This could be suboptimal for the SNP in an election year – politicalbetting.com

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

rottenborough said:

Sophy Ridge
@SophyRidgeSky
·
1h
🚨🚨
@montie
says that given the conversations with Conservative MPs he’s having, he thinks there will be a leadership challenge to Rishi Sunak after the local elections in two weeks … and the PM might be wise to call one himself

https://twitter.com/SophyRidgeSky/status/1781039207600787963

If Tim Montgomerie is so utterly dumb or so blinkered by his own hatred of Sunak that he doesn't know Sunak *can't* call a leadership election himself then I don't think his views are worth much.

To be fair to Montie in the past he has suggested this and that Sunak gets his supporters to send in letters to trigger than leadership election.

Even by his low standards that's a ludicrous suggestion again born of a desire to be rid of Sunak that goes past what little reason he has. No leader with any sense forces a vote of confidence as it usually leaves them fatally damaged anyway.

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

God I love Brexiteers.

Criticising Starmer for not overturning one of the key things of the Brexit platform, stopping free movement.

I didn't vote to end Free Movement. I was a Liberal Leaver and voted for sovereignty, democracy and an end to interfering EU laws. Free Movement didn't bother me, I liked it, I liked the opportunities it offered, especially to our young people, and theirs, too.

Quite a few people voted along the same lines as me. If you look at polling, soveriegnty and democracy came ahead of migratiio in Leave voters' concerns. Of course many did vote Leave because of FoM, and I respect that choice, even if I don't share it

This is shite politics from Starmer. Either he is lying when he doesn't need to, or he really is Teresa May Mark 2, and he believes this, which is a calamity

But you're not the Leave campaign, you're one of seventeen million Brexit voters, the Leave campaign made ending freedom of movement a key part of their campaign.

TheScreamingEagles said:

RochdalePioneers said:

ydoethur said:

rottenborough said:

Sophy Ridge
@SophyRidgeSky
·
1h
🚨🚨
@montie
says that given the conversations with Conservative MPs he’s having, he thinks there will be a leadership challenge to Rishi Sunak after the local elections in two weeks … and the PM might be wise to call one himself

https://twitter.com/SophyRidgeSky/status/1781039207600787963

If Tim Montgomerie is so utterly dumb or so blinkered by his own hatred of Sunak that he doesn't know Sunak *can't* call a leadership election himself then I don't think his views are worth much.

Do I have it right that Hague changed the rules to stop another Major put up or shut up performance?

Yes but there is a theoretical work around.

Seriously though. Of course there will be a challenge if they get the expected beating in a few weeks. Whether they manage to get the letters to do it properly - or the votes to topple him - remains to be seen.

A late June election really could be on. Because the alternative is a save summer of rats biting each other in the sack.

Or is that just a description of what Tory MPs get up?

We have twelve jurors in the Trump case, plus one alternate. Looks like the case could open Monday.

Andy_JS said:

Official Tory majority in the Commons is down from 80 at the general election to 42 now. I wonder if the same thing would have happened if they'd started off with a majority of around 40.

And only 52 letters required now.

Dumbosaurus said:

@RochdalePioneers I sent you a question about fruit and veg varieties the other day, did you see it? (It may have looked like the ramblings of a maniac so fine if you don't respond, just want to check it actually got to you...)

[looks at symbols at the top of the page] Oooh so yo did! Sorry!

Not my area of expertise, sorry. I would be interested in any answer you found!

Neil Henderson
@hendopolis
TELEGRAPH: PM vows to end ‘sicknote culture’

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1781062882697834718


no you wont mate, because you are done and will be in California by this time next year.

He's a wooden prevaricator and a weather vane bereft of originality

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

God I love Brexiteers.

Criticising Starmer for not overturning one of the key things of the Brexit platform, stopping free movement.

I didn't vote to end Free Movement. I was a Liberal Leaver and voted for sovereignty, democracy and an end to interfering EU laws. Free Movement didn't bother me, I liked it, I liked the opportunities it offered, especially to our young people, and theirs, too.

Quite a few people voted along the same lines as me. If you look at polling, soveriegnty and democracy came ahead of migratiio in Leave voters' concerns. Of course many did vote Leave because of FoM, and I respect that choice, even if I don't share it

This is shite politics from Starmer. Either he is lying when he doesn't need to, or he really is Teresa May Mark 2, and he believes this, which is a calamity

But you're not the Leave campaign, you're one of seventeen million Brexit voters, the Leave campaign made ending freedom of movement a key part of their campaign.

You're a Remainer, why not just take the W. The EU is generously offering to restore a form of Free Movement for the young. It's not Rejoin but it is a jolly nice idea. And what is Labour's response? "Fuck off it crosses our Brexit Red Lines"

I mean, my God, the stupidity. I woildn't blame the EU for saying Fuck that then, and never offering it again

It's not their Brexit Red Lines, it is the Red Lines the voters chose.

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

God I love Brexiteers.

Criticising Starmer for not overturning one of the key things of the Brexit platform, stopping free movement.

I didn't vote to end Free Movement. I was a Liberal Leaver and voted for sovereignty, democracy and an end to interfering EU laws. Free Movement didn't bother me, I liked it, I liked the opportunities it offered, especially to our young people, and theirs, too.

Quite a few people voted along the same lines as me. If you look at polling, soveriegnty and democracy came ahead of migratiio in Leave voters' concerns. Of course many did vote Leave because of FoM, and I respect that choice, even if I don't share it

This is shite politics from Starmer. Either he is lying when he doesn't need to, or he really is Teresa May Mark 2, and he believes this, which is a calamity

But you're not the Leave campaign, you're one of seventeen million Brexit voters, the Leave campaign made ending freedom of movement a key part of their campaign.

You're a Remainer, why not just take the W. The EU is generously offering to restore a form of Free Movement for the young. It's not Rejoin but it is a jolly nice idea. And what is Labour's response? "Fuck off it crosses our Brexit Red Lines"

I mean, my God, the stupidity. I woildn't blame the EU for saying Fuck that then, and never offering it again

The problem is (and no insult intended) you're a bit manic in your views.

