Howdy, Stranger!

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

The Sunday open thread – politicalbetting.com

13

Comments

  • Andy_JS said:

    Japan's population is declining at quite a significant rate. It's down by more than 3 million since its peak in 2010.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Japan#Vital_statistics
    Not in Tokyo.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    Pagan2 said:

    And what do you bid with your need points....been a single male on that list for 50 years you still have the need points you started with
    You're having great trouble understanding it is a completely different system.
    There is no list.
    I'm a single male and it took fewer than two months from registration to keys, including Christmas and New Year.
    If you are eligible for a property you can bid. If you put in the first bid you get the property. How long you've been waiting is irrelevant.
    There were only 2 in the County I was eligible for. I got one.
    There is no "waiting list".
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,573
    kinabalu said:

    I agree in essence. But like sandpit on PT you are skewing the language towards your favoured option.

    Public services would need to be 'cut'. Just saying 'rethought' is already finessing and spinning things.

    If we want that honest 'grown up' conversation (which we do) it has to feature the unvarnished truth.
    “Rethought” is not the same as “cut”

    It implies doing less, but doing it better: ie narrower scope but appropriately funded and well executed. “Cut” is just taking a slice off all budgets without thinking about what the government *should* be doing.

    The NHS is a classic. The argument is never “what do we want to achieve and how do we do it in the best possible way”. It’s always “the budget is only up 4% not 5%. You’re killing the NHS!”
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    nova said:

    Where was this?

    I've not worked in this area recently, but when I did, it was hugely different across the country. Some areas had a surplus of council housing, so a reasonable amount of turnover, but most of London was almost impossible. There was so little housing that you had to have significant additional needs to get anywhere near a flat.
    Northumberland.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,377
    HYUFD said:

    Details of last week's Yougov out and have more 2019 Tory voters now going RefUK than Labour after Boris leaves the Commons and the Partygate report vote.

    16% of 2019 Conservative voters now back RefUK and 15% back Starmer Labour.
    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/5wuhxdx0xb/TheTimes_VI_230621_W.pdf

    Still no Tory poll leads after 18 months and 19 days (6th December 2021, Redfield).
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,573
    Carnyx said:

    Not true, actually. I have a little field inherited from an ancestor and kept for sentimental/environmental reasons, and I get £80 pa for it from the farmer. But I have to pay NI on that. Class 2 or 3. Apparently it counts as a business.
    Why doesn’t he just fill your freezer once a year like everyone else in that situation?
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,221


    They're even more densely populated in their residential areas than us, yet it works. Without concreting over the entire country.

    That part I think is largely geography -- when your country is a mix of mountains and river plains then you build massively on the plains because the mountains aren't feasibly habitable for large numbers of people. One of the characteristic views of Japan is the urban sprawl on the flat right up to the base of the wooded hills and mountains.

    Incidentally the Japanese are not averse to a bit of concrete -- the construction state is a nice cosy relationship between the building industry, politicians and banking which will happily build less-than-obviously necessary bridges, dams, etc in scenic areas.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,109
    HYUFD said:

    Details of last week's Yougov out and have more 2019 Tory voters now going RefUK than Labour after Boris leaves the Commons and the Partygate report vote.

    16% of 2019 Conservative voters now back RefUK and 15% back Starmer Labour.
    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/5wuhxdx0xb/TheTimes_VI_230621_W.pdf

    I've been surprised it's taken so long for Reform to get to 10% in an opinion poll. I think it's because their leader is not well known, and everyone expects it to be Farage.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    Cyclefree said:

    Well, we've had idiot Tory MPs saying daft/stupid/offensive things.

    So a Labour MP has decided to join in - Andrew Western, MP for Stratford and Urmston - and show his disdain for the principle of innocence until proven guilty and the right of those accused of criminal offences to get legal advice.

    https://twitter.com/andrewhwestern/status/1673012638085701632?s=61&t=wWWeJB3W_ksMJK4LA1OvkA

    Perhaps his party leader could give him a few lessons on the basics of the criminal justice system.

    While I basically agree with your point, example cited are public record. And thus kosher as a political criticism.

    Believe that lawyers turned politicos have been criticized on account of their clients since days of Marcus Tullius Cicero. Or rather long before . . .
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    edited June 2023
    Having said all that.
    There are 36 flats in this building. Just found out 5 of them are currently empty.
    So there isn't a proper shortage of Housing Association properties up here.
    Incidentally. They aren't cheap.
    But. I have security of tenure. A warden for half the day. And repairs tend to be same day if urgent, same week for everything else.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    Andy_JS said:

    I've been surprised it's taken so long for Reform to get to 10% in an opinion poll. I think it's because their leader is not well known, and everyone expects it to be Farage.
    Could there be some Tory-schism fatigue as well? Referendum Party > UKIP > Reform?

    And that's only the ones I'm recollecting right now.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    pm215 said:

    That part I think is largely geography -- when your country is a mix of mountains and river plains then you build massively on the plains because the mountains aren't feasibly habitable for large numbers of people. One of the characteristic views of Japan is the urban sprawl on the flat right up to the base of the wooded hills and mountains.

    Incidentally the Japanese are not averse to a bit of concrete -- the construction state is a nice cosy relationship between the building industry, politicians and banking which will happily build less-than-obviously necessary bridges, dams, etc in scenic areas.
    They're also learning more every year about earthquakes. In particular liquefaction takes large areas out of building all together.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,686

    While I basically agree with your point, example cited are public record. And thus kosher as a political criticism.

