If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere wellIt were done quickly – politicalbetting.com

kinabalu said:

Who next then? No betfair market yet.

I've put a tenner on Kate Forbes at 5/2 with William Hill. Now in to 2/1.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

TOPPING said:

WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE MAKE THIS WHOLE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO SCOTLAND THING GO AWAY.

No one cares ffs.

I would suggest Starmer cares very much

You would be wrong Big G. He says he cares and electorally it might be important but he couldn't care less about Scotland.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

TOPPING said:

WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE MAKE THIS WHOLE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO SCOTLAND THING GO AWAY.

No one cares ffs.

I would suggest Starmer cares very much

I just hope that Starmer is saving some of the wishes he's been given by the genie for after he becomes PM.

LostPassword said:

Scott_xP said:

@blairmcdougall

If Swinney takes over it is an acknowledgment that the SNP is headed for significant losses. A year ago he said he’d been trying to step down front the frontline since 2016. A new leader would immediately face disaster, Swinney is expendable as he’s already resigned.

There are other explanations. Everyone can see that he's a temporary leader, and so it gives the SNP time to work out who should hear them for the long term, rather than making the decision in a hurry and an atmosphere of crisis.

There is going to be a contest. If Swinney wins, that's it

A very weird part of this contest is that the Greens and Alba will essentially be calling the shots in this election. They will be asked for their opinion at every turn. That might have unintended consequences/effects on the way the votes fall, if there is a contest and not a coronation.

For that reason, this isn’t a market I feel very comfortable wading into.

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Who next then? No betfair market yet.

The guardian is claiming Forbes would be “overwhelming favourite” to win with the members. Is that true? She’s really quite right and the party is quite left

But I do not understand the inner workings of the Nats. She would struggle to form a government without the greens and then she’d surely have to call an election which she would likely lose

If she's so inclined to try and change her party she would be more sensible to do so from opposition. I think you're right in that there is no way she could lead the party right now without losing the support of a whole chunk of them.

TheValiant said:

TOPPING said:

WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE MAKE THIS WHOLE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO SCOTLAND THING GO AWAY.

No one cares ffs.

Scotland is part of the United Kingdom, and this is a United Kingdom politics site.
Until and unless that changes, whilst certain people might not care (I don't care about Merbyn Kernow for instance) it's right to discuss it.

We're long overdue a header on MK

Andy_JS said:

Jim Sillars on Sky News: Humza a follower, not a leader.

Jim Sillars, a deputy leader for a year followed by 32 years of noisy impotence.

Scotland will be free when the last bitter old man is strangled by the last copy of Harry Potter and the Trans Dementors.

During election campaigns the incumbent party has tended to lose ground to the opposition - partly because the latter then receives equal media coverage by broadcasters etc. Swingback as such really only tends to apply to the period leading up to the formal election campaign itself.
Hmm.
Ydoethur said -
'Not true of 1964, 1970, Oct 1974, 1983, 1992, 1997 or 2005.

I think that’s an oversimplification.'

Re - the examples referred to there.

1964 - The election was announced in Mid-September. In the period to the end of September 5 polls had the Tories ahead with leads ranging from 0.2% to 4.0%. A single random Gallup poll had a Labour lead of 4.5%.. Polling Day was October 15th and only in the final 2 weeks did Labour edge back into the lead it had enjoyed until late Summer. That saw 5 polls with Labour leads in the range of 0.1% to 8% and 4 Tory leads which ranged from 0.8% to 3.6%..
The result on 15th October across GB saw a Labour lead of 1.9% - a better outcome for the party than suggested by most polls a month earlier at the outset of the campaign.The swingback to Douglas-Home and the Tories which had been evident in August and early September had been reversed.

1970 - The election was announced on May 18th to be held on June 18th.In mid- May polls recorded Labour leads in the range of 3.2% - 7.5%.The final week of the campaign saw 6 Labour leads ranging from 2% to 9.6% with a single eve of poll from ORC showing a 1% Tory lead.
The result on 18th June was a Tory lead across GB of 2.4% - a clear swing to the Opposition party compared with what polls had implied a month earlier.

