There's a myth being propagated here which is in serious danger of becoming acknowledged "fact". During Truss's brief tenure bond rates rose because the UK no longer seemed a safe bet with irresponsible spending and cuts in taxes. The major problem was the uncosted open ended cheque in respect of peoples' fuel bills, the tax cuts themselves were more modest.
After Sunak and particularly Hunt took over we returned to trend. The gas subsidy, whilst still large, was costed and time limited. What was also happening, however, is that the burst of international inflation that had caused the spike in gas prices became much more generalised as fuel costs drove everything else higher, particularly food. This meant interest rates rose internationally as well as here.
The myth is that the current rise in mortgage rates as people come to the end of their fixed rates has anything to do with Truss, her economic incompetence or is in any way out of the norm. It's just not true. After more than a decade of incredibly low interest rates following the GFC bond rates have returned to the lower end of normal and mortgages have moved accordingly. Hard for those who had got used to practically free money but inevitable. And absolutely nothing to do with Truss.
That may well be true but, you know, *politics*.
The long term trend from 2011 to 2021 was a 28% increase in the number of households renting, and a 13% increase in the number who own their homes outright. The Tories have overseen a new feudalism, and private renters have very long and very bitter memories even if they manage to get on the ladder.
On topic, the lesson from Black Wednesday (negative equity and repossession), GE2017 (dementia tax), Truss and the interest rate spike (very expensive mortages) is you don't touch people's houses. You just don't touch them.
By the same token, when the Tories launched RTB, liberalised banks to lend and had lots of houses built in the 80s, they did very well. Right now, lots of young people can't really afford them, so they're not.
The secret is to ease access for people to good homes at good and low prices. And then leave them alone.
Labour actually have a plan for that, if they have the balls to go big on it.
Labour will do precisely zero. In fact I think they will end up rolling back some of the first time buyer specific reliefs.
Interesting. Do you have a link for the rolling back proposal?
No link, there's just no money to do anything. Plus Labour just completely u turned on their workers "new deal". They've got form.
So you have no evidence whatsoever for that “assertion”
Also, FYI, they have not u-turned completely on their proposed workers reforms. Even this week’s FT piece didn’t suggest that. Without wishing to get into arguments from authority I’m an employment lawyer and have to keep up with these things. In fact (polishes nails) I was quoted in City AM on the matter (bows)
How can I get evidence for a future u turn I expect from Labour? Are you thick?
No. I’m pointing out the basic fact that you have no evidence to think they will roll back first time buyer provisions. None at all. I can ask on what basis you expect it to happen, you did, and I critiqued it. Then you suggested I’m thick. Which isn’t quite the killer argument I’d hoped for.
There's a myth being propagated here which is in serious danger of becoming acknowledged "fact". During Truss's brief tenure bond rates rose because the UK no longer seemed a safe bet with irresponsible spending and cuts in taxes. The major problem was the uncosted open ended cheque in respect of peoples' fuel bills, the tax cuts themselves were more modest.
After Sunak and particularly Hunt took over we returned to trend. The gas subsidy, whilst still large, was costed and time limited. What was also happening, however, is that the burst of international inflation that had caused the spike in gas prices became much more generalised as fuel costs drove everything else higher, particularly food. This meant interest rates rose internationally as well as here.
The myth is that the current rise in mortgage rates as people come to the end of their fixed rates has anything to do with Truss, her economic incompetence or is in any way out of the norm. It's just not true. After more than a decade of incredibly low interest rates following the GFC bond rates have returned to the lower end of normal and mortgages have moved accordingly. Hard for those who had got used to practically free money but inevitable. And absolutely nothing to do with Truss.
Brown had nothing to do with those dodgy American mortgages, either, but thems the breaks.
That's true. Brown had, however, created a regulatory framework which mean there was plenty of opportunities for similar fiscal recklessness here. Remember Northern Rock's 120% mortgages? Fine, as long as the only way for house prices is up. Default rates on UK mortgages never reached American standards but they were bad enough to undermine a market built on the sale of mortgage bundles with AAA ratings.