    Believe that lawyers turned politicos have been criticized on account of their clients since days of Marcus Tullius Cicero. Or rather long before . . .
    Well yes, but by Andrew Western's logic no defence lawyer should ever become an MP.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,157
    HYUFD said:

    Details of last week's Yougov out and have more 2019 Tory voters now going RefUK than Labour after Boris leaves the Commons and the Partygate report vote.

    16% of 2019 Conservative voters now back RefUK and 15% back Starmer Labour.
    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/5wuhxdx0xb/TheTimes_VI_230621_W.pdf

    And that's the vice Sunak is caught in. As opposed to the vices that got Johnson caught out.

    Whatever he does from here, whatever moves he makes to the centre or to the right are going to lose him votes from the other side of what's left of his coalition. Backing Bozza and sacking him were both vote losers. So he tried to avoid doing either.

    And that feeds into the other problem- the risk that he just sits there, like a terrified rabbit, for the next year and a half. The latter days of Major were bad, but I don't recall them being this bad.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,328

    “Rethought” is not the same as “cut”

    It implies doing less, but doing it better: ie narrower scope but appropriately funded and well executed. “Cut” is just taking a slice off all budgets without thinking about what the government *should* be doing.

    The NHS is a classic. The argument is never “what do we want to achieve and how do we do it in the best possible way”. It’s always “the budget is only up 4% not 5%. You’re killing the NHS!”
    This is not true. People -- those in the NHS, researchers, think tanks, Dept of Health civil servants, government and more -- are constantly rethinking how to run the NHS, at all levels. (Indeed, one of the problems the NHS faces, I would suggest, is how often the government loves a big re-organisation of the NHS.)

    I suggest there is more time and effort spent on rethinking the NHS than there is on most any other publicly-funded endeavour.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398

    Sorry that's not remotely an argument for planning, you could not be more wrong. There isn't time for decades of work as our population levels weren't the same decades ago, and if decades of work are going into it then no wonder everything is so broken as the facts decades ago are not the facts today.

    If everything is planned then I'm curious where the new railway station, new schools, new GPs and everything else are. None of them exist. I still am registered at my old GP in my old town, I've not transferred my kids schooling either, and drive across the river to a different town for those.

    Organic development works better. If houses are built, but no schools etc then people will vote for what they need. Unsurprisingly at the local elections the local Lib Dem (who got elected) was not campaigning on NIMBYism, but supporting new GPs to built and new schools to be built. Because that's what the new residents need and its not all there yet. Supermarkets have opened etc because businesses like Aldi and ASDA will open branches where their customers are. Thousands of people move into an area, they'll be in like a shot to get a shot at those customers.

    The state is bloody useless at planning. Design transportation, sure, then let it organically grow in what's zoned there.
    Ok, so you don't think there should be planning, with the exception of road building. There should be no state provision for day to day needs etc - shops, healthcare etc, because this will follow where people choose to build houses because politicians will be elected to make it happen. There would be no public realm, or town centres, just housing and roads, and supermarkets.

    This all sounds like a total disaster to me.



  • darkage said:

    Ok, so you don't think there should be planning, with the exception of road building. There should be no state provision for day to day needs etc - shops, healthcare etc, because this will follow where people choose to build houses because politicians will be elected to make it happen. There would be no public realm, or town centres, just housing and roads, and supermarkets.

    This all sounds like a total disaster to me.



    No. I think there should be healthcare, and schools etc but it should evolve depending upon what the voters need.

    Not spend decades planning what was needed decades ago, but is totally obsolete decades later as the facts have changed so much all your plans were based on faulty assumptions.

    The latter is a proven disaster today.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,480
    edited June 2023

    And that's the vice Sunak is caught in. As opposed to the vices that got Johnson caught out.

    Whatever he does from here, whatever moves he makes to the centre or to the right are going to lose him votes from the other side of what's left of his coalition. Backing Bozza and sacking him were both vote losers. So he tried to avoid doing either.

    And that feeds into the other problem- the risk that he just sits there, like a terrified rabbit, for the next year and a half. The latter days of Major were bad, but I don't recall them being this bad.
    Major did lose votes to his right too in 1997 to Goldsmith's Referendum Party and UKIP as well as New Labour but Sunak is now losing more to on his right (to RefUK) than Major did while also still leaking to Labour
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    Cookie said:

    Well yes, but by Andrew Western's logic no defence lawyer should ever become an MP.
    Bad logic, I agree. For one thing, successful bleeding-heart defense lawyers have sometimes turned out to be throw-the-book-at-em judges.

    Still a legitimate hit if hardly silver bullet. And certainly is noteworthy, electorally-speaking, IF a candidate's client list is heavily skewed in some direction, or another.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,060
    Suspicious minds murdered at Glasto. Not the first time for that particular karaoke favourite I expect
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,410
    Look at this interview with Sunak:

    https://order-order.com/2023/06/25/prime-minister-praises-bank-of-england-and-baileys-track-record-confirms-total-support/

    Can anyone honestly tell me they can bear more than 20 seconds of the groundlessly patronising little turd without wanting to hurl things at the screen? He is disastrous.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    HYUFD said:

    Major did lose votes to his right too in 1997 to Goldsmith's Referendum Party and UKIP as well as New Labour but Sunak is now losing more to on his right (to RefUK) than Major did while also still leaking to Labour
    I'm curious why you often use the term "Starmer Labour" rather than simply Labour?
    It's a style thing of yours which jars with me a bit.
    Not that I have any right to stop you.
    Just a bit nosy really.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,516

    I’m taking the texts at face value - no reason not to. But obviously if it was all Hunter than Biden isn’t responsible.
    There's MASSIVE reason not to!
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173

    Could there be some Tory-schism fatigue as well? Referendum Party > UKIP > Reform?