Not sure if its before or after the lagershed wherever you are, but I can just as equally imagine you being completely livid with Starmer if he had said straight away he agreed with this.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

God I love Brexiteers.

Criticising Starmer for not overturning one of the key things of the Brexit platform, stopping free movement.

I didn't vote to end Free Movement. I was a Liberal Leaver and voted for sovereignty, democracy and an end to interfering EU laws. Free Movement didn't bother me, I liked it, I liked the opportunities it offered, especially to our young people, and theirs, too.

Quite a few people voted along the same lines as me. If you look at polling, soveriegnty and democracy came ahead of migratiio in Leave voters' concerns. Of course many did vote Leave because of FoM, and I respect that choice, even if I don't share it

This is shite politics from Starmer. Either he is lying when he doesn't need to, or he really is Teresa May Mark 2, and he believes this, which is a calamity

But you're not the Leave campaign, you're one of seventeen million Brexit voters, the Leave campaign made ending freedom of movement a key part of their campaign.

You're a Remainer, why not just take the W. The EU is generously offering to restore a form of Free Movement for the young. It's not Rejoin but it is a jolly nice idea. And what is Labour's response? "Fuck off it crosses our Brexit Red Lines"

I mean, my God, the stupidity. I woildn't blame the EU for saying Fuck that then, and never offering it again

It's not their Brexit Red Lines, it is the Red Lines the voters chose.

///who.fucking.cares

Are the Remainers so horribly bitter they won't take this because it might make Brexit work better? Is that it? Is that the psychology? I wonder if that it what is going on here, because otherwise I am genuinely mystified

I bet 65% of the country would be very happy with this, maybe more. Free Movement fir young people! Love and freedom!

Yet Starmer is such a twat he's not just ruling it out he is *rebuffing* it "because it crosses my Brexit Red Lines". What Brexit red lines?? He was in favour of overturning the bloody vote!

I fear he is going to be a catastrophically bad prime minister, this is not a good sign

TheScreamingEagles said:

Stuartinromford said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

God I love Brexiteers.

Criticising Starmer for not overturning one of the key things of the Brexit platform, stopping free movement.

Ah, but which Brexit platform? I suspect that some Brexit backers hated having to rely on the anti-immigration vote to get their dream over the line.

See, I could embarrass so many Leavers when I remind them of their comments to this.

But that's what we have now.

Free trade agreement. ✅
No free movement. ✅
No budget contributions. ✅
No supremacy of EU law. ✅

Which part of that didn't come true?

Foxy said:

This is surely tweet of the week and a cracking example of free movement, albeit non EU...

https://twitter.com/MarinaPurkiss/status/1781042377999761550?t=k5XfCz_Rg34x6mDDpdPniA&s=19

Proving that we need immigrants to do the jobs us Brits don’t want to do…

So, has anyone here discussed their prostitute's immigration status with them?

O/T

The Triggernometry guys talking to Jimmy Carr.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voXqQYmQNTM

BartholomewRoberts said:

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

God I love Brexiteers.

Criticising Starmer for not overturning one of the key things of the Brexit platform, stopping free movement.

I didn't vote to end Free Movement. I was a Liberal Leaver and voted for sovereignty, democracy and an end to interfering EU laws. Free Movement didn't bother me, I liked it, I liked the opportunities it offered, especially to our young people, and theirs, too.

Quite a few people voted along the same lines as me. If you look at polling, soveriegnty and democracy came ahead of migratiio in Leave voters' concerns. Of course many did vote Leave because of FoM, and I respect that choice, even if I don't share it

This is shite politics from Starmer. Either he is lying when he doesn't need to, or he really is Teresa May Mark 2, and he believes this, which is a calamity

But you're not the Leave campaign, you're one of seventeen million Brexit voters, the Leave campaign made ending freedom of movement a key part of their campaign.

You're a Remainer, why not just take the W. The EU is generously offering to restore a form of Free Movement for the young. It's not Rejoin but it is a jolly nice idea. And what is Labour's response? "Fuck off it crosses our Brexit Red Lines"

I mean, my God, the stupidity. I woildn't blame the EU for saying Fuck that then, and never offering it again

The problem is (and no insult intended) you're a bit manic in your views.

Not sure if its before or after the lagershed wherever you are, but I can just as equally imagine you being completely livid with Starmer if he had said straight away he agreed with this.

No I wouldn't. I never cared about FoM. As soon as I heard this I thought "great, let's do it". Indeed I presumed Labour would seize on it eagerly and say Yes - go look at my comments

But they are "rebuffing it". I got them completely wrong. I am now left HOPING that Starmer is just a liar. My fear is that he will be a retread of Teresa May

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

God I love Brexiteers.

Criticising Starmer for not overturning one of the key things of the Brexit platform, stopping free movement.

I didn't vote to end Free Movement. I was a Liberal Leaver and voted for sovereignty, democracy and an end to interfering EU laws. Free Movement didn't bother me, I liked it, I liked the opportunities it offered, especially to our young people, and theirs, too.

Quite a few people voted along the same lines as me. If you look at polling, soveriegnty and democracy came ahead of migratiio in Leave voters' concerns. Of course many did vote Leave because of FoM, and I respect that choice, even if I don't share it

This is shite politics from Starmer. Either he is lying when he doesn't need to, or he really is Teresa May Mark 2, and he believes this, which is a calamity

But you're not the Leave campaign, you're one of seventeen million Brexit voters, the Leave campaign made ending freedom of movement a key part of their campaign.

You're a Remainer, why not just take the W. The EU is generously offering to restore a form of Free Movement for the young. It's not Rejoin but it is a jolly nice idea. And what is Labour's response? "Fuck off it crosses our Brexit Red Lines"

I mean, my God, the stupidity. I woildn't blame the EU for saying Fuck that then, and never offering it again

It's not their Brexit Red Lines, it is the Red Lines the voters chose.

///who.fucking.cares

Are the Remainers so horribly bitter they won't take this because it might make Brexit work better? Is that it? Is that the psychology? I wonder if that it what is going on here, because otherwise I am genuinely mystified

I bet 65% of the country would be very happy with this, maybe more. Free Movement fir young people! Love and freedom!