On topic, the lesson from Black Wednesday (negative equity and repossession), GE2017 (dementia tax), Truss and the interest rate spike (very expensive mortages) is you don't touch people's houses. You just don't touch them.
By the same token, when the Tories launched RTB, liberalised banks to lend and had lots of houses built in the 80s, they did very well. Right now, lots of young people can't really afford them, so they're not.
The secret is to ease access for people to good homes at good and low prices. And then leave them alone.
Labour actually have a plan for that, if they have the balls to go big on it.
Labour will do precisely zero. In fact I think they will end up rolling back some of the first time buyer specific reliefs.
Interesting. Do you have a link for the rolling back proposal?
No link, there's just no money to do anything. Plus Labour just completely u turned on their workers "new deal". They've got form.
Their plan (which they've give very quiet on) would be net positive for the public finances. It doesn't involve tax giveaways.
But net negative for their image, pushing through planning reform in the UK is notoriously difficult. It's why successive governments since the 70s have all dodged the issue.
Unpopular but necessary decisions, if taken early enough, are exactly what you should be doing with a large majority.
If they went big on it, they could transform the housing market to the great benefit of the economy.
I can never remember thinking a change of government would make me richer or poorer.
Governments affect the mood.
A mean spirited nasty government like this Tory one just puts a downer on all of us.
The Labour one of '97 had the opposite effect. The UK felt freer kinder and more progressive.
Does anyone think governments are going to affect our mortgage costs or make us individually richer or poorer?
Roger, that is because you are loaded and it will never impact you, for the plebs it is a big concern given they don't have the option to sell one of their assorted villas, art works , etc if they are a bit short now and again.
On topic, the lesson from Black Wednesday (negative equity and repossession), GE2017 (dementia tax), Truss and the interest rate spike (very expensive mortages) is you don't touch people's houses. You just don't touch them.
By the same token, when the Tories launched RTB, liberalised banks to lend and had lots of houses built in the 80s, they did very well. Right now, lots of young people can't really afford them, so they're not.
The secret is to ease access for people to good homes at good and low prices. And then leave them alone.
Labour actually have a plan for that, if they have the balls to go big on it.
Labour will do precisely zero. In fact I think they will end up rolling back some of the first time buyer specific reliefs.
Interesting. Do you have a link for the rolling back proposal?
No link, there's just no money to do anything. Plus Labour just completely u turned on their workers "new deal". They've got form.
Their plan (which they've give very quiet on) would be net positive for the public finances. It doesn't involve tax giveaways.
But net negative for their image, pushing through planning reform in the UK is notoriously difficult. It's why successive governments since the 70s have all dodged the issue.
Difficult for the Conservatives, because about their last holdout is places on the edge of conurbations who fear development. See Havering, Bromley, Epping. Or Fareham. That's why Gove's reforms went down the toilet.
Starmer's coalition can basically tell them to suck it up. Will of the people and all that.
There are two major reports - in the Indy and the FT - saying that Russia is intent on attacking all of Europe, sabotage, hacking, explosions, assassinations. The next five years of Labour might see us more or less at war with Russia
See what China is doing to Boeing
It's hard to imagine China is doing more to Boeing than Boeing is to itself.
Boeing might be an incompetent bus load of fools, managerially - but I just can’t see them murdering two whistleblowers.
Can Harper stop telling us what our priorities are. And clinging onto the projections to a GE are ridiculous. The Lib Dems aren’t going to poll 17% and the independents aren’t going to do aswell .
And now we’re back to the life raft of Tees Valley ! zzzzzzz
When faced with a question on being beaten by the Lib Dems he then said “local elections are not representative of what will happen in a general election”!