    And that's only the ones I'm recollecting right now.
    Reform is an obscure fringe party which the large bulk of the electorate will identify as being (a) more right wing than the Tories, (b) anti-EU and (c) something to do with Farage, whether they know he used to lead it or think he still does.

    Regardless, there's no particular reason to suppose that it will do any better than the 2% of the popular vote that the Brexit Party picked up last time. Certainly, it's less established, less credible and lower profile than the Greens, who polled a bit less than 3% in 2019.

    Most of the voters who are claiming to back Reform are liable either not to turn out or to go back to the Tories come the election.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,480
    edited June 2023
    dixiedean said:

    I'm curious why you often use the term "Starmer Labour" rather than simply Labour?
    It's a style thing of yours which jars with me a bit.
    Not that I have any right to stop you.
    Just a bit nosy really.
    In part as it distinguishes them from their predecessors, plenty of swing voters now back a Starmer led Labour Party who would never have voted for the Corbyn or even Ed Miliband or Brown led Labour Party. It is not as big an effect as Blair led New Labour (which was polling over 60% in a few mid 1990s polls) but it is there
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,236

    Yes, because they have zoning. Which is what I've argued for.

    They don't have an oligopoly of house developers who can work a planning system where more than a quarter of residential planning applications are rejected. They have residential zones and building regs and what you do with your own land is up to you.

    So yes, if building up is more productive, do that.

    What's the objection to that?

    They're even more densely populated in their residential areas than us, yet it works. Without concreting over the entire country.
    Zoning has bugger all to do with that. The biggest factor has been their - forced - decision to sacrifice agricultural land for building and rely on imported food.

    And the trouble with your zoning plan is that it still wouldn't get rid of most of the planning rules (thankfully). Those don't relate in any way to allowing or preventing developmemt. They are all about making sure the developers do the necessary mitigation for archaeology and environmental factors, services, etc. All the stuff that Thatcher modernised when she reformed planning in the 1980s. None of that goes away under a zoning scheme. As I have said many times before, your one man war on the planning system is based on ignorance.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    pigeon said:

    Reform is an obscure fringe party which the large bulk of the electorate will identify as being (a) more right wing than the Tories, (b) anti-EU and (c) something to do with Farage, whether they know he used to lead it or think he still does.

    Regardless, there's no particular reason to suppose that it will do any better than the 2% of the popular vote that the Brexit Party picked up last time. Certainly, it's less established, less credible and lower profile than the Greens, who polled a bit less than 3% in 2019.

    Most of the voters who are claiming to back Reform are liable either not to turn out or to go back to the Tories come the election.
    Indeed.
    And which they choose and in what proportion (as well as a few who'll go back to Labour, etc.) will probably more than anything else, dictate the scale of the defeat.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    Re: lawyers and clients, once worked for local deputy prosecutor who was running to be a judge.

    He'd been a tough, generally successful prosecutor versus range of alleged/convicted malefactors. Including cases of domestic violence.

    This record, backed up by wide variety of impressive testimonials & endorsements, proved to be highly persuasive with voters across the political spectrum, from wack to woke and back.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,590
    edited June 2023

    While I basically agree with your point, example cited are public record. And thus kosher as a political criticism.

    Believe that lawyers turned politicos have been criticized on account of their clients since days of Marcus Tullius Cicero. Or rather long before . . .
    It's not a political criticism. It's a criticism of a lawyer doing his work. It is as stupid, unjustified and dangerous as Braverman attacking lawyers who work for those claiming asylum or Boris attacking lefty lawyers.

    Everyone - including corporate bodies - is entitled to legal advice. Both corporate and humans have human rights. Both can be charged with criminal offences. Both benefit from the presumption of innocence and both are entitled to seek legal advice, whether for criminal or civil litigation.

    This MP does not seem to understand this. Or he does but cynically seeks to associate a lawyer with his client - the sort of nonsense which when Tory MPs do it is rightly criticised.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,875

    Look at this interview with Sunak:

    https://order-order.com/2023/06/25/prime-minister-praises-bank-of-england-and-baileys-track-record-confirms-total-support/

    Can anyone honestly tell me they can bear more than 20 seconds of the groundlessly patronising little turd without wanting to hurl things at the screen? He is disastrous.

    No where near Truss
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    pigeon said:

    Reform is an obscure fringe party which the large bulk of the electorate will identify as being (a) more right wing than the Tories, (b) anti-EU and (c) something to do with Farage, whether they know he used to lead it or think he still does.

    Regardless, there's no particular reason to suppose that it will do any better than the 2% of the popular vote that the Brexit Party picked up last time. Certainly, it's less established, less credible and lower profile than the Greens, who polled a bit less than 3% in 2019.

    Most of the voters who are claiming to back Reform are liable either not to turn out or to go back to the Tories come the election.
    You're probably correct. And HOW could I forget the Brexit Party?!?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    edited June 2023
    HYUFD said:

    In part as it distinguishes them from their predecessors, plenty of swing voters now back a Starmer led Labour Party who would never have voted for the Corbyn or even Ed Miliband or Brown led Labour Party. It is not as big an effect as Blair led New Labour (which was polling over 60% in a few mid 1990s polls) but it is there
    OK. Fair enough. So it's to distinguish between support for the current incarnation of Labour rather than Labour per se?
    In which case it has some utility then. I haven't seen anyone else use the phrase. A bit like @MoonRabbit's use of "Lady Thatcher" it always stands out as a unique phrase of a particular poster.
    Thanks for explaining.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,573
    kinabalu said:

    There's MASSIVE reason not to!
    I’m not interested in Hunter Biden so don’t spent any time on it. Just responded to the post with my thoughts
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,516
    Pulpstar said:

    Suspicious minds murdered at Glasto. Not the first time for that particular karaoke favourite I expect

    Disagree with you there. Liked it. The Elvis and FYCs better but she's 83!
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,573

    This is not true. People -- those in the NHS, researchers, think tanks, Dept of Health civil servants, government and more -- are constantly rethinking how to run the NHS, at all levels. (Indeed, one of the problems the NHS faces, I would suggest, is how often the government loves a big re-organisation of the NHS.)