Yet Starmer is such a twat he's not just ruling it out he is *rebuffing* it "because it crosses my Brexit Red Lines". What Brexit red lines?? He was in favour of overturning the bloody vote!

I fear he is going to be a catastrophically bad prime minister, this is not a good sign

In comparison to the past few, quite a decent one then.
It's all relative.

bigjohnowls said:

geoffw said:

He's a wooden prevaricator and a weather vane bereft of originality

SKS fans please explain

Is shorter

RobD said:

Foxy said:

This is surely tweet of the week and a cracking example of free movement, albeit non EU...

https://twitter.com/MarinaPurkiss/status/1781042377999761550?t=k5XfCz_Rg34x6mDDpdPniA&s=19

Proving that we need immigrants to do the jobs us Brits don’t want to do…

So, has anyone here discussed their prostitute's immigration status with them?

Our top prostitute connoisseur prefers foreign ones, but partakes abroad.

TheScreamingEagles said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Stuartinromford said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

God I love Brexiteers.

Criticising Starmer for not overturning one of the key things of the Brexit platform, stopping free movement.

Ah, but which Brexit platform? I suspect that some Brexit backers hated having to rely on the anti-immigration vote to get their dream over the line.

See, I could embarrass so many Leavers when I remind them of their comments to this.

But that's what we have now.

Free trade agreement. ✅
No free movement. ✅
No budget contributions. ✅
No supremacy of EU law. ✅

Which part of that didn't come true?

EU law has supremacy in some areas.

The Free Trade Agreement really isn't which has led to bullshit like this

The UK government has told the country’s port authorities that it will not “turn on” critical health and safety checks for EU imports when post-Brexit border controls begin this month because of the risk of “significant disruption”.

In a presentation seen by the Financial Times, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) outlined a plan to avoid queues of lorries at ports, revealing that if the new border measures were implemented as planned big delays could follow. 

Since announcing new border controls on plant and food products last year the government has promised it would “phase in” checks, which trade groups have warned will hurt small businesses and drive up the price of food. 

However, just over a fortnight before physical inspections are set to begin, the presentation last week made clear that the new border systems will not be fully ready.

In order to get around the problem, the government said it would ensure the rate of checks was initially “set to zero for all commodity groups” — essentially switching off large parts of the risk management system, in what it called a “phased implementation approach”. 

Implementation of the new border controls has been postponed five times since 2021, which has left EU exporters of animal and plant products free to send them to the UK without checks. 

https://www.ft.com/content/ba197465-65d1-4745-80a6-d50a8d19ef48

Yes, we were discussing this earlier. We should recognise EU rules as being equivalent, which is not unusual in free trade agreements, and never implement these controls is my personal opinion.

Either way though, we have a free trade agreement. Your pretending we don't is like Scott pretending that Brexit isn't done.

All 4 of those claims came true. You may not like how they came true, but that doesn't mean they didn't.

bigjohnowls said:

geoffw said:

He's a wooden prevaricator and a weather vane bereft of originality

SKS fans please explain

Based on the polls he's about to lead Labour to their greatest ever victory.

stodge said:

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

turbotubbs said:

Leon said:

Can it really be the case that Labour are ruling out youth mobility with the EU and the Tories are welcoming it?

wtf is wrong with Starmer? Is he that frit?

Genuinely I think he is. He will do whatever it takes to get over the line.

The thing is as he's already shown when he told the Corbynites he'd implement their policies if he became leader, then dumped them the second he was elected, Starmer has no integrity or principles and will say and do anything to be elected.

Once he's elected, he can do whatever he pleases.

He could sign up to youth mobility, or even full free movement, or nothing at all.

Whatever he says now while seeking to be elected has no resemblance to what he'll do once elected.

This feels like Starmer’s first massive unforced error. He’s completely misjudged the national mood

So this is the issue which will bring the voters flocking back to the Conservatives?

Seriously - "misjudged the public mood" - yeah, right.

Probably not, but it’s stupid.

I mean look, it has got me agreeing with Leon.

turbotubbs said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Stuartinromford said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

God I love Brexiteers.

Criticising Starmer for not overturning one of the key things of the Brexit platform, stopping free movement.

Ah, but which Brexit platform? I suspect that some Brexit backers hated having to rely on the anti-immigration vote to get their dream over the line.

See, I could embarrass so many Leavers when I remind them of their comments to this.

But that's what we have now.

Free trade agreement. ✅
No free movement. ✅
No budget contributions. ✅
No supremacy of EU law. ✅

Which part of that didn't come true?

EU law has supremacy in some areas.

The Free Trade Agreement really isn't which has led to bullshit like this

The UK government has told the country’s port authorities that it will not “turn on” critical health and safety checks for EU imports when post-Brexit border controls begin this month because of the risk of “significant disruption”.

In a presentation seen by the Financial Times, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) outlined a plan to avoid queues of lorries at ports, revealing that if the new border measures were implemented as planned big delays could follow. 

Since announcing new border controls on plant and food products last year the government has promised it would “phase in” checks, which trade groups have warned will hurt small businesses and drive up the price of food. 

However, just over a fortnight before physical inspections are set to begin, the presentation last week made clear that the new border systems will not be fully ready.

In order to get around the problem, the government said it would ensure the rate of checks was initially “set to zero for all commodity groups” — essentially switching off large parts of the risk management system, in what it called a “phased implementation approach”. 

Implementation of the new border controls has been postponed five times since 2021, which has left EU exporters of animal and plant products free to send them to the UK without checks. 

https://www.ft.com/content/ba197465-65d1-4745-80a6-d50a8d19ef48

I think to most people free trade means no tariffs. We have that. We don’t have frictionless trade.

But we do have tariffs thanks to Brexit.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68688486

RochdalePioneers said:

Dumbosaurus said:

@RochdalePioneers I sent you a question about fruit and veg varieties the other day, did you see it? (It may have looked like the ramblings of a maniac so fine if you don't respond, just want to check it actually got to you...)