Actually there is a reasonable chance that the Lib Dems do poll in the high teens. They are generally ignored by the media, but at election times they have to be reported fairly, and usually they benefit from the attention. So coming into the campaign on around 12-13% they could easily climb. Unlike Reform they have the capacity to wage a ground war in their target seats, so gains like Winchester and Cheltenham in Wessex are looking pretty certain. I would say therefore that it is more likely than not that the Lib Dems match their 1997 performance and more than double their seat tally. If the Tories hit meltdown then more seats in places like Surrey and Glos come into play too and that credibility can enhance their poll rating in a positive circle. The media has a limited attention span, and after the 53rd "Starmer on course for a landslide as Sunak is yesterday´s cold mince" story, they may well cast around for a fresh angle. "Lib Dems poised to make pincer movement on the Tories in their target seats" is one such story.
Stock market up whilst house prices remain pretty stagnant. How much longer will the good news last?
And interest on savings accounts has risen from derisory to substantial. It's hard to think of a more efficient way to take money out of the pockets of hard-working middle-aged families and lavish it on elderly 'savers'.
Newsagents report rocketing demand for the Sunday Telegraph in the Camden area.
I’m beyond caring. Of COURSE it came from the fucking lab. Anyone who now thinks otherwise offers compelling evidence they have a sub-80 IQ
I’m just going to throw this out there.
Maybe, just maybe, you’re not as clever as you think you are? I know that you think I’m an imbecile. Let’s take that as read. But have you ever considered in your whole life that maybe, just maybe, you might be wrong about something? Doing so may make you less the significant object of derision you are.
Forget waiting for a black swan. Pivot now and pivot hard. Away from the failed mess. Give people something new to concentrate on. Campaign on bringing back hanging for small boat refugees. Campaign on forcing people off sick notes into building new prisons which you then lock them up in. Campaign on mandatory skirts for girls in schools.
Whatever. Just change the script.
Waaaay ahead of you.
Tory MP yesterday suggested they stand on a joint Tory/Reform ticket at the GE
Would Reform really want to be associated with this bunch of whack job losers?
On topic, the lesson from Black Wednesday (negative equity and repossession), GE2017 (dementia tax), Truss and the interest rate spike (very expensive mortages) is you don't touch people's houses. You just don't touch them.
By the same token, when the Tories launched RTB, liberalised banks to lend and had lots of houses built in the 80s, they did very well. Right now, lots of young people can't really afford them, so they're not.
The secret is to ease access for people to good homes at good and low prices. And then leave them alone.
Labour actually have a plan for that, if they have the balls to go big on it.
Labour will do precisely zero. In fact I think they will end up rolling back some of the first time buyer specific reliefs.
Interesting. Do you have a link for the rolling back proposal?
No link, there's just no money to do anything. Plus Labour just completely u turned on their workers "new deal". They've got form.
So you have no evidence whatsoever for that assertion.
Also, FYI, they have not u-turned completely on their proposed workers reforms. Even this week’s FT piece didn’t suggest that. Without wishing to get into arguments from authority I’m an employment lawyer and have to keep up with these things. In fact (polishes nails) I was quoted in City AM on the matter (bows)
I wonder when Starmer really began to think "yes, I can win in 2024/5"? My theory is that he took the job to be John the Baptist, preparing the way for the next Labour PM, not to be that PM. Both the personnel and the programme you need for those two roles are very different.
Newsagents report rocketing demand for the Sunday Telegraph in the Camden area.
I’m beyond caring. Of COURSE it came from the fucking lab. Anyone who now thinks otherwise offers compelling evidence they have a sub-80 IQ
I’m just going to throw this out there.
Maybe, just maybe, you’re not as clever as you think you are? I know that you think I’m an imbecile. Let’s take that as read. But have you ever considered in your whole life that maybe, just maybe, you might be wrong about something? Doing so may make you less the significant object of derision you are.
There are two major reports - in the Indy and the FT - saying that Russia is intent on attacking all of Europe, sabotage, hacking, explosions, assassinations. The next five years of Labour might see us more or less at war with Russia
See what China is doing to Boeing
It seems inevitable to me that the next Labour government will see the collapse of the Putin regime and very likely his death. The price Russia is paying to win the war in Ukraine is unsustainable. They can be a damn nuisance, no doubt, but they are not a conventional threat. In the meantime, to be even more sure, we need to do all we can to make that price they pay for Ukraine even higher, ideally to the point that they give up.