    I suggest there is more time and effort spent on rethinking the NHS than there is on most any other publicly-funded endeavour.
    Not the key question - what do we want the NHS to do. And not in the public political debate.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,236
    geoffw said:

    There is however the little question of reparations for the damage inflicted by the unprovoked war they initiated

    As there was in WW2. And learning the lessons of WW1 we waived a great deal of that under the London Agreement of 1953.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173
    dixiedean said:

    Indeed.
    And which they choose and in what proportion (as well as a few who'll go back to Labour, etc.) will probably more than anything else, dictate the scale of the defeat.
    I continue to cling to the notion that the Conservatives won't poll less than a third of the popular vote, and may well do a little better than that (rationale: Major managed about 31% in 1997, the median age of the electorate has increased since then, the Tory core vote has actually done very well out of the last thirteen years, Starmer does not fill anyone with enthusiasm, and there's every indication that the Labour platform will not offer radical change to its younger supporter base, which is harder to motivate to turn out than the grey vote.) But I'll admit that the mortgage crisis, coming on top of years of disarray and copious evidence of rank incompetence, is a test of my nerve in holding to that prediction.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    dixiedean said:

    OK. Fair enough. So it's to distinguish between support for the current incarnation of Labour rather than Labour per se?
    In which case it has some utility then. I haven't seen anyone else use the phrase. A bit like @MoonRabbit's use of "Lady Thatcher" it always stands out as a unique phrase of a particular poster.
    Thanks for explaining.
    Purpose of "Starmer Labour" is to keep disaffected, esp. pro-Cobryn supporters and lean-ers alienated from and less inclined to vote for Labour candidates.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,410

    No where near Truss
    Don't make me laugh. He makes a Truss interview look like Princess Diana visiting landmine victims. She is awkward but struggles through and gives real answers. He's by turns pompous, repetitious, patronising and hostile. Toxic.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,780
    Andy_JS said:

    I've been surprised it's taken so long for Reform to get to 10% in an opinion poll. I think it's because their leader is not well known, and everyone expects it to be Farage.
    Reform's polling is showing wild swings. Are they on 10% (Opinium) or 2% (Ipsos, 3 days earlier)? With such wide disparities I think panel self selection might have come into play so I would tend to place more reliance on Ipsos as the company that doesn't use a panel.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,875

    Don't make me laugh. He makes a Truss interview look like Princess Diana visiting landmine victims. She is awkward but struggles through and gives real answers. He's by turns pompous, repetitious, patronising and hostile. Toxic.
    She single handed destroyed the markets in an act of sabotage, and with her predecessor she trashed the conservative brand 100% and you have the nonsense to suggest Sunak is toxic

  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,379

    Reform's polling is showing wild swings. Are they on 10% (Opinium) or 2% (Ipsos, 3 days earlier)? With such wide disparities I think panel self selection might have come into play so I would tend to place more reliance on Ipsos as the company that doesn't use a panel.
    Indeed, I suspect R&W will confirm the Opinium Reform number to be a big outlier.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    Cyclefree said:

    It's not a political criticism. It's a criticism of a lawyer doing his work. It is as stupid, unjustified and dangerous as Braverman attacking lawyers who work for those claiming asylum or Boris attacking lefty lawyers.

    Everyone - including corporate bodies - is entitled to legal advice. Both corporate and humans have human rights. Both can be charged with criminal offences. Both benefit from the presumption of innocence and both are entitled to seek legal advice, whether for criminal or civil litigation.

    This MP does not seem to understand this. Or he does but cynically seeks to associate a lawyer with his client - the sort of nonsense which when Tory MPs do it is rightly criticised.
    Any criticism of a political candidate IS political criticism.

    Whether legit, or fair, or reasonable, or significant - these are separate questions. Right to seek AND provide legal representation not withstanding.

    Same with Tories as will Labour as with ORMLP or whatever.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,962
     

    As there was in WW2. And learning the lessons of WW1 we waived a great deal of that under the London Agreement of 1953.
    Some countries - notably Russia - insisted on reparations, e.g. $300m from Finland, in the form of machinery, rolling stock and ice-breakers (ships), which were fully paid off in the early-50s.
    Are you suggesting that Russia now gets off scot free?

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,798

    Not the key question - what do we want the NHS to do. And not in the public political debate.
    Almost every healthcare expert for decades has reckoned there should be more focus on primary care. Their motivations vary, to improve mental health, concerns about social conditions, free up resources for specialised treatment and so on. They may want to manage primary care in different ways, but they are agreed on the basic premise: that's where the priority needs to be.

    Of course the public debate is almost entirely about hospitals.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,394
    @Gabriel_Pogrund
    🚨 In 2020 the Russian embassy told the British government the Kremlin “of course” welcomed a peerage for Evgeny Lebedev

    It said Boris Johnson’s nominee had strengthened UK-Russia ties

    And said he could use Moscow in his title(!)— an unprecedented step

    @Gabriel_Pogrund
    I’ve posted this in light of story breaking tonight. The Queen, it is said, was asked to block Lebedev’s peerage after Boris Johnson ignored repeated warnings he posed a threat to national security.

    https://twitter.com/Gabriel_Pogrund/status/1673066802195120129
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,394
    @HollyLynch5
    Boris Johnson’s time in office was characterised by rule breaking. Even knowing that, these revelations are utterly unbelievable about the position he put officials and the security services in. Tuesday 10pm

    https://twitter.com/HollyLynch5/status/1673067601998540801
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,157

    She single handed destroyed the markets in an act of sabotage, and with her predecessor she trashed the conservative brand 100% and you have the nonsense to suggest Sunak is toxic

    Can't we agree that they're both pretty dreadful?