Oct 1974 - The election was announced in mid-September to be held on October 10th. Polls were recording Labour leads in the range of 4% -14% whilst a single NOP poll showed a 1% Tory lead. The final week saw Labour leads of 5.5% - 14.5%.
The result on October 10th saw a Labour lead in GB of 3.6%. The Labour lead had narrowed during the campaign..

1983 - The election was announced on May 9th to be held on June 9th. At the outset polls recorded Tory leads of 10% - 17.5% .
The outcome on 9th June was a Tory GB lead of 15.2% . Whilst that was little changed from the margin indicated a month earlier both major parties lost vote shares during the campaign period to the Alliance. The Labour opposition did not benefit though the the Tories overall lost support during the campaign to the Lib/SDP Alliance

1992 - This election did not fit the pattern at all, but - as was to be the case in 2015 - serious polling methodological issues were later identified. A consensus has emerged to the effect that the Tories were actually ahead throughout both campaigns - and ,for that reason, analysis is difficult and unlikely to be productive.

SandyRentool said:

Andy_JS said:

Not enough money for new trains on the Central Line.

https://www.mylondon.news/news/transport/exactly-london-underground-revamped-central-28845199

"TfL has revealed when the next revamped Central line trains will enter service on the London Underground. The 1992 stock is being upgraded as part of a £500 million programme.

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, and TfL bosses say a brand new fleet of trains is not possible as they have not been given enough cash by central government. Instead, carriages are being renovated with new seats, LED lighting, CCTV and IT systems.

A new moquette, wheels and motors are also being installed. However, engineers told MyLondon in November that technical constraints mean that it is not possible to fit air conditioning."

Meanwhile, up here in levelling up land, we have Class 150, 156 and 158 DMUs that all entered service prior to 1992.

Ay-up! We have Bakerloo line trains down 'ere in London wot entered service in 1972! Piccadilly line not far behind in 1973.

1997 - This election possibly best fits present circumstances
Labour won a landslide majority on1st May and a GB lead of 13% across GB. This was actually well short of the leads being recorded in late March when the election announcement took place when polls were recording Labour leads in the range of 21% - 25.5%. It also bears similarity to what was seen in 1966 , 1983 and was to be seen again in 2001 when massive overwhelming polling leads were not reflected in the final outcome with the winning party's polling lead having been exaggerated.

The 1979 election also merits some consideration . Whilst Callaghan lost decisively by 7.1% on May 3rd, that margin was a fair bit short of what polls had been recording in mid - late March prior to the fall of the Labour government. However, that probably simply reflected some recovery from the depths of Labour unpopularity in January and February at the peak of the Winter of Discontent - perhaps similar to the Tory recovery at the end of 2022 when Sunak replaced Truss. Over a longer period the Tories did improve their position in May 1979 compared with what polls had been showing throughout 1978. September & October 1978 had actually seen Labour 5% or so ahead according to Gallup!

All Hail Mr Trump:

(It's the Re-Truth that is the concern here.)

numbertwelve said:

Leon said:

numbertwelve said:

Clutch_Brompton said:

Who do the SNP have who can recover their fortunes? Anyone obvious? The fact they found a Humza isn't promising - very reminiscent of the Cons and La Truss.

I don’t think there is anyone. Like the Tories in Westminster they need to go into opposition now for a bit. Some time away might actually help them, particularly if Labour lead the UK and Scottish governments - they stand a good chance of capitalising when they come unstuck.

People seem to really rate Forbes on here. I think she’s OK, I just don’t think she’s going to do anything to help them right now, she will just start a big debate in the party over social policy and there’ll be a risk that they lose support on the left to the Greens and Labour… she also can’t command a majority.

I really rate Forbes but then I would. She’s obviously centre right and quite unwoke. I fear she’d be good and intelligent and drive Indy again; I console myself that the Nats are too bats and too left wing to tolerate her. Also she’s better off waiting for the two election defeats to pass before making another bid: if she is so minded

So who else?