I'm glad that my political instincts that Sadiq would win with a 10+ point margin weren't mistaken, though I'd still have liked to see him unseated. Maybe next time when Labour are unr incumbent party it will be much easier.
Well he seriously underperformed and Susan Hall seriously overperformed their respective parties polling numbers.
So, yeah, it may well happen next time.
There’s been evidence for some time that Labour has peaked in London. Uxbridge is a piece of it, and while people cast around for simple explanations like ‘ULEZ’, I suspect something more structural is going on. I notice that the Tories comfortably held my old patch of Havering & Redbridge, despite Redbridge now being very Labour, and a strong showing from Reform (if with a bit of help from Gaza candidates), and the assembly seat they lost was to the LDs.
London trended strongly Labour as tenants took over from home owners and younger residents moved in while older residents moved out. Nowadays, many of the young can’t afford to live in London and I know that some commute in to jobs from far away, simply because of having to live somewhere affordable; my brother’s son commutes from Southend. And running a London BTL is not as attractive as it was. It’s quite likely that London is no longer getting younger and more rented; indeed it would be interesting to see if these trends are starting to reverse? Hence we may be past peak Labour in London?
Sunak will go when he thinks he can win, ergo the decision on the date of the next election is inherently irrational and unpredictable.
Probably will be triggered by some random news story causing a temporary blip in the polls.
If Sunak waits until the polls show he can win, it will be Marchvember the Oneteenth.
Tories should just pass a law to say parliaments can last 10 years; what is there legally to stop them, since Parliament is sovereign?
Absolutely nothing. Except Charles refusing to sign the Act.
No, he's not allowed to refuse to sign an Act - that is much more deeply embedded in our unwritten constitution than 5 year parliaments.
The Chartists and lots of groups would argue about annual parliaments 3 or 7 years, all at the discretion of parliament.
Legally it is doable.
Politically it would be… unwise
Parliament already has discretion on the length of parliaments - anything between 0 and 5 years. Government legislating to further extend its time in office would be more than unwise.
Suella Braverman is on telly, a Truss-like gift to Labour in her analysis, agenda and popularity.
Asked by @bbclaurak why the Tories lost in London with a right-wing candidate, she says a) cos Susan Hall was 'unsupported' by the party but also b) the party botched the selection.
Stock market up whilst house prices remain pretty stagnant. How much longer will the good news last?
And interest on savings accounts has risen from derisory to substantial. It's hard to think of a more efficient way to take money out of the pockets of hard-working middle-aged families and lavish it on elderly 'savers'.
And the interest on student loans. The 2010+ cohort of students are now coming into prime voter age.
On topic, the lesson from Black Wednesday (negative equity and repossession), GE2017 (dementia tax), Truss and the interest rate spike (very expensive mortages) is you don't touch people's houses. You just don't touch them.
By the same token, when the Tories launched RTB, liberalised banks to lend and had lots of houses built in the 80s, they did very well. Right now, lots of young people can't really afford them, so they're not.
The secret is to ease access for people to good homes at good and low prices. And then leave them alone.
Labour actually have a plan for that, if they have the balls to go big on it.
Labour will do precisely zero. In fact I think they will end up rolling back some of the first time buyer specific reliefs.
Government subsidies to help first time buyers don’t solve the issue. far better to spend the money on building new homes
There's a myth being propagated here which is in serious danger of becoming acknowledged "fact". During Truss's brief tenure bond rates rose because the UK no longer seemed a safe bet with irresponsible spending and cuts in taxes. The major problem was the uncosted open ended cheque in respect of peoples' fuel bills, the tax cuts themselves were more modest.
After Sunak and particularly Hunt took over we returned to trend. The gas subsidy, whilst still large, was costed and time limited. What was also happening, however, is that the burst of international inflation that had caused the spike in gas prices became much more generalised as fuel costs drove everything else higher, particularly food. This meant interest rates rose internationally as well as here.
