruction and an indiscriminate war crime. Article 56 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides:
'Works and installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population. Other military objectives located at or in the vicinity of these works or installations shall not be made the object of attack if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population.'
Model of the worse case attached.
SOURCE: https://cornucopia.se/2022/10/worst-case-modelling-for-nova-kakhovka-dam-break/
https://twitter.com/igorsushko/status/1665940031381594112?s=20
Colin Powell said they stopped when they realised it would cause more damage than nuking Baghdad and realised they would likely face war crimes charges.0 -
Investment - and aid - to build renewable infrastructure in developing countries would be good for the entire world both economically and environmentally.RochdalePioneers said:
So the direction of our investment should be in cleaning up the mess - by driving a transition to green energy - rather than handing over £dollah in reparations. Especially when some of the beneficiaries will be the people who are currently the worst polluters.FeersumEnjineeya said:
While China's CO2 emissions per capita have now overtaken those of the UK, the UK is, per capita, still responsible for far more of the excess CO2 in the atmosphere due to its long history of CO2 emissions.Pulpstar said:
Good thing our emissions are below China on a per capita basis then. France must be expecting a rebate with it's nuclear use too quite honestly.Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=18
Labelling it reparations wouldn't change that reality, even if it were to irritate some.
You could sooth them by pointing out it might reduce the pressure for migration.1 -
Mr. Ghedebrav, I lack your faith in our politicians.
Look at recent delinquency. Or even back when Blair thought tossing half the rebate on the bonfire of his ambition was a great deal for the nation.0 -
In terms of councils however Labour now control more. What is different is the Tories have held councils like Dartford, Walsall and Dudley and Torbay they lost in 1995 but lost a few councils like Surrey Heath and Spelthorne they held in 1995Sean_F said:
Yes. Despite the losses, the Conservatives still have a sizeable councillor base. A repeat of the mid-90’s would see them lose almost every county council, plus about half the 2,500 seats they won on May 4th.ydoethur said:
As would the 2029 election.Sean_F said:
The R & W figures don’t seem to bad for Sunak.HYUFD said:
If Sunak got a hung parliament from the situation he took over in October that would almost be a victory for him in itself.Nigelb said:
"A bit worse than Starmer" isn't going to be a winning election strategy, either.HYUFD said:I notice however TSE fails to mention Starmer only leads Sunak 42% to 37% as preferred PM in the same Redfield poll. A result which if reflected in voting intention after the debates and election campaign would produce a hung parliament
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1665755411440336903?s=20
The preferred PM figures on the new boundaries translated to voteshare gives Labour 314 Tories 273 ie similar to 2017 in reverse
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=37&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=3&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.4&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=8&SCOTReform=1.4&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.8&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
However, if the Tories did pull off a 1992 type result, subsequent local elections would be total carnage for the party.
The great tragedy for Major was winning a tiny majority. Had he won a big majority, e.g. the 77 UNS predicted, he would have had more seats to play with and party discipline could have been more strictly enforced. They would probably still have lost in 1997 but it would have been a defeat not a rout.
Had he got a hung Parliament, Labour would likely have taken power but he would probably have been kept on as party leader and after twelve months Labour would have been out, taking all the blame for Black Wednesday and he'd have been set up for ten years.
Sunak does not want the same fate.0 -
I think that quote was attributed to the great Billy Wilder, though no doubt it has an apocryphal element.Chris said:
They do say that Austria's greatest achievement was convincing the world that Hitler was German and Beethoven was Austrian.Ghedebrav said:
They have previous on this tbf.HYUFD said:
FPO ahead there, looks like Austria another continental European nation swinging rightNickPalmer said:
Lol, yes. Apparently the error was found when a journalist queried an inconsistency. Oops.Chris said:
Blamed on a “technical error by a colleague with an Excel table”.Nigelb said:The Tories set a low bar recently, but it's been limboed.
Oops! Austria’s Social Democrats announce wrong winner of leadership contest
Party announces one winner on Saturday, and another on Monday.
https://www.politico.eu/article/austria-social-party-democrats-announce-wrong-winner-of-leadership-contest/
If only Rishi Sunak had been there.
The backdrop is interesting too. The Social Democrats have been pondering how to deal with an unlikely resurgence of the almost-dead Communist Party, who got 0.7% at the last election but recently won two state elections with a mixture of LibDem tactics (relentless focusing on local issues) and personal austerity (their councillors donate most of their pay to food banks and other local voluntary services). On the back of that, their national polling shot up to 6-8%.
What to do? Babler, who won the Social Democrat vote after the recount, seems to be a hard leftist who makes Corbyn sounds moderate. But the Social Democrats have problems on the centrist flank too, and it seems unlikely that Babler and the comic chaos surrounding his election will help there. Overall it's good news for the far right FPO and the Christian Democrat OVP - maybe also for the centrist NEOS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Austrian_legislative_election0 -
Why not give your views, rather than sneering at those who support Ukraine?Anabobazina said:The PB Curried Toy Soldiers are out on a big training exercise today.
2 -
I think the mere elapse of time did that. It also brought us the sweat shop, and children up chimneys, and industrial World War-scale slaughter, and global warming. Defining it as a blessing, or a curse, doesn't seem like useful history.Sean_F said:
Industrialisation, however, was a blessing. It took the world out of the 17th century.FeersumEnjineeya said:
Reparations is a pretty loaded term, but it does seem fair that those countries that have put the most CO2 into the atmosphere should also be bearing the brunt of efforts to curb emissions, which means helping other countries to industrialise much more cleanly than we did.RochdalePioneers said:
So the direction of our investment should be in cleaning up the mess - by driving a transition to green energy - rather than handing over £dollah in reparations. Especially when some of the beneficiaries will be the people who are currently the worst polluters.FeersumEnjineeya said:
While China's CO2 emissions per capita have now overtaken those of the UK, the UK is, per capita, still responsible for far more of the excess CO2 in the atmosphere due to its long history of CO2 emissions.Pulpstar said:
Good thing our emissions are below China on a per capita basis then. France must be expecting a rebate with it's nuclear use too quite honestly.Taz said:Rich countries with high greenhouse gas emissions could pay $170tn in climate reparations by 2050.
I can see Labour supporting this as many of their activists and younger MP candidates are inline with this sort of thinking.
Be interesting to see how this pans out. Undoubtedly the charity sector will be in favour as they will be the ones to administer it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/rich-countries-with-high-greenhouse-gas-emissions-could-pay-170tn-in-climate-reparations/ar-AA1c9YB4?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f091f22db52742908323d2925335ce4c&ei=180