Forbes might help the cause in the long term by galvanising a more centrist vision of independence away from Nicola’s Coalition of All The Social Justice Warriors, but I don’t foresee her being a success in the short term.

She is not going to be loved by the central belt lefties. Labour will clean up a whole load of seats, and the SNP will end up looking more like the pre-Salmond SNP: more rural, more tartan Tory and less numerous.

@SkyNews

Following Humza Yousaf's resignation as Scotland's First Minister, Alba Party's Ash Regan MSP has said it is 'bizarre' that he quit rather than working with her and her party, to survive a potential no-confidence vote.

@holyroodmandy

Still puzzled as to what the FM was referring to when he said he wasn't "prepared to trade his values & principles simply to retain power" when what Ash Regan was asking for was "protecting the dignity, safety & rights of women & children, & providing a competent government".

kinabalu said:

Barnesian said:

kinabalu said:

Who next then? No betfair market yet.

I've put a tenner on Kate Forbes at 5/2 with William Hill. Now in to 2/1.

She'd be fav in a contest, I'd have thought. But will they prefer to avoid one?

Kate Forbes has a head start, has already declared she wants to be FM and is the only one of the original three candidate replacements for Nicola Sturgeon in the running. Unless those opposed can rally round a Not Forbes candidate in sufficient numbers it looks she will get it by default.

This is a rerun of the Johnson/Truss/Sunak situation. Sturgeon/Humza/Forbes where the middle one blows up in spectacular style.

Cyclefree said:

BlancheLivermore said:

I've just reached Sahagún, the official halfway mark, in nine days, two hours and twenty minutes

Glorious. I really admire you for doing this and love reading your reports.

Fantastic albergue there... A long haul over the meseta to come though, given you are going backwards. Long haul to Burgos.

Selebian said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

SandyRentool said:

Andy_JS said:

Not enough money for new trains on the Central Line.

https://www.mylondon.news/news/transport/exactly-london-underground-revamped-central-28845199

"TfL has revealed when the next revamped Central line trains will enter service on the London Underground. The 1992 stock is being upgraded as part of a £500 million programme.

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, and TfL bosses say a brand new fleet of trains is not possible as they have not been given enough cash by central government. Instead, carriages are being renovated with new seats, LED lighting, CCTV and IT systems.

A new moquette, wheels and motors are also being installed. However, engineers told MyLondon in November that technical constraints mean that it is not possible to fit air conditioning."

Meanwhile, up here in levelling up land, we have Class 150, 156 and 158 DMUs that all entered service prior to 1992.

Ay-up! We have Bakerloo line trains down 'ere in London wot entered service in 1972! Piccadilly line not far behind in 1973.

Don't try to out-Yorkshire us!

These are typical trains on the service from Pickering to Whitby:

I entered service in 1973 and I'm definitely not fit for purpose any more.

bondegezou said:

The issues the SNP (or the Tories) need to address aren’t new. The party has been trying to decide where it wants to go for the entirety of Yousaf’s period in office. The same discussions were happening under Sturgeon. I’m no SNP fan, so I’m quite happy for them to go on fighting, but if the party wants to dig itself out of its current hole, I suggest they need to make some decisions and unify under a new leader. I think it would help the SNP to pick someone who can lead them from out of Salmond’s and Sturgeon’s shadow.

But the SNP face the same issue as the Tories. Whoever is leader at the next election is going to get mollicated.

They both need a sacrificial lamb, and then they can pick a leader to rebuild from the rubble.

But first, there has to be rubble...

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Foxy said:

Mexicanpete said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

bondegezou said:

LostPassword said:

Alanbrooke said:

TOPPING said:

As all here may be aware, I yield to no one in my left wing, bring 'em all over, that mug is not in my name, sure I may have been at war with and dropping bombs on them but now I am a big fan and support their struggle against the evil oppressor, pro-immigration stance.

But Ireland may inadvertently be giving Rishi the support he needs wrt his immigration/Rwanda policy. Pass a law saying they must go back to the last country they came from, eh? Well I never.