    Truss had a policy platform which boiled down to finding the Downing Street "Do Not Press This Button" button and pressing it with all her might. She was also pretty peculiar in her public speaking.

    Sunak's policies are sensible, realistic, albeit dismal- I do think that to argue against them is to argue against arithmetic. But he really can't sell them to the public. That's a particular problem given the thinness of the gruel he has to offer.

    But then, if either of them were any good, would Johnson have had them as senior members of his Cabinet?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,590
    edited June 2023

    Any criticism of a political candidate IS political criticism.

    Whether legit, or fair, or reasonable, or significant - these are separate questions. Right to seek AND provide legal representation not withstanding.

    Same with Tories as will Labour as with ORMLP or whatever.
    So when Braverman and co next attack lefty lawyers providing advice to asylum seekers or, say, Starmer, Labour - and this MP in particular - will go, oh yes, that's all perfectly OK, it's just a political criticism and perfectly legitimate and there is absolutely no problem at all......

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,203
    Gabriels were my fav Glasto moment.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,394

    if either of them were any good, would Johnson have had them as senior members of his Cabinet?

    BoZo wouldn't let them stand at the last election if they were any good
  • Zoning has bugger all to do with that. The biggest factor has been their - forced - decision to sacrifice agricultural land for building and rely on imported food.

    And the trouble with your zoning plan is that it still wouldn't get rid of most of the planning rules (thankfully). Those don't relate in any way to allowing or preventing developmemt. They are all about making sure the developers do the necessary mitigation for archaeology and environmental factors, services, etc. All the stuff that Thatcher modernised when she reformed planning in the 1980s. None of that goes away under a zoning scheme. As I have said many times before, your one man war on the planning system is based on ignorance.
    The ignorance is the way you keep shifting your arguments when you realise you're wrong always to suit your same desired output even though the arguments keep being wrong and changing; from first suggesting that relaxing planning would lead to the countryside being concreted over and that anyone who suggests it knows the value of nothing, to then claiming that planning doesn't stand in the way of developments and falsely claiming that 90% of residential planning applications are approved. When the figure you so proudly were quoting was the figure for applications for conservatories and lofts on existing homes, not the figure for proposed new homes.

    At least after being called out on it, you haven't repeated your 90% claim today.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,651

    Re: lawyers and clients, once worked for local deputy prosecutor who was running to be a judge.

    He'd been a tough, generally successful prosecutor versus range of alleged/convicted malefactors. Including cases of domestic violence.

    This record, backed up by wide variety of impressive testimonials & endorsements, proved to be highly persuasive with voters across the political spectrum, from wack to woke and back.

    Criminal barristers in England & Wales have to work both sides of the fence so they can all be accused of being both tough and soft on crime.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,798
    edited June 2023

    Don't make me laugh. He makes a Truss interview look like Princess Diana visiting landmine victims. She is awkward but struggles through and gives real answers. He's by turns pompous, repetitious, patronising and hostile. Toxic.
    Sunak gave a real answer, if one you probably don't like. "Yes." Sunak thinks the BoE is doing the right thing.

    It's actually one of his better interviews. A low bar admittedly.

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,875

    Can't we agree that they're both pretty dreadful?

    Truss had a policy platform which boiled down to finding the Downing Street "Do Not Press This Button" button and pressing it with all her might. She was also pretty peculiar in her public speaking.

    Sunak's policies are sensible, realistic, albeit dismal- I do think that to argue against them is to argue against arithmetic. But he really can't sell them to the public. That's a particular problem given the thinness of the gruel he has to offer.

    But then, if either of them were any good, would Johnson have had them as senior members of his Cabinet?
    Sunak has an impossible hand to play, and at least he is acting responsibly in the present crisis and will pay an electoral price

    Sunak also warned about Truss policies in the leadership campaign, and he has been proven correct on that score

    I see Sunak more as a technocrat than a politician, and certainly he seems to know the issues but is blind to the politics
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366

    As there was in WW2. And learning the lessons of WW1 we waived a great deal of that under the London Agreement of 1953.
    Very happy to waive any reparations for any emergent democratic regime in Russia to set them up for success. If, however, we get more of the same right wing dictatorship, then we shouldn't forgive a penny.
  • TresTres Posts: 2,775

    Don't make me laugh. He makes a Truss interview look like Princess Diana visiting landmine victims. She is awkward but struggles through and gives real answers. He's by turns pompous, repetitious, patronising and hostile. Toxic.
    Have you forgotten the hilarity of the Truss tour of local radio stations during her brief stint in no 10?
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,078

    Look at this interview with Sunak:

    https://order-order.com/2023/06/25/prime-minister-praises-bank-of-england-and-baileys-track-record-confirms-total-support/

    Can anyone honestly tell me they can bear more than 20 seconds of the groundlessly patronising little turd without wanting to hurl things at the screen? He is disastrous.

    Very poor interview. Sunak is playing out the fag-end of a sleazy, incompetent, rule breaking and corrupt Tory regime.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,787
    DougSeal said:

    Criminal barristers in England & Wales have to work both sides of the fence so they can all be accused of being both tough and soft on crime.
    Does being able to balance a ball on your nose help with this?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,203
    I have just discovered - after 30 years together - that Elton John came to my wife's first ever gig, unannounced.