The myth is that the current rise in mortgage rates as people come to the end of their fixed rates has anything to do with Truss, her economic incompetence or is in any way out of the norm. It's just not true. After more than a decade of incredibly low interest rates following the GFC bond rates have returned to the lower end of normal and mortgages have moved accordingly. Hard for those who had got used to practically free money but inevitable. And absolutely nothing to do with Truss.
Brown had nothing to do with those dodgy American mortgages, either, but thems the breaks.
It is however fair to blame him (and Darling actually, who as CST set up the regulatory regime) for not noticing that British banks were undercapitalised and heavily dependent on the American loan market to stay solvent.
And fair to blame Truss for the instability and credibility hit, as well as the direct financial cost, that her little escapade created. Like Brown, she is easily tarred with more than she was responsible for and won’t shake it off, however much ‘explaining’ people try to do.
Suella Braverman is on telly, a Truss-like gift to Labour in her analysis, agenda and popularity.
Asked by @bbclaurak why the Tories lost in London with a right-wing candidate, she says a) cos Susan Hall was 'unsupported' by the party but also b) the party botched the selection.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
Forget waiting for a black swan. Pivot now and pivot hard. Away from the failed mess. Give people something new to concentrate on. Campaign on bringing back hanging for small boat refugees. Campaign on forcing people off sick notes into building new prisons which you then lock them up in. Campaign on mandatory skirts for girls in schools.
Whatever. Just change the script.
Waaaay ahead of you.
Tory MP yesterday suggested they stand on a joint Tory/Reform ticket at the GE
Would Reform really want to be associated with this bunch of whack job losers?
There is a desperate delusion on the Tory right, that (a) ReFUK voters are really Conservative voters and (b) a deal should be done to fix it.
Farage wants to destroy the existing party so that he can own the ruins and rebuild it in his own image. No deals, no mercy.
Worse for the moron party is that they can't out FUK the FUKers. First of all Farage is far more politically intelligent than they are. Secondly the more the Tories do performative cruelty, the fewer votes they get. Because FUKers always want MORE performative cruelty, and actual human being with a soul think painting over Mickey is a Bad Thing.
I can see this being a popular narrative with PBs Tory and Labour contingents. Labour supporters because it justifies the Tories sticking with a shit leader who's threatening to take them to electoral oblivion, and PB Tories because it means they don't have to revisit their decision to support a manifestly inadequate leader. 'I was wrong' is not three words you ever see together on PB. It's more comforting psychologically to believe it was all Truss's fault.
It falls on me once again to state the bleeding obvious, that people will be voting (and are being polled) on whether they want Rishi Sunak to be their PM for another term, not Liz Truss.
There are two major reports - in the Indy and the FT - saying that Russia is intent on attacking all of Europe, sabotage, hacking, explosions, assassinations. The next five years of Labour might see us more or less at war with Russia
See what China is doing to Boeing
It's hard to imagine China is doing more to Boeing than Boeing is to itself.
Boeing might be an incompetent bus load of fools, managerially - but I just can’t see them murdering two whistleblowers.
China or Russia? Yes
But, what would be the motive? Sow discard and suspicion in the US? Protect Boeing because they like their planes?
I can fully believe it might be the former, but that's a pretty extreme and high-risk way to do it and I'd be amazed if they had assassin-agents on the loose in Western countries who were not known.
On topic, the lesson from Black Wednesday (negative equity and repossession), GE2017 (dementia tax), Truss and the interest rate spike (very expensive mortages) is you don't touch people's houses. You just don't touch them.
By the same token, when the Tories launched RTB, liberalised banks to lend and had lots of houses built in the 80s, they did very well. Right now, lots of young people can't really afford them, so they're not.
The secret is to ease access for people to good homes at good and low prices. And then leave them alone.
Labour actually have a plan for that, if they have the balls to go big on it.
Labour will do precisely zero. In fact I think they will end up rolling back some of the first time buyer specific reliefs.
Interesting. Do you have a link for the rolling back proposal?
No link, there's just no money to do anything. Plus Labour just completely u turned on their workers "new deal". They've got form.