Ireland is in La Francophonie, so Im sure President Macron will do his utmost to help out.

Perhaps I missed it, but I don't think any French government minister was so dim as to claim credit for asylum seekers crossing the Channel in small boats. None of them said, "you see, our policy to scare asylum seekers to go elsewhere is working," and thereby accept responsibility for it.

Sunak has accepted that his policy dumps asylum seekers on Ireland, that he is essentially in the same position as Belarus, shoving people across the Polish border, and so that puts Ireland in a much stronger position to demand that he does something about it.

If he hadn't been so stupid he would have responded to the Irish claims with a gallic shrug, said that the Rwanda policy was intended to stop the boat crossings, and left British voters to join the dots. But he couldn't help himself.

A key problem with the Rwanda scheme is that it seems unlikely to work, so Sunak and the policy's supporters have fallen on the Irish government's comments like a thirsty man in a desert finding a spring. The value of someone saying "it's working" (even though they are doing so for their own political reasons) is worth more to Sunak than the cost of having to clear up the mess that follows admitting he's shoving people across the Irish border.

I can understand opponents to the Rwanda scheme dismissing the Irish development but this is a real issue between Ireland and UK that will draw France and the EU into it and hopefully see cooperation and more importantly determination across thee countries to stop the boats once and for all and make Rwanda scheme redundant

Of course this would be a political result for Sunak but for me stopping the boats is about saving lives at sea not least because our family have lost several family members at sea and why our youngest son is an active RNLI sea going volunteer

Rwanda is all about political posturing. Wasn't it Cummings who suggested it was a smoke screen to cover up another Johnson scandal?

I doubt very much the scheme will stop the boats. There were far more robust mechanisms that could have been explored, but a political win is a political win. The Irish issue which has become an unexpected by product is a Daily Mail win for Sunak. Will the boats stop? Very unlikely, but if 6 boats a day becomes five, Sunak will consider that a win.

On Friday and Saturday there were 500 recorded small boat arrivals so evidence of a deterrent effect seems rdispute ather absent!

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats-last-7-days

I find it extraordinary that anyone would expect to see an immediate reduction in boat crossings when the smugglers will be desperate to send over as many as possible before the consequences of the legislation become obvious not least as this Irish problem develops and flights take off

Here’s Tony Blair saying that a lot of asylum seekers are no more than economic migrants playing the system

https://x.com/wayotworld/status/1784633398973092319?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

kinabalu said:

Getting described as a 'gamble' gone wrong but a gamble has the potential to pay off - so what would that 'win' have looked like for Humza Yousaf?

Well, quite.

I don’t really know what he was trying to achieve.

I assume he was trying to re-set the perception that he was being led by the unpopular Greens. But then he seems to be on board with most of their agenda, so…

If he wanted to try and recast the relationship with the Greens but make sure he could still run a minority administration, shouldn’t he really have tried to negotiate a revised version of Bute House rather than summoning the Greens to an unceremonious dawn sacking?

If he wanted to work across groups in the Parliament might it not have been a better idea to strike a conciliatory tone in the Chamber rather than blunder about trading political insults?

Doubtless the real story will come out in the fullness of time but as political unforced errors go it was a pretty perplexingly bad one.

CarlottaVance said:

If there is to be “healing of hurt & upset” it must start with the electorate who are not the hateful bigots they are sometimes painted, particularly women’s rights activists. It must also take place within @theSNP. I will support a leader who recognises this

https://x.com/joannaccherry/status/1784904343721750924

Cherry doesn't strike me as someone who learns lessons but let's hope she's learned from the last leadership election. Maybe start with getting folk other than Alex Salmond to back her choice for leader.

I haven't received a polling card... should I be worried? I know the government is trying to restrict access to voting so is there some hoop I should have jumped through to stop myself being kicked off the register?