[looks at symbols at the top of the page] Oooh so yo did! Sorry!

Not my area of expertise, sorry. I would be interested in any answer you found!

Ta - to throw it open to the floor just on the offchance anyone else may know ( @TimS ?) - much fruit & veg you buy has a specified variety - either printed on the packaging if you bought it that way or depending on where you got it from loose possibly on the boxes or something.

This is massively important. A simple example - most green grapes you buy in the UK are from my observation the "Thompson" variety. That's absolutely shit. Shouldn't be called a grape.

If you see a grape variety beginning "IFG" though then you're almost certainly on to a winner. In that particular case IFG are a conglomerate that specialise in awesome grape seeds or something I think.

Sometimes it can be more complicated - Tang Gold is the current easy peeler variety in M&S for example but you have to be a bit careful about the ones you pick (pro tip - go for skin with a bit of air in).

All of the above is self taught because I cannot find any proper resource for fruit & veg varieties and the pros/cons thereof.

You do get specific varieties being marketed occasionally (an obvious one is Pink Lady apples) but generally the varieties are just printed on the label with no further info. Probably most people don't even notice them. But surely they're being printed for a reason? Signals to those "in the know"?

How do I get in the know?

RobD said:

Foxy said:

This is surely tweet of the week and a cracking example of free movement, albeit non EU...

https://twitter.com/MarinaPurkiss/status/1781042377999761550?t=k5XfCz_Rg34x6mDDpdPniA&s=19

Proving that we need immigrants to do the jobs us Brits don’t want to do…

So, has anyone here discussed their prostitute's immigration status with them?

I for one have never had sex with anyone who has refused entry.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Well...

Angela Rayner is facing fresh questions after her eldest child was listed on the electoral roll at the home where she has insisted she did not live.

Public documents, seen by The Times, show Rayner’s son, then in his late teens, living in Stockport with his stepfather rather than with the Labour deputy leader. At the time, in 2014, Rayner was listed on the electoral roll at another former council home, about a mile away, that she has insisted was her “principal property”.

Social media photographs from the period show her son’s bedroom at the Lowndes Lane property where he was registered, owned by Mark Rayner, who was then her husband. Neighbours claimed they heard her older son practising drums, and that the family received a grant to removate the house so it would better accommodate her younger disabled son.

Greater Manchester police are investigating allegations that Rayner supplied incorrect information to the electoral register when she lived between the two houses in Stockport in the 2010s.

There is no suggestion her son has done anything wrong.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/angela-rayner-council-house-eldest-child-electoral-roll-6cjzd2ckb

Her five year old son was on the electoral roll? Who did he vote for?

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

It is going to be a quite monumental irony if, in the end, I decide to vote Tory again (even tho I despise them) because the Labour leader is too much of a hardcore dogmatic "red line" Teresa May-esque Brexiteer

We all know you're voting Tory whatever.

I don't. So well done you for knowing my own mind better than me

I HATE this modern Tory party. Talking rightwing but acting left, on almost every issue, they are pathetic and they deserve extinction

But really, this abject nonsense from Starmer on EU Youth Mobility? It makes me despair for our country

Perhaps @TheScreamingEagles could explain what kind of blowjob his metaphor referred to when laughing at the idea of the UK having free trade with the EU post-Brexit as the UK is coloured green in this map as a free trade agreement is now "in force".

The EU itself on its own website refers to it as free trade, indeed saying it "goes beyond traditional free trade agreements". https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/relations-non-eu-countries/relations-united-kingdom/eu-uk-trade-and-cooperation-agreement_en

Must be some pretty good blowjobs and meals we're getting in your eyes TSE.

Leon said:

geoffw said:

Leon said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

stodge said:

Leon said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

turbotubbs said:

Leon said:

Can it really be the case that Labour are ruling out youth mobility with the EU and the Tories are welcoming it?

wtf is wrong with Starmer? Is he that frit?

Genuinely I think he is. He will do whatever it takes to get over the line.

The thing is as he's already shown when he told the Corbynites he'd implement their policies if he became leader, then dumped them the second he was elected, Starmer has no integrity or principles and will say and do anything to be elected.

Once he's elected, he can do whatever he pleases.

He could sign up to youth mobility, or even full free movement, or nothing at all.

Whatever he says now while seeking to be elected has no resemblance to what he'll do once elected.

This feels like Starmer’s first massive unforced error. He’s completely misjudged the national mood

So this is the issue which will bring the voters flocking back to the Conservatives?

Seriously - "misjudged the public mood" - yeah, right.

I’m not saying starmer is going to lose. He’s going to win. I’m saying he didn’t have to do this and he’s played it really badly and it’s storing up an image of him as a duplicitous coward. Unless he actually means it then it makes him a cretin

I suspect most people don't have an "image" of Starmer (apart from those who've already decided they don't like him) other than he's not Rishi Sunak and he's not a Conservative. Granted, that makes him a tabula rasa on which you or I or anyone can project whatever they like.

He's no Blair but there won't be another Blair - we've all become more cynical and aren't going to be taken in by his schtick any more than we would by someone like Boris Johnson.

Starmer is a politician and they often do quite well in politics because they understand how the game is played. "I have no plans for" doesn't mean I definitely won't but I'm not going to at the moment. The classic was Margaret Thatcher's "it is my intention to let my name go forward for the second round" in November 1990 - to most people it was a statement she was going to go for the second round but that's not what she actually said.

Starmer is used to the verbal jousting of the courtroom - that plays well in Westminster but probably less so beyond.

Which is my point. I am presuming this is a convenient lie but I don’t think Starmer needed to lie. Most Brits will like this idea. Free movement for the young. Let them fall in love again!

He’s so terrified of losing the red wall on Brexit he’s made a significant error which was entirely unnecessary

Thing is, his coming out like this simply reveals an inadequate reading of the motivations for Brexit, like he's mouthing the words but not understanding them

I predict Starmer is going to be Teresa May all over again. A convinced and inflexible brexiteer because he’s terrified of his own 2nd vote Remainer past. Look at this terrible headline. It’s a colossal error



My god. They even say “red lines”

I think he just doesn't want to be Theresa May in the sense of giving away a commanding polling lead just before the finish line. So he is ending up being overly cautious absolutely everything.