    The things we keep secret, eh?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,962
    WillG said:

    Very happy to waive any reparations for any emergent democratic regime in Russia to set them up for success. If, however, we get more of the same right wing dictatorship, then we shouldn't forgive a penny.
    You won't know till after the event whether the new regime will or will not be malevolent. Look at Russia's history since the fall of the Soviet Union

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    murali_s said:

    Very poor interview. Sunak is playing out the fag-end of a sleazy, incompetent, rule breaking and corrupt Tory regime.
    The only argument I have there is "fag end".
    Sadly, there's 18 more months of this before they are put out of our misery.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,651

    Does being able to balance a ball on your nose help with this?
    In the context of being an employment lawyer who acts for employers and employees, yes, yes it does. Helps justify my hourly rate.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,651
    Tres said:

    Have you forgotten the hilarity of the Truss tour of local radio stations during her brief stint in no 10?
    Is forgotten all about that! We’ve crammed a lot into 12-months. Brilliant.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,686
    geoffw said:

    You won't know till after the event whether the new regime will or will not be malevolent. Look at Russia's history since the fall of the Soviet Union

    I think given the last 500 years of Russian history its safe to assume the regime will be malevolent.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366

    Can't we agree that they're both pretty dreadful?

    Truss had a policy platform which boiled down to finding the Downing Street "Do Not Press This Button" button and pressing it with all her might. She was also pretty peculiar in her public speaking.

    Sunak's policies are sensible, realistic, albeit dismal- I do think that to argue against them is to argue against arithmetic. But he really can't sell them to the public. That's a particular problem given the thinness of the gruel he has to offer.

    But then, if either of them were any good, would Johnson have had them as senior members of his Cabinet?
    Sunak could be a Bill Clinton level communicator and he couldn't sell policies to the public. After ten years in office, the public stop listening. Especially during a time of economic hardship. And even more after the venality of Boris and the incompetence of Truss, under the same party brand.

    But for all their flaws, there have been two major issues of our time: repulsing COVID and the War in Ukraine. On the first, the Tories oversaw a fantastic vaccine roll-out. On the second, they have been imperilous in leading the united Western stand against Ukraine. The latter at political cost due to the inflationary effects. I will always think positively of them because of those two.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    edited June 2023
    geoffw said:

    You won't know till after the event whether the new regime will or will not be malevolent. Look at Russia's history since the fall of the Soviet Union

    You could extend that back to the Tsars.
    They almost all turned out to be malevolent. Although it wasn't always obvious instantly.
    Honourable exceptions for Alexander II. And Gorbachev.
    About the only two who seemed to factor the welfare of the people into their decision making.

    Edit. @cookie said it earlier, better and more succinctly. As ever.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366
    dixiedean said:

    You could extend that back to the Tsars.
    They almost all turned out to be malevolent. Although it wasn't always obvious instantly.
    Honourable exceptions for Alexander II. And Gorbachev.
    About the only two who seemed to factor the welfare of the people into their decision making.
    Because they have all been autocrats. If a democracy is started there, it may or may not last. But free and fair elections should be the condition for reparations relief.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,410

    Can't we agree that they're both pretty dreadful?

    Truss had a policy platform which boiled down to finding the Downing Street "Do Not Press This Button" button and pressing it with all her might. She was also pretty peculiar in her public speaking.

    Sunak's policies are sensible, realistic, albeit dismal- I do think that to argue against them is to argue against arithmetic. But he really can't sell them to the public. That's a particular problem given the thinness of the gruel he has to offer.

    But then, if either of them were any good, would Johnson have had them as senior members of his Cabinet?
    My comments were related to presentation, not politics. He can't interview or speak publicly - that is a serious issue. Especially when, as you point out, he's selling a s**t sandwich.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    DougSeal said:

    Criminal barristers in England & Wales have to work both sides of the fence so they can all be accused of being both tough and soft on crime.
    How about the guy I posted about earlier, namely Edmund James, QC MP (Liberal) described by The Spectator as (according to wiki) a leader in all actions for seduction, breach of promise of marriage, assault, and false imprisonment, and in all cases that involved the reputation of an actress or a horse.

    But where those civil, not criminal cases?

    Note that unfortunately Edmund James was shortly both ex-QC (first ever disbarred) and ex-MP. However, believe that he might have won MY vote, based on a case where he was counsel for the defense for alleged murderer - and got him off on a technicality.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extradition_case_of_John_Anderson

    Anderson, a slave in Missouri, in 1660 escaped, stabbed and killed a man trying to recapture him, eluded other slave-catchers, and crossed the Detroit River into Canada West (Ontario). Request for extradition ultimately (also timely) rejected in 1861 due to faulty wording of warrant.

    Most significant, albeit unexpected, result of James's advocacy in Anderson's case, was passage of Habeas Corpus Act 1862 by UK parliament denying British courts the right to issue writs of habeas corpus for British colonies or dominions with their own competent courts - a key step on the road from Empire to Commonwealth.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    WillG said:

    Because they have all been autocrats. If a democracy is started there, it may or may not last. But free and fair elections should be the condition for reparations relief.
    And what if a free and fair election results in an autocrat? Or something so unstable that it leads to one?
    Russia has had them before. They tend not to permit a second one within living memory.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,410
    Tres said:

    Have you forgotten the hilarity of the Truss tour of local radio stations during her brief stint in no 10?
    Not at all, I'm taking into account every bit of how butt-arse awful she is at this stuff - he's worse because he actively makes you want to reach for the rotten vegetables even if you liked him at the beginning.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,666
    Everyone enjoyed the cool change this evening?