Their plan (which they've give very quiet on) would be net positive for the public finances. It doesn't involve tax giveaways.
But net negative for their image, pushing through planning reform in the UK is notoriously difficult. It's why successive governments since the 70s have all dodged the issue.
Unpopular but necessary decisions, if taken early enough, are exactly what you should be doing with a large majority.
If they went big on it, they could transform the housing market to the great benefit of the economy.
That's hopelessly naive. Labour will have the same local pressure as the Tories when it comes to planning reforms the same local councillors warning them of disaster if the reforms are pushed through and Keir doesn't strike me as the force of nature type to just do it anyway. He's fundamentally weak, even now his position on the next election is "I'm not sure but we're the red team not the blue one" which is fine to get into power but he'll have little to no mandate to actually do anything, just as Boris did in 2019 despite the huge 80 seat majority.
On topic, the lesson from Black Wednesday (negative equity and repossession), GE2017 (dementia tax), Truss and the interest rate spike (very expensive mortages) is you don't touch people's houses. You just don't touch them.
By the same token, when the Tories launched RTB, liberalised banks to lend and had lots of houses built in the 80s, they did very well. Right now, lots of young people can't really afford them, so they're not.
The secret is to ease access for people to good homes at good and low prices. And then leave them alone.
Labour actually have a plan for that, if they have the balls to go big on it.
Labour will do precisely zero. In fact I think they will end up rolling back some of the first time buyer specific reliefs.
Government subsidies to help first time buyers don’t solve the issue. far better to spend the money on building new homes
The number of homes is increasing faster than the number of people or the number of households.
The problem is that housing is seen as an investment so first time buyers are squeezed by cash buyers, second home owners and BTL landlords.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
Net migration to the UK is about 650,000/year of which approximately 30,000 are informal migrants arriving by boat. Why so much focus on the 4% and not the 96% that the government have absolute control over?
Newsagents report rocketing demand for the Sunday Telegraph in the Camden area.
I’m beyond caring. Of COURSE it came from the fucking lab. Anyone who now thinks otherwise offers compelling evidence they have a sub-80 IQ
Aren´t you some kind of expert on the numinous sex lives of cider scented dolmens, or something...?
The only laboratory that most of the Telegraph hacks know anything about is one that makes intoxicating chemicals, which probably explains why they publish such pish so often.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
This is on the cards too, I'm sure once the EU adopts it the ECHR will magically reverse its position on it though.
Can Harper stop telling us what our priorities are. And clinging onto the projections to a GE are ridiculous. The Lib Dems aren’t going to poll 17% and the independents aren’t going to do aswell .
And now we’re back to the life raft of Tees Valley ! zzzzzzz
When faced with a question on being beaten by the Lib Dems he then said “local elections are not representative of what will happen in a general election”!
Actually there is a reasonable chance that the Lib Dems do poll in the high teens. They are generally ignored by the media, but at election times they have to be reported fairly, and usually they benefit from the attention. So coming into the campaign on around 12-13% they could easily climb. Unlike Reform they have the capacity to wage a ground war in their target seats, so gains like Winchester and Cheltenham in Wessex are looking pretty certain. I would say therefore that it is more likely than not that the Lib Dems match their 1997 performance and more than double their seat tally. If the Tories hit meltdown then more seats in places like Surrey and Glos come into play too and that credibility can enhance their poll rating in a positive circle. The media has a limited attention span, and after the 53rd "Starmer on course for a landslide as Sunak is yesterday´s cold mince" story, they may well cast around for a fresh angle. "Lib Dems poised to make pincer movement on the Tories in their target seats" is one such story.
That used to be said, but isn’t the experience of their performance since 2010.
But LibDem national VI, and actual vote, doesn’t really matter. As I’ve said before, if LibDems in Labour target seats vote Labour but Labour voters in (the fewer) LibDem targets vote LibDem, the LD vote share goes down but their seat tally goes up.
The LibDems just beat the Tories in seat count when their poll VI is about 10% and their estimated NEV from Thursday about 16%, when the Tories are on 20-25% and 25% respectively. That’s what should really worry the Tories.