As a tactic is is very likely to see him over the finish line with a large majority against a tired, unpopular government.

But it will mean his room for manoeuvre in office will be limited.

Francois Hollande is who Starmer needs to avoid turning into. A dull left of centre government who gets nothing done and so gets turfed out at the first opportunity for someone who actually wants to attempt to implement reform to improve things.

.

viewcode said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Well...

Angela Rayner is facing fresh questions after her eldest child was listed on the electoral roll at the home where she has insisted she did not live.

Public documents, seen by The Times, show Rayner’s son, then in his late teens, living in Stockport with his stepfather rather than with the Labour deputy leader. At the time, in 2014, Rayner was listed on the electoral roll at another former council home, about a mile away, that she has insisted was her “principal property”.

Social media photographs from the period show her son’s bedroom at the Lowndes Lane property where he was registered, owned by Mark Rayner, who was then her husband. Neighbours claimed they heard her older son practising drums, and that the family received a grant to removate the house so it would better accommodate her younger disabled son.

Greater Manchester police are investigating allegations that Rayner supplied incorrect information to the electoral register when she lived between the two houses in Stockport in the 2010s.

There is no suggestion her son has done anything wrong.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/angela-rayner-council-house-eldest-child-electoral-roll-6cjzd2ckb

Her five year old son was on the electoral roll? Who did he vote for?

Five? "Public documents, seen by The Times, show Rayner’s son, then in his late teens..."

dixiedean said:

rottenborough said:

Sunak is talking utter bollx.

GPs only initial provide a sick note (or fit note as it is now named in Orwellian fashion).

If someone needs to be off long term sick and claim ESA benefit then GP is nothing to do with it after the initial short period. Sunak says crack new specialist teams will assess people. They already do you ignorant twat. In fact your government pays them millions every year to do these assessments which ill and disabled people loath because they are so utterly shite and badly carried out.

Even Johnson was better than this spreadsheet loving idiot.

Are they the same as the crack army of supply teachers who would break strikes?
We have full employment.
There isn't a body of specialist anyone available.
Especially on the pittance a Tory government with no concept of market forces offers.

So increase wages, increase productivity, let unproductive businesses that can't cope with higher wages go out of business and let living standards improve because we are earning more as we're more productive.

That's the only way to reach an equilibrium.

Importing more people to fill vacancies no more works than importing people allows them to "steal jobs". More people = more demand = more need for employment. There is no fixed number of jobs in a country, jobs are proportional to population, its wages that determines equilibrium not quantity of people.

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

It is going to be a quite monumental irony if, in the end, I decide to vote Tory again (even tho I despise them) because the Labour leader is too much of a hardcore dogmatic "red line" Teresa May-esque Brexiteer

We all know you're voting Tory whatever.

I don't. So well done you for knowing my own mind better than me

I HATE this modern Tory party. Talking rightwing but acting left, on almost every issue, they are pathetic and they deserve extinction

But really, this abject nonsense from Starmer on EU Youth Mobility? It makes me despair for our country

I agree it's a bad decision if true - I'd still like to see an actual statement from Labour to convince me they are really taking that stance - all I've seen is indirect reports.

The Russian ambassador to the UN is speaking atm. Not sure what he's talking about because Sky News cut away just after I started watching.

RobD said:

Foxy said:

This is surely tweet of the week and a cracking example of free movement, albeit non EU...

https://twitter.com/MarinaPurkiss/status/1781042377999761550?t=k5XfCz_Rg34x6mDDpdPniA&s=19

Proving that we need immigrants to do the jobs us Brits don’t want to do…

So, has anyone here discussed their prostitute's immigration status with them?

Where did you come from?

TheScreamingEagles said:

What a shameful piece of shit Liz Truss is, if Corbyn used this defence he would have been rightly pummelled for repeating a well known antisemitic trope.

A spokesman for Truss said: “Liz came across the quote and thought it was a useful way of illustrating a point about the Bank of England. Numerous online sources have stated that it was attributed it to Rothschild, so she attributed it thus.”

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/liz-trusss-new-book-includes-false-rothschild-quote-about-control-of-money-jsy4f6k8

Hell hath no fury like an editor scorned?

viewcode said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Well...

Angela Rayner is facing fresh questions after her eldest child was listed on the electoral roll at the home where she has insisted she did not live.

Public documents, seen by The Times, show Rayner’s son, then in his late teens, living in Stockport with his stepfather rather than with the Labour deputy leader. At the time, in 2014, Rayner was listed on the electoral roll at another former council home, about a mile away, that she has insisted was her “principal property”.

Social media photographs from the period show her son’s bedroom at the Lowndes Lane property where he was registered, owned by Mark Rayner, who was then her husband. Neighbours claimed they heard her older son practising drums, and that the family received a grant to removate the house so it would better accommodate her younger disabled son.

Greater Manchester police are investigating allegations that Rayner supplied incorrect information to the electoral register when she lived between the two houses in Stockport in the 2010s.

There is no suggestion her son has done anything wrong.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/angela-rayner-council-house-eldest-child-electoral-roll-6cjzd2ckb

Her five year old son was on the electoral roll? Who did he vote for?

Victoria Freeman
@v_j_freeman
·
11h
Angela Rayner’s tax affairs are a bit murky but going hard on them when you know you’ve got an MP embroiled in a rent boy chem sex blackmail party funds embezzlement imbroglio is too much. Just go away. You’re done.

https://twitter.com/v_j_freeman/status/1780881195745608009

Neil Henderson
@hendopolis
·
9m
EXPRESS. PM tells sick note Britain: get a grip and a job #TomorrowsPapersToday

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1781068852824084576

I see Sunak is back on his "vowing" to do X, Y or Z routine!

Everybody can see he can't deliver on a single thing he vows.

rottenborough said:

Neil Henderson
@hendopolis
·
9m
EXPRESS. PM tells sick note Britain: get a grip and a job #TomorrowsPapersToday

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1781068852824084576

What about Carriage Clock Britain?