Scott_xP said:

bondegezou said:

The issues the SNP (or the Tories) need to address aren’t new. The party has been trying to decide where it wants to go for the entirety of Yousaf’s period in office. The same discussions were happening under Sturgeon. I’m no SNP fan, so I’m quite happy for them to go on fighting, but if the party wants to dig itself out of its current hole, I suggest they need to make some decisions and unify under a new leader. I think it would help the SNP to pick someone who can lead them from out of Salmond’s and Sturgeon’s shadow.

But the SNP face the same issue as the Tories. Whoever is leader at the next election is going to get mollicated.

They both need a sacrificial lamb, and then they can pick a leader to rebuild from the rubble.

But first, there has to be rubble...

I would expect SNP to be the biggest party in Holyrood at the next election. Maybe not enough to form a government but still important

bondegezou said:

Theuniondivvie said:

bondegezou said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Who next then? No betfair market yet.

The guardian is claiming Forbes would be “overwhelming favourite” to win with the members. Is that true? She’s really quite right and the party is quite left

But I do not understand the inner workings of the Nats. She would struggle to form a government without the greens and then she’d surely have to call an election which she would likely lose

Perhaps somebody non-divisive who can quieten things down for a period while the party decides where it wants to go on independence strategy and general political positioning.

It doesn’t seem wise to go into a general election with a leader devoid of opinions on the key issues! Putting these things off doesn’t work. The party needs to pick an approach and then rally around a leader who is going to deliver that approach.

Aye.

Labour have picked an approach with Starmer. That approach is don’t-scare-the-horses. We all know exactly what Starmer is going to say on any issue. Labour are 100% committed to this approach and it’s working for them.

We all know what Starmer is going to say on any issue?

????

The opposite of what he said the last time he was asked?

CarlottaVance said:

More chaos ahoy. Humza Yousaf does a Sturgeon and announces his intention to resign as FM but not until SNP members (number TBC) have chosen another leader. Stand by for another unedifying dogfight on the cusp of a general election

https://x.com/HTScotPol/status/1784902279084081173

Will there still be a VONC?

numbertwelve said:

kinabalu said:

Getting described as a 'gamble' gone wrong but a gamble has the potential to pay off - so what would that 'win' have looked like for Humza Yousaf?

Well, quite.

I don’t really know what he was trying to achieve.

I assume he was trying to re-set the perception that he was being led by the unpopular Greens. But then he seems to be on board with most of their agenda, so…

If he wanted to try and recast the relationship with the Greens but make sure he could still run a minority administration, shouldn’t he really have tried to negotiate a revised version of Bute House rather than summoning the Greens to an unceremonious dawn sacking?

If he wanted to work across groups in the Parliament might it not have been a better idea to strike a conciliatory tone in the Chamber rather than blunder about trading political insults?

Doubtless the real story will come out in the fullness of time but as political unforced errors go it was a pretty perplexingly bad one.

Yes I don't really get it. My best guess - he'd identified the association with the 'kooky' Greens as a vote loser so he wanted to loosen that, move the party more to the centre, and at the same time stamp himself as the sort of strong and decisive leader his two predecessors had been.

Scott_xP said:

@SkyNews

Following Humza Yousaf's resignation as Scotland's First Minister, Alba Party's Ash Regan MSP has said it is 'bizarre' that he quit rather than working with her and her party, to survive a potential no-confidence vote.

SLab would be foolish if they withdrew their VONC in the Scottish Government - it allows them to portray the SNP as puppets dancing to the Scottish Green Party.

isam said:

bondegezou said:

Theuniondivvie said:

bondegezou said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Who next then? No betfair market yet.

The guardian is claiming Forbes would be “overwhelming favourite” to win with the members. Is that true? She’s really quite right and the party is quite left

But I do not understand the inner workings of the Nats. She would struggle to form a government without the greens and then she’d surely have to call an election which she would likely lose

Perhaps somebody non-divisive who can quieten things down for a period while the party decides where it wants to go on independence strategy and general political positioning.

It doesn’t seem wise to go into a general election with a leader devoid of opinions on the key issues! Putting these things off doesn’t work. The party needs to pick an approach and then rally around a leader who is going to deliver that approach.