I of course want rid of the Tories so don’t want them to change leader.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
Was discussing this last night with tory friend (I know, I know but hear me out) and it took her all of about 5 seconds to say, ‘But it was Liz Truss that did it. That’s the moment we lost the election.’
She reckons people would have forgiven or forgotten Boris’ partying but not the Liz Truss budget.
I saw a comment in a previous thread from someone saying the next election was lost for the Tories the moment Kwasi Kwarteng sat down after delivering the mini budget.
I think that was spot on.
Curtice is right when he said two 6 week periods in this Parliament have been crucial to the fate of the Conservatives: (1) Partygate and (2) Liz Truss.
(1) undermined their moral authority (2) undermined the perception of competence
On topic, the lesson from Black Wednesday (negative equity and repossession), GE2017 (dementia tax), Truss and the interest rate spike (very expensive mortages) is you don't touch people's houses. You just don't touch them.
By the same token, when the Tories launched RTB, liberalised banks to lend and had lots of houses built in the 80s, they did very well. Right now, lots of young people can't really afford them, so they're not.
The secret is to ease access for people to good homes at good and low prices. And then leave them alone.
Labour actually have a plan for that, if they have the balls to go big on it.
Labour will do precisely zero. In fact I think they will end up rolling back some of the first time buyer specific reliefs.
Interesting. Do you have a link for the rolling back proposal?
No link, there's just no money to do anything. Plus Labour just completely u turned on their workers "new deal". They've got form.
Their plan (which they've give very quiet on) would be net positive for the public finances. It doesn't involve tax giveaways.
But net negative for their image, pushing through planning reform in the UK is notoriously difficult. It's why successive governments since the 70s have all dodged the issue.
Unpopular but necessary decisions, if taken early enough, are exactly what you should be doing with a large majority.
If they went big on it, they could transform the housing market to the great benefit of the economy.
One of those heavy lifting ‘ifs’, while Labour promises us breakfast clubs for kids and school teeth brushing lessons…
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
Net migration to the UK is about 650,000/year of which approximately 30,000 are informal migrants arriving by boat. Why so much focus on the 4% and not the 96% that the government have absolute control over?
Because it's red meat for DM and Express readers, most of whom assume all the brown faces they see came in illegally by boat to plot terrorists atrocities.
On topic, the lesson from Black Wednesday (negative equity and repossession), GE2017 (dementia tax), Truss and the interest rate spike (very expensive mortages) is you don't touch people's houses. You just don't touch them.
By the same token, when the Tories launched RTB, liberalised banks to lend and had lots of houses built in the 80s, they did very well. Right now, lots of young people can't really afford them, so they're not.
The secret is to ease access for people to good homes at good and low prices. And then leave them alone.
Labour actually have a plan for that, if they have the balls to go big on it.
Labour will do precisely zero. In fact I think they will end up rolling back some of the first time buyer specific reliefs.
Government subsidies to help first time buyers don’t solve the issue. far better to spend the money on building new homes
The number of homes is increasing faster than the number of people or the number of households.
Are you sure ?
Can you give some numbers as the common assumption is it is the other way round.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
They are not refusing the engage. There’s no intersection between the two sides.
The EU is insisting that the UK takes an agreed percentage of migrants across Europe. The UK is not willing to do that deal.
There's a myth being propagated here which is in serious danger of becoming acknowledged "fact". During Truss's brief tenure bond rates rose because the UK no longer seemed a safe bet with irresponsible spending and cuts in taxes. The major problem was the uncosted open ended cheque in respect of peoples' fuel bills, the tax cuts themselves were more modest.
After Sunak and particularly Hunt took over we returned to trend. The gas subsidy, whilst still large, was costed and time limited. What was also happening, however, is that the burst of international inflation that had caused the spike in gas prices became much more generalised as fuel costs drove everything else higher, particularly food. This meant interest rates rose internationally as well as here.