(Do people still get given Carriage Clocks when they retire? Either way, seems like a significant pool of untapped labour.)

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

It is going to be a quite monumental irony if, in the end, I decide to vote Tory again (even tho I despise them) because the Labour leader is too much of a hardcore dogmatic "red line" Teresa May-esque Brexiteer

We all know you're voting Tory whatever.

I don't. So well done you for knowing my own mind better than me

I HATE this modern Tory party. Talking rightwing but acting left, on almost every issue, they are pathetic and they deserve extinction

But really, this abject nonsense from Starmer on EU Youth Mobility? It makes me despair for our country

I agree it's a bad decision if true - I'd still like to see an actual statement from Labour to convince me they are really taking that stance - all I've seen is indirect reports.

The FT headline, which I have screenshot below, is pretty clear. Labour are rebuffing this generous offer because it "crosses their Brexit red lines"

I am praying this is a tactical error which they will amend when they realise what a misjudgment it is, let's hope that is the case; I fear Starmer really means it because he is genuinely cowardly and careerist. Fucksake!

I presume because the FT are putting it in those terms they have something concrete from Labour but where's the official Labour statement?

It's almost certainly wishful thinking on my part, I get that, but it has been known for the press to inflate or interpret a position. BBC notes that 'Labour has said it has "no plans for a youth mobility scheme" if it wins the general election later this year' which I could well believe but isn't quite the same as the FT's 'red lines' stance.

Time will tell, I guess.

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

It is going to be a quite monumental irony if, in the end, I decide to vote Tory again (even tho I despise them) because the Labour leader is too much of a hardcore dogmatic "red line" Teresa May-esque Brexiteer

We all know you're voting Tory whatever.

I don't. So well done you for knowing my own mind better than me

I HATE this modern Tory party. Talking rightwing but acting left, on almost every issue, they are pathetic and they deserve extinction

But really, this abject nonsense from Starmer on EU Youth Mobility? It makes me despair for our country

I agree it's a bad decision if true - I'd still like to see an actual statement from Labour to convince me they are really taking that stance - all I've seen is indirect reports.

The FT headline, which I have screenshot below, is pretty clear. Labour are rebuffing this generous offer because it "crosses their Brexit red lines"

I am praying this is a tactical error which they will amend when they realise what a misjudgment it is, let's hope that is the case; I fear Starmer really means it because he is genuinely cowardly and careerist. Fucksake!

Labour need to grow a pair. Brexit red lines? The country is fucked. Proper fucked. What are they worried about, that a gentle deal to make something less fucked will put people off? Will turn them back towards the Tories?

Bart is One in Ten - the loons who think they can eat sovrinty. Out there in the real world people have tried, they're sick of being gaslit and lied to, and they just want something that works.

Foxy said:

MJW said:

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Leon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

God I love Brexiteers.

Criticising Starmer for not overturning one of the key things of the Brexit platform, stopping free movement.

I didn't vote to end Free Movement. I was a Liberal Leaver and voted for sovereignty, democracy and an end to interfering EU laws. Free Movement didn't bother me, I liked it, I liked the opportunities it offered, especially to our young people, and theirs, too.

Quite a few people voted along the same lines as me. If you look at polling, soveriegnty and democracy came ahead of migratiio in Leave voters' concerns. Of course many did vote Leave because of FoM, and I respect that choice, even if I don't share it

This is shite politics from Starmer. Either he is lying when he doesn't need to, or he really is Teresa May Mark 2, and he believes this, which is a calamity

But you're not the Leave campaign, you're one of seventeen million Brexit voters, the Leave campaign made ending freedom of movement a key part of their campaign.

You're a Remainer, why not just take the W. The EU is generously offering to restore a form of Free Movement for the young. It's not Rejoin but it is a jolly nice idea. And what is Labour's response? "Fuck off it crosses our Brexit Red Lines"

I mean, my God, the stupidity. I woildn't blame the EU for saying Fuck that then, and never offering it again

Isn't it just simple political caution and choreography? You don't snap their hand off because it might have strings that are more awkward politically that could blow up in your face and you may have your own counterproposal.

I suspect Labour are a bit miffed as they'd hope to have more comprehensive look at our arrangements with the EU in 2025 when lots is up for review and they can frame things as having had a seat at the table rather than saying "yes please" at whatever the EU proposes.

Overcautious, perhaps. As someone who has aged out of those who'd benefit post-referendum I'd quite like free movement for more than just the under-30s thank you very much. But not exactly stupid.

There are a few strings attached to the EU offer. No NHS surcharge, pay same fees as English students at Uni etc.

Is that the same fees as English students pay at Scottish universities?

Dumbosaurus said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Dumbosaurus said:

@RochdalePioneers I sent you a question about fruit and veg varieties the other day, did you see it? (It may have looked like the ramblings of a maniac so fine if you don't respond, just want to check it actually got to you...)

[looks at symbols at the top of the page] Oooh so yo did! Sorry!

Not my area of expertise, sorry. I would be interested in any answer you found!

Ta - to throw it open to the floor just on the offchance anyone else may know ( @TimS ?) - much fruit & veg you buy has a specified variety - either printed on the packaging if you bought it that way or depending on where you got it from loose possibly on the boxes or something.

This is massively important. A simple example - most green grapes you buy in the UK are from my observation the "Thompson" variety. That's absolutely shit. Shouldn't be called a grape.

If you see a grape variety beginning "IFG" though then you're almost certainly on to a winner. In that particular case IFG are a conglomerate that specialise in awesome grape seeds or something I think.

Sometimes it can be more complicated - Tang Gold is the current easy peeler variety in M&S for example but you have to be a bit careful about the ones you pick (pro tip - go for skin with a bit of air in).

All of the above is self taught because I cannot find any proper resource for fruit & veg varieties and the pros/cons thereof.

You do get specific varieties being marketed occasionally (an obvious one is Pink Lady apples) but generally the varieties are just printed on the label with no further info. Probably most people don't even notice them. But surely they're being printed for a reason? Signals to those "in the know"?