Aye.

Labour have picked an approach with Starmer. That approach is don’t-scare-the-horses. We all know exactly what Starmer is going to say on any issue. Labour are 100% committed to this approach and it’s working for them.

We all know what Starmer is going to say on any issue?

????

The opposite of what he said the last time he was asked?

Not quite. It's more that he says what is politically advantageous at the time. And if that contradicts what he said previously, well that's not a problem for him...

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

More chaos ahoy. Humza Yousaf does a Sturgeon and announces his intention to resign as FM but not until SNP members (number TBC) have chosen another leader. Stand by for another unedifying dogfight on the cusp of a general election

https://x.com/HTScotPol/status/1784902279084081173

Will there still be a VONC?

Good question. I don't know the answer, but yes, that's a good point

I was right - Yousaf did mention Gaza in his resignation speech.

Leo Varadkar, Ireland - GONE
Humza Yousaf, Scotland - GONE

Next...

Pedro Sanchez, Spain -SOON GONE?
Cyril Ramaphosa, South Africa - SOON GONE?

SandyRentool said:

Taz said:

He’s mentioned Gaza.

The goal against Scotland at Euro 96?

He didn’t mention Gary McAllisters penalty miss.

isam said:

bondegezou said:

Theuniondivvie said:

bondegezou said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Who next then? No betfair market yet.

The guardian is claiming Forbes would be “overwhelming favourite” to win with the members. Is that true? She’s really quite right and the party is quite left

But I do not understand the inner workings of the Nats. She would struggle to form a government without the greens and then she’d surely have to call an election which she would likely lose

Perhaps somebody non-divisive who can quieten things down for a period while the party decides where it wants to go on independence strategy and general political positioning.

It doesn’t seem wise to go into a general election with a leader devoid of opinions on the key issues! Putting these things off doesn’t work. The party needs to pick an approach and then rally around a leader who is going to deliver that approach.

Aye.

Labour have picked an approach with Starmer. That approach is don’t-scare-the-horses. We all know exactly what Starmer is going to say on any issue. Labour are 100% committed to this approach and it’s working for them.

We all know what Starmer is going to say on any issue?

????

The opposite of what he said the last time he was asked?

isam, we know you have your own perspective on Starmer.

I think the rest of us know what Starmer is going to say on any issue. His answer will be non-committal, promise not to reverse any Conservative policy, but include some vague hope of doing things better than the Tories, which the electorate will lap up because it’s very easy to believe he can deliver something better than the Tories.

bondegezou said:

Anabobazina said:

I haven't received a polling card... should I be worried? I know the government is trying to restrict access to voting so is there some hoop I should have jumped through to stop myself being kicked off the register?

You should’ve received a polling card by now. If you’re on the register, you don’t need a polling card, but you might still want to find out why it hasn’t arrived.

Probably something to do with the Royal Mail being crap. Which why I was annoyed to find out I can't just pop my postal ballot through the letterbox at the council offices, for some reason. (It's next to the pub, so fairly convenient)

isam said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Foxy said:

Mexicanpete said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

bondegezou said:

LostPassword said:

Alanbrooke said:

TOPPING said:

As all here may be aware, I yield to no one in my left wing, bring 'em all over, that mug is not in my name, sure I may have been at war with and dropping bombs on them but now I am a big fan and support their struggle against the evil oppressor, pro-immigration stance.

But Ireland may inadvertently be giving Rishi the support he needs wrt his immigration/Rwanda policy. Pass a law saying they must go back to the last country they came from, eh? Well I never.

Ireland is in La Francophonie, so Im sure President Macron will do his utmost to help out.

Perhaps I missed it, but I don't think any French government minister was so dim as to claim credit for asylum seekers crossing the Channel in small boats. None of them said, "you see, our policy to scare asylum seekers to go elsewhere is working," and thereby accept responsibility for it.