    One of the great meteorological phenomena: a dry cold front. Wind, rapid drop in temperature and humidity, but no rain.

    The air is currently coursing through our house like super-charged air conditioning.
  • PJHPJH Posts: 775

    Reform's polling is showing wild swings. Are they on 10% (Opinium) or 2% (Ipsos, 3 days earlier)? With such wide disparities I think panel self selection might have come into play so I would tend to place more reliance on Ipsos as the company that doesn't use a panel.
    I don't know anyone who's even heard of Reform. I can't believe much more than 10% of the electorate have heard of them, let alone say they will vote for them. I don't give them a moment's thought and I'm very switched on. Any poll with them above about 4% must be suspect in my view. Unless Farage re-emerges from hiding, in which case all bets are off.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559

    Purpose of "Starmer Labour" is to keep disaffected, esp. pro-Cobryn supporters and lean-ers alienated from and less inclined to vote for Labour candidates.
    That is, the purpose of the phrase "Starmer Labour" etc., etc.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    edited June 2023
    dixiedean said:

    I'm curious why you often use the term "Starmer Labour" rather than simply Labour?
    It's a style thing of yours which jars with me a bit.
    Not that I have any right to stop you.
    Just a bit nosy really.
    It's like saying "Donkeys Beer Korma JIMMY SAVILE PAEDOPHILE!!!! Corbyn Labour" five times over again. Like the key shortcut for a phrase on the CP/M operating system wordprocessor on Amstrad PCWs.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    TimS said:

    Everyone enjoyed the cool change this evening?

    One of the great meteorological phenomena: a dry cold front. Wind, rapid drop in temperature and humidity, but no rain.

    The air is currently coursing through our house like super-charged air conditioning.

    Same here in SE Scotland, but lots of rain. Garden has had a good soak.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    edited June 2023

    Not at all, I'm taking into account every bit of how butt-arse awful she is at this stuff - he's worse because he actively makes you want to reach for the rotten vegetables even if you liked him at the beginning.
    Fact is. The Tories have come up with a halfway acceptably competent leader once in the last eight goes.*
    At what point do they ask themselves that their system isn't working?

    *Whilst appreciating Labour isn't that much better. But at least they have fewer tries at it.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,666
    PJH said:

    I don't know anyone who's even heard of Reform. I can't believe much more than 10% of the electorate have heard of them, let alone say they will vote for them. I don't give them a moment's thought and I'm very switched on. Any poll with them above about 4% must be suspect in my view. Unless Farage re-emerges from hiding, in which case all bets are off.
    Real elections suggest Refuk is on closer to 2% than 10%. I think Ref is what disgruntled right wingers reach for when they can’t quite admit they’ll actually vote conservative or just not vote at all.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617
    Farooq said:

    I'd forgotten about the donkeys.
    And there's the illegal ice creams. Starmer is clearly some kind of knotted-handkerchief Carry On villain.
    I'd forgotten about the ice-creams!
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,410
    dixiedean said:

    Fact is. The Tories have come up with a halfway acceptably competent leader once in the last eight goes.*
    At what point do they ask themselves that their system isn't working?

    *Whilst appreciating Labour isn't that much better. But at least they have had fewer tries at it.
    May we know which one are you counting as the halfway competent one?
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,378
    J
    @Beyond_Topline
    All the evidence on public opinion on Brexit points towards closer integration in the medium term IMO.

    After another 5 years of demographic churn, it feels very likely that the 2028/9 Labour manifesto will include some kind of step change in the relationship.

    I suspect Cons will acquiesce at that point too, because by the 2030s a huge proportion of Brexit voters will no longer be with us, and they certainly aren't being replaced by Remainers changing their minds and becoming Brexiteers. This is one issue that feels very cohort based.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617

    May we know which one are you counting as the halfway competent one?
    John Major.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    edited June 2023
    TimS said:

    Everyone enjoyed the cool change this evening?

    One of the great meteorological phenomena: a dry cold front. Wind, rapid drop in temperature and humidity, but no rain.

    The air is currently coursing through our house like super-charged air conditioning.

    It absolutely pissed down here for a couple of hours. No wind either.
    But, yes. It's cooled down a bit.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,109
    Enjoying the Elton John concert.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,157

    My comments were related to presentation, not politics. He can't interview or speak publicly - that is a serious issue. Especially when, as you point out, he's selling a s**t sandwich.
    Too much too soon- a decade ago, he wasn't even a candidate, so he's not really had time to get good, and you can't really do it once you're in the spotlight. (Leaders of the opposition can to a degree, but PMs are too exposed too much of the time.)

    Shame really. Had his rise not been so meteoric, he'd have had a decent shot at LotO in 2028ish and PM in 2033, and he could have Been His Own Man. Instead, he's become PM now and nobody can take that away from him... but he's got a lousy hand and insufficent skills to play it as well as it can be played.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,651
    edited June 2023

    How about the guy I posted about earlier, namely Edmund James, QC MP (Liberal) described by The Spectator as (according to wiki) a leader in all actions for seduction, breach of promise of marriage, assault, and false imprisonment, and in all cases that involved the reputation of an actress or a horse.

    But where those civil, not criminal cases?

    Note that unfortunately Edmund James was shortly both ex-QC (first ever disbarred) and ex-MP. However, believe that he might have won MY vote, based on a case where he was counsel for the defense for alleged murderer - and got him off on a technicality.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extradition_case_of_John_Anderson

    Anderson, a slave in Missouri, in 1660 escaped, stabbed and killed a man trying to recapture him, eluded other slave-catchers, and crossed the Detroit River into Canada West (Ontario). Request for extradition ultimately (also timely) rejected in 1861 due to faulty wording of warrant.