How do I get in the know?

Afraid I don’t know, but it’s an interesting question. I only really know about wine grapes. When it comes to other fruit, apart from garriguette being the nicest strawberries much of the rest is a mystery. For eating grapes I like muscat varieties, though they do have seeds. Chasselas is also nice, both eating and wine grape.

Though you’re being a bit harsh on Thompson Seedless. It’s actually quite a venerable ancient grape from Asia Minor. Also called by its better known name “Sultana” and used to make dried sultana raisins as well as some Turkish wines.

RochdalePioneers said:

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

It is going to be a quite monumental irony if, in the end, I decide to vote Tory again (even tho I despise them) because the Labour leader is too much of a hardcore dogmatic "red line" Teresa May-esque Brexiteer

We all know you're voting Tory whatever.

I don't. So well done you for knowing my own mind better than me

I HATE this modern Tory party. Talking rightwing but acting left, on almost every issue, they are pathetic and they deserve extinction

But really, this abject nonsense from Starmer on EU Youth Mobility? It makes me despair for our country

I agree it's a bad decision if true - I'd still like to see an actual statement from Labour to convince me they are really taking that stance - all I've seen is indirect reports.

The FT headline, which I have screenshot below, is pretty clear. Labour are rebuffing this generous offer because it "crosses their Brexit red lines"

I am praying this is a tactical error which they will amend when they realise what a misjudgment it is, let's hope that is the case; I fear Starmer really means it because he is genuinely cowardly and careerist. Fucksake!

Labour need to grow a pair. Brexit red lines? The country is fucked. Proper fucked. What are they worried about, that a gentle deal to make something less fucked will put people off? Will turn them back towards the Tories?

Bart is One in Ten - the loons who think they can eat sovrinty. Out there in the real world people have tried, they're sick of being gaslit and lied to, and they just want something that works.

I want something that works too, and Sunak's government is not it.

But the key to getting change is to acknowledge what the problem is.

The problem is not Brexit, the problem is this tired Tory government.

We can get rid of the tired Tory government, there's no reason to go back into a tired, sclerotic EU to do so.

Stuartinromford said:

rottenborough said:

Neil Henderson
@hendopolis
·
9m
EXPRESS. PM tells sick note Britain: get a grip and a job #TomorrowsPapersToday

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1781068852824084576

What about Carriage Clock Britain?

(Do people still get given Carriage Clocks when they retire? Either way, seems like a significant pool of untapped labour.)

Nope. They get even more feather bedding as they are the only ones left voting Tory.

dixiedean said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

dixiedean said:

rottenborough said:

Sunak is talking utter bollx.

GPs only initial provide a sick note (or fit note as it is now named in Orwellian fashion).

If someone needs to be off long term sick and claim ESA benefit then GP is nothing to do with it after the initial short period. Sunak says crack new specialist teams will assess people. They already do you ignorant twat. In fact your government pays them millions every year to do these assessments which ill and disabled people loath because they are so utterly shite and badly carried out.

Even Johnson was better than this spreadsheet loving idiot.

Are they the same as the crack army of supply teachers who would break strikes?
We have full employment.
There isn't a body of specialist anyone available.
Especially on the pittance a Tory government with no concept of market forces offers.

So increase wages, increase productivity, let unproductive businesses that can't cope with higher wages go out of business and let living standards improve because we are earning more as we're more productive.

That's the only way to reach an equilibrium.

Importing more people to fill vacancies no more works than importing people allows them to "steal jobs". More people = more demand = more need for employment. There is no fixed number of jobs in a country, jobs are proportional to population, its wages that determines equilibrium not quantity of people.

We have six staff, which we struggle with as it is. We had two off sick today and one with an appointment this morning.
So staffed at 50%. All three of us were assaulted more than once today. My eye was bleeding. We were told no supply was available. Our employer is the government. They are trying to impose a 2% settlement this year.
It can't go on like this. Statutory documents are being broken every day.
It simply isn't safe.

Yes and how do you change that.

Importing more people to fill the jobs imports more people's kids who need places at schools, which then means more people need to fill the jobs that your colleagues already struggle to fill. Its a never ending loop that can't be broken as jobs and population are proportional to each other.

I'm perfectly fine with immigration, at any volume. It could go up from where it is now and I wouldn't care, but it wouldn't fill any employment gap as it can't, its not possible to do so, since jobs and population are in proportion to each other.

Or we could pay yourself and your colleagues a decent wage that attracts people to fill those vacancies, instead of other jobs, and other less productive and less necessary job roles die off and we reach a new equilibrium.

The problem isn't free movement, or the lack thereof. The problem is paying less than what is required to fill the roles and a 2% settlement makes the problem worse too.

Do you disagree with any of that?

BartholomewRoberts said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

It is going to be a quite monumental irony if, in the end, I decide to vote Tory again (even tho I despise them) because the Labour leader is too much of a hardcore dogmatic "red line" Teresa May-esque Brexiteer

We all know you're voting Tory whatever.

I don't. So well done you for knowing my own mind better than me

I HATE this modern Tory party. Talking rightwing but acting left, on almost every issue, they are pathetic and they deserve extinction

But really, this abject nonsense from Starmer on EU Youth Mobility? It makes me despair for our country

I agree it's a bad decision if true - I'd still like to see an actual statement from Labour to convince me they are really taking that stance - all I've seen is indirect reports.

The FT headline, which I have screenshot below, is pretty clear. Labour are rebuffing this generous offer because it "crosses their Brexit red lines"

I am praying this is a tactical error which they will amend when they realise what a misjudgment it is, let's hope that is the case; I fear Starmer really means it because he is genuinely cowardly and careerist. Fucksake!

Labour need to grow a pair. Brexit red lines? The country is fucked. Proper fucked. What are they worried about, that a gentle deal to make something less fucked will put people off? Will turn them back towards the Tories?

Bart is One in Ten - the loons who think they can eat sovrinty. Out there in the real world people have tried, they're sick of being gaslit and lied to, and they just want something that works.

I want something that works too, and Sunak's government is not it.