Sunak has accepted that his policy dumps asylum seekers on Ireland, that he is essentially in the same position as Belarus, shoving people across the Polish border, and so that puts Ireland in a much stronger position to demand that he does something about it.

If he hadn't been so stupid he would have responded to the Irish claims with a gallic shrug, said that the Rwanda policy was intended to stop the boat crossings, and left British voters to join the dots. But he couldn't help himself.

A key problem with the Rwanda scheme is that it seems unlikely to work, so Sunak and the policy's supporters have fallen on the Irish government's comments like a thirsty man in a desert finding a spring. The value of someone saying "it's working" (even though they are doing so for their own political reasons) is worth more to Sunak than the cost of having to clear up the mess that follows admitting he's shoving people across the Irish border.

I can understand opponents to the Rwanda scheme dismissing the Irish development but this is a real issue between Ireland and UK that will draw France and the EU into it and hopefully see cooperation and more importantly determination across thee countries to stop the boats once and for all and make Rwanda scheme redundant

Of course this would be a political result for Sunak but for me stopping the boats is about saving lives at sea not least because our family have lost several family members at sea and why our youngest son is an active RNLI sea going volunteer

Rwanda is all about political posturing. Wasn't it Cummings who suggested it was a smoke screen to cover up another Johnson scandal?

I doubt very much the scheme will stop the boats. There were far more robust mechanisms that could have been explored, but a political win is a political win. The Irish issue which has become an unexpected by product is a Daily Mail win for Sunak. Will the boats stop? Very unlikely, but if 6 boats a day becomes five, Sunak will consider that a win.

On Friday and Saturday there were 500 recorded small boat arrivals so evidence of a deterrent effect seems rdispute ather absent!

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats-last-7-days

I find it extraordinary that anyone would expect to see an immediate reduction in boat crossings when the smugglers will be desperate to send over as many as possible before the consequences of the legislation become obvious not least as this Irish problem develops and flights take off

Here’s Tony Blair saying that a lot of asylum seekers are no more than economic migrants playing the system

https://x.com/wayotworld/status/1784633398973092319?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

Asylum claim refusals peaked under Blair. For those who want an efficient migration system they should vote for pragmatists like Blair, not those who shout the loudest.

CarlottaVance said:

More chaos ahoy. Humza Yousaf does a Sturgeon and announces his intention to resign as FM but not until SNP members (number TBC) have chosen another leader. Stand by for another unedifying dogfight on the cusp of a general election

https://x.com/HTScotPol/status/1784902279084081173

This is presumably to pause the 28 day countdown timer to an election if no replacement FM in place. I don't see the Greens wanting to VoNC to force an election.

Humza has been the opposite of astute but this move makes sense.

Theuniondivvie said:

kinabalu said:

numbertwelve said:

kinabalu said:

Getting described as a 'gamble' gone wrong but a gamble has the potential to pay off - so what would that 'win' have looked like for Humza Yousaf?

Well, quite.

I don’t really know what he was trying to achieve.

I assume he was trying to re-set the perception that he was being led by the unpopular Greens. But then he seems to be on board with most of their agenda, so…

If he wanted to try and recast the relationship with the Greens but make sure he could still run a minority administration, shouldn’t he really have tried to negotiate a revised version of Bute House rather than summoning the Greens to an unceremonious dawn sacking?

If he wanted to work across groups in the Parliament might it not have been a better idea to strike a conciliatory tone in the Chamber rather than blunder about trading political insults?

Doubtless the real story will come out in the fullness of time but as political unforced errors go it was a pretty perplexingly bad one.

Yes I don't really get it. My best guess - he'd identified the association with the 'kooky' Greens as a vote loser so he wanted to loosen that, move the party more to the centre, and at the same time stamp himself as the sort of strong and decisive leader his two predecessors had been.

The twitter conspiracy theorists say it was a Machiavellian SPAD who wanted Humza gone. I always prefer stupidity over conspiracies so I favour stupid fucking SPADS who came up with the cunning plan and stupid fucking Humza who bought it.

I do recall you saying when he got the job that you thought he was a nice guy but no Albert Einstein.