    Most significant, albeit unexpected, result of James's advocacy in Anderson's case, was passage of Habeas Corpus Act 1862 by UK parliament denying British courts the right to issue writs of habeas corpus for British colonies or dominions with their own competent courts - a key step on the road from Empire to Commonwealth.
    You can get a reputation for one or the other, Starmer was appointed DPP for a reason, but as a junior (ie any barrister not a QC/KC) you get what’s given to you at the independent bar. Traditionally barristers are all self-employed and you might get your instructions from either the Crown or the Defence. You can’t afford to be picky.

    According to Wiki Edwin (tsk!) James QC’s famous cases included -

    -The successful prosecution of poisoner William Palmer in 1856.

    -The successful defence of Simon Bernard, who was tried in 1858 for complicity with Felice Orsini in his plot to assassinate Napoleon III of France.

    - The Canadian appeal case of the fugitive slave John Anderson.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617

    Why doesn’t he just fill your freezer once a year like everyone else in that situation?
    Doesn't produce the right sort of stuff ...
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,109
    TimS said:

    Everyone enjoyed the cool change this evening?

    One of the great meteorological phenomena: a dry cold front. Wind, rapid drop in temperature and humidity, but no rain.

    The air is currently coursing through our house like super-charged air conditioning.

    Yes, happened at about 7:30pm around here.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,666
    edited June 2023
    dixiedean said:

    It absolutely pissed down here for a couple of hours. No wind either.
    But, yes. It's cooled down a bit.
    I realise I’m being a bit London centric here. Classic dry cold front in the South.

    The all time greatest was 30th June 1995. Sea breeze front across the entire midlands and South, 33C to 18C in less than an hour.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    edited June 2023

    May we know which one are you counting as the halfway competent one?
    Cameron. At least for a while. He hauled them back to power. Then to a majority.
    Personally, I don't rate him, and we are suffering from a lot of his policies, but he leapt the competent bar.
    Having a policy, selling it to the public, then implementing it is my baseline for competence.
    Corruption and scandal wasn't great during his time either.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,116
    Andy_JS said:

    Enjoying the Elton John concert.

    Same, but his special,guests aware somewhat underwhelming.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    dixiedean said:

    Fact is. The Tories have come up with a halfway acceptably competent leader once in the last eight goes.*
    At what point do they ask themselves that their system isn't working?

    *Whilst appreciating Labour isn't that much better. But at least they have fewer tries at it.
    Stability, or at least something appearing to approach it - contrasted with instability, from party for whom stability was once both core virtue and key vote-catcher.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    DougSeal said:

    You can get a reputation for one or the other, Starmer was appointed DPP for a reason, but as a junior (ie any barrister not a QC/KC) you get what’s given to you at the independent bar. Traditionally barristers are all self-employed and you might get your instructions from either the Crown or the Defence. You can’t afford to be picky.

    According to Wiki Edwin (tsk!) James QC’s famous cases included -

    -The successful prosecution of poisoner William Palmer in 1856.

    -The successful defence of Simon Bernard, who was tried in 1858 for complicity with Felice Orsini in his plot to assassinate Napoleon III of France.

    - The Canadian appeal case of the fugitive slave John Anderson.
    Same as with most professions, aside from the top 10% or so . . . and even for them more than you'd think.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,866
    dixiedean said:

    Cameron. At least for a while. He hauled them back to power. Then to a majority.
    Personally, I don't rate him, and we are suffering from a lot of his policies, but he leapt the competent bar.
    Having a policy, selling it to the public, then implementing it is my baseline for competence.
    Corruption and scandal wasn't great during his time either.
    By the same measure I'd count Kinnock as competent, too. He had a policy. Reform the Labour Party. He sold it to the Party, and, to an extent, the public. And implemented it so successfully that Smith and then Blair weren't really behind in the polls for a decade plus for any length of time.
    It's not necessarily about electoral success.
    A Johnson could achieve the first two easily. He just had no idea, nor interest in how to implement any of his (political) fantasies.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,060
    I think the weather has been amazing the last few weeks. Even a bit of rain to fill up the pond for the horses field
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,217
    Since some of you are more interested in Hunter Biden than I am, here's commentary from Jonathan Turley that seems insightful: https://jonathanturley.org/2023/06/25/the-designated-defendant-was-hunter-biden-always-expected-to-be-the-fail-guy/

    "Below is my column in the Messenger on the curious role of Hunter Biden as the “designated defendant” of the Biden family. Throughout the years of influence peddling and millions in transfers to various Biden associates and family members, Hunter remained the frontman. He is now expected to face accountability for these dealings. He even complained to his daughter in 2019 that he was being sued. Telling her that “It’s really hard. But don’t worry, unlike Pop [Joe], I won’t make you give me half your salary.” While he will get off light, he will be expected to take 100 percent of any accountability as his father repeatedly says how “proud” he is of his son."

    (The Bidens remind me -- a bit -- of the old Daley machine. The original Daley saw nothing wrong with family and friends making money from the city, but might sacrifice someone, if necessary.

    I would be interested to learn how Hunter got so screwed up -- but not enough to do any serious research on the subject.)
  • MiklosvarMiklosvar Posts: 1,855
    Carnyx said:

    Doesn't produce the right sort of stuff ...
    If it's bigger than a tenth of an acre it should be asking 80 per week or per month I would have thought.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,641
    Elton John leading the way at the top of the league, no change since 1971 👍
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,109
    I was hoping he would sing Song For Guy and Part Time Love.
This discussion has been closed.