But the key to getting change is to acknowledge what the problem is.

The problem is not Brexit, the problem is this tired Tory government.

We can get rid of the tired Tory government, there's no reason to go back into a tired, sclerotic EU to do so.

I agree - Brexit is not the problem, what we have done after Brexit is the problem. But they could do this deal to let students be mobile and we would still have left the EU.

The problem - and you won't like this - is you. Theorists who sit there talking dogmatic nonsense which has zero application in the real world. The political set is still in fear of you lot despite the fact free fun you spout about the real world mechanics of things like trade.

Ah well. The more they listed to you, the more fucked we get, the closer we get to the reality of removing most of these daft self-imposed pain barriers.

TimS said:

Dumbosaurus said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Dumbosaurus said:

@RochdalePioneers I sent you a question about fruit and veg varieties the other day, did you see it? (It may have looked like the ramblings of a maniac so fine if you don't respond, just want to check it actually got to you...)

[looks at symbols at the top of the page] Oooh so yo did! Sorry!

Not my area of expertise, sorry. I would be interested in any answer you found!

Ta - to throw it open to the floor just on the offchance anyone else may know ( @TimS ?) - much fruit & veg you buy has a specified variety - either printed on the packaging if you bought it that way or depending on where you got it from loose possibly on the boxes or something.

This is massively important. A simple example - most green grapes you buy in the UK are from my observation the "Thompson" variety. That's absolutely shit. Shouldn't be called a grape.

If you see a grape variety beginning "IFG" though then you're almost certainly on to a winner. In that particular case IFG are a conglomerate that specialise in awesome grape seeds or something I think.

Sometimes it can be more complicated - Tang Gold is the current easy peeler variety in M&S for example but you have to be a bit careful about the ones you pick (pro tip - go for skin with a bit of air in).

All of the above is self taught because I cannot find any proper resource for fruit & veg varieties and the pros/cons thereof.

You do get specific varieties being marketed occasionally (an obvious one is Pink Lady apples) but generally the varieties are just printed on the label with no further info. Probably most people don't even notice them. But surely they're being printed for a reason? Signals to those "in the know"?

How do I get in the know?

Afraid I don’t know, but it’s an interesting question. I only really know about wine grapes. When it comes to other fruit, apart from garriguette being the nicest strawberries much of the rest is a mystery. For eating grapes I like muscat varieties, though they do have seeds. Chasselas is also nice, both eating and wine grape.

Though you’re being a bit harsh on Thompson Seedless. It’s actually quite a venerable ancient grape from Asia Minor. Also called by its better known name “Sultana” and used to make dried sultana raisins as well as some Turkish wines.

Oh and did you know both brown “raisins” and golden “sultanas” are made from the sultana grape variety? Just different processing.

The seedlessness is what makes them possible as easy to eat snacks.

The significance of the EU offer is that it shows that the EU gained more from dumping its surplus young people on the UK than the UK did.

If it was something that the UK gained more from then the EU wouldn't want it back.

another_richard said:

The significance of the EU offer is that it shows that the EU gained more from dumping its surplus young people on the UK than the UK did.

If it was something that the UK gained more from then the EU wouldn't want it back.

One thing young people in the demographically rapidly ageing EU are not is “surplus”. And the further East you go the more true that becomes.

Youth mobility was and is a win-win, except where it creates a damaging brain drain. Certainly a risk in countries like Romania.

BartholomewRoberts said:

dixiedean said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

dixiedean said:

rottenborough said:

Sunak is talking utter bollx.

GPs only initial provide a sick note (or fit note as it is now named in Orwellian fashion).

If someone needs to be off long term sick and claim ESA benefit then GP is nothing to do with it after the initial short period. Sunak says crack new specialist teams will assess people. They already do you ignorant twat. In fact your government pays them millions every year to do these assessments which ill and disabled people loath because they are so utterly shite and badly carried out.

Even Johnson was better than this spreadsheet loving idiot.

Are they the same as the crack army of supply teachers who would break strikes?
We have full employment.
There isn't a body of specialist anyone available.
Especially on the pittance a Tory government with no concept of market forces offers.

So increase wages, increase productivity, let unproductive businesses that can't cope with higher wages go out of business and let living standards improve because we are earning more as we're more productive.

That's the only way to reach an equilibrium.

Importing more people to fill vacancies no more works than importing people allows them to "steal jobs". More people = more demand = more need for employment. There is no fixed number of jobs in a country, jobs are proportional to population, its wages that determines equilibrium not quantity of people.

We have six staff, which we struggle with as it is. We had two off sick today and one with an appointment this morning.
So staffed at 50%. All three of us were assaulted more than once today. My eye was bleeding. We were told no supply was available. Our employer is the government. They are trying to impose a 2% settlement this year.
It can't go on like this. Statutory documents are being broken every day.
It simply isn't safe.

Yes and how do you change that.

Importing more people to fill the jobs imports more people's kids who need places at schools, which then means more people need to fill the jobs that your colleagues already struggle to fill. Its a never ending loop that can't be broken as jobs and population are proportional to each other.

I'm perfectly fine with immigration, at any volume. It could go up from where it is now and I wouldn't care, but it wouldn't fill any employment gap as it can't, its not possible to do so, since jobs and population are in proportion to each other.

Or we could pay yourself and your colleagues a decent wage that attracts people to fill those vacancies, instead of other jobs, and other less productive and less necessary job roles die off and we reach a new equilibrium.

The problem isn't free movement, or the lack thereof. The problem is paying less than what is required to fill the roles and a 2% settlement makes the problem worse too.

Do you disagree with any of that?

Question - how do we pay people more when the people buying their products / services can't afford them now?

In theory? Yes - pay more. In practice? Even when people point at awful employers like Asda and say "they are very rich", you then look behind the curtain and see a mountain of VC debt. Capitalism says "let them go bust" and as one-offs that is absolutely what should happen. But with so many businesses drowning in debt they can barely service, what happens when they all fail? In theory they get replaced by new businesses. Sure, In practice? Too many bankruptcies and we crash into a deep recession and get even poorer...