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

More chaos ahoy. Humza Yousaf does a Sturgeon and announces his intention to resign as FM but not until SNP members (number TBC) have chosen another leader. Stand by for another unedifying dogfight on the cusp of a general election

https://x.com/HTScotPol/status/1784902279084081173

Will there still be a VONC?

I assume that the Cons will revoke the VONC in him as First Minister, but that Lab will still put forward their VONC in the Scottish Govt... but that's just a supposition based on logic, so likely false!

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

More chaos ahoy. Humza Yousaf does a Sturgeon and announces his intention to resign as FM but not until SNP members (number TBC) have chosen another leader. Stand by for another unedifying dogfight on the cusp of a general election

https://x.com/HTScotPol/status/1784902279084081173

Will there still be a VONC?

It would be a waste of time having a VONC in HY as FM, now that he has announced his resignation.
But I hope there's still a VONC in the Scottish Government so there can be a SGE.

SandyRentool said:

Taz said:

He’s mentioned Gaza.

The goal against Scotland at Euro 96?

No, he turned up with a fishing rod, a chicken and some cans. Humza appreciated the gesture.

Theuniondivvie said:

Scott_xP said:

@Dennynews

Anas Sarwar is speaking to reporters in Glasgow. He is demanding an election is called instead of a “back room deal” to choose a new First Minister.

“It is for the people of Scotland to decide, and that is why there should be an election”

When's the election in Wales taking place?

Of course it isn't going to happen. But calling for an election is what oppositions do. It's a motion which must be gone through. He's not really expecting an election to be called, just as the SNP wouldn't really expect Sarwar not to call for one.
Noone needs to get at all exercised about the confected outrage.

Not a flattering comparison, but there are some parallels between Conservatives nationally & the SNP. Speaks to dangers of populism - blaming everything that's going wrong on an external foe (Westminster/EU) while proffering up a magical-thinking solution (independence/Brexit).

https://x.com/soniasodha/status/1784912135367049571

Andy_JS said:

"SNP's Kate Forbes hopes Scottish Greens will 'embrace' her"

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/24282892.snps-kate-forbes-hopes-scottish-greens-will-embrace/

In a chaste manner, entirely conformant with proscriptions of the Old Testament.

Cookie said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Scott_xP said:

@Dennynews

Anas Sarwar is speaking to reporters in Glasgow. He is demanding an election is called instead of a “back room deal” to choose a new First Minister.

“It is for the people of Scotland to decide, and that is why there should be an election”

When's the election in Wales taking place?

Of course it isn't going to happen. But calling for an election is what oppositions do. It's a motion which must be gone through. He's not really expecting an election to be called, just as the SNP wouldn't really expect Sarwar not to call for one.
Noone needs to get at all exercised about the confected outrage.

Yeah, but I thought PB might be above breathless regurgitating of Sarwar's guff.
Actually, wtf was I thinking, of course it's not above that.

Donkeys said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

More chaos ahoy. Humza Yousaf does a Sturgeon and announces his intention to resign as FM but not until SNP members (number TBC) have chosen another leader. Stand by for another unedifying dogfight on the cusp of a general election

https://x.com/HTScotPol/status/1784902279084081173

Will there still be a VONC?

It would be a waste of time having a VONC in HY as FM, now that he has announced his resignation.
But I hope there's still a VONC in the Scottish Government so there can be a SGE.

He’s still first minister, is he not?

@JohnRentoul

Ladbrokes news release: BETTING SUSPENDED on Humza Yousaf replacement after flood of bets on John Swinney


I took some of the 8/1 that was on offer this morning

@DeltapollUK
🚨New Voting Intention🚨
Labour lead widens to twenty points in our latest results.
Con 24% (-3)
Lab 44% (+1)
Lib Dem 8% (-1)
Reform 12% (-)
SNP 3% (-)
Green 5% (-)
Other 3% (+2)
Fieldwork: 26th-29th April 2024
Sample: 1,577 GB adults
(Changes from 19th-22nd April 2024)