The myth is that the current rise in mortgage rates as people come to the end of their fixed rates has anything to do with Truss, her economic incompetence or is in any way out of the norm. It's just not true. After more than a decade of incredibly low interest rates following the GFC bond rates have returned to the lower end of normal and mortgages have moved accordingly. Hard for those who had got used to practically free money but inevitable. And absolutely nothing to do with Truss.
Brown had nothing to do with those dodgy American mortgages, either, but thems the breaks.
It is however fair to blame him (and Darling actually, who as CST set up the regulatory regime) for not noticing that British banks were undercapitalised and heavily dependent on the American loan market to stay solvent.
And fair to blame Truss for the instability and credibility hit, as well as the direct financial cost, that her little escapade created. Like Brown, she is easily tarred with more than she was responsible for and won’t shake it off, however much ‘explaining’ people try to do.
The Truss problem was not just the budget, though I think the additional rate tax cut probably helped remind a lot of people of the Tories’ real priorities. It was the internal party chaos that ensued, and the string of bad news events over the following 12 months.
I know many on here were nonplussed by the debate over HS2 but to me the series of cutbacks starting under Boris and concluding under Sunak signified a government just giving up on the future. It suggested a country in decline, no longer able to afford to invest.
There’s not actually been much bad news recently. People had a tax cut, inflation is down, the economy is doing OK and the NHS crisis is no worse than it was a year ago by all accounts. But it’s too late.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
Net migration to the UK is about 650,000/year of which approximately 30,000 are informal migrants arriving by boat. Why so much focus on the 4% and not the 96% that the government have absolute control over?
Because it's red meat for DM and Express readers, most of whom assume all the brown faces they see came in illegally by boat to plot terrorists atrocities.
TBF fair to the Daily Mail and their readers they didn't like white faces from Poland either.
Forget waiting for a black swan. Pivot now and pivot hard. Away from the failed mess. Give people something new to concentrate on. Campaign on bringing back hanging for small boat refugees. Campaign on forcing people off sick notes into building new prisons which you then lock them up in. Campaign on mandatory skirts for girls in schools.
Whatever. Just change the script.
Waaaay ahead of you.
Tory MP yesterday suggested they stand on a joint Tory/Reform ticket at the GE
Would Reform really want to be associated with this bunch of whack job losers?
There is a desperate delusion on the Tory right, that (a) ReFUK voters are really Conservative voters and (b) a deal should be done to fix it.
Farage wants to destroy the existing party so that he can own the ruins and rebuild it in his own image. No deals, no mercy.
Worse for the moron party is that they can't out FUK the FUKers. First of all Farage is far more politically intelligent than they are. Secondly the more the Tories do performative cruelty, the fewer votes they get. Because FUKers always want MORE performative cruelty, and actual human being with a soul think painting over Mickey is a Bad Thing.
And because politically, it doesn’t work, and while Farage is free of having to implement any of it, the Tories are in power and stuck with the responsibility. Promising that pigs can fly is much easier than putting it to the test by projecting them into the air. Cf. Brexit.
I of course want rid of the Tories so don’t want them to change leader.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
Sunak's problems largely stem from having almost no knowledge of how most people in the UK live - the pressures they face, the aspirations they have - and of how things work for them. He has never lived anything close to an ordinary life. What's really strange is that he has never had any interest in finding out. But he's also not a narcissist or a grifter. So I genuinely don't see why he got into politics.
I can see this being a popular narrative with PBs Tory and Labour contingents. Labour supporters because it justifies the Tories sticking with a shit leader who's threatening to take them to electoral oblivion, and PB Tories because it means they don't have to revisit their decision to support a manifestly inadequate leader. 'I was wrong' is not three words you ever see together on PB. It's more comforting psychologically to believe it was all Truss's fault.
It falls on me once again to state the bleeding obvious, that people will be voting (and are being polled) on whether they want Rishi Sunak to be their PM for another term, not Liz Truss.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
Net migration to the UK is about 650,000/year of which approximately 30,000 are informal migrants arriving by boat. Why so much focus on the 4% and not the 96% that the government have absolute control over?
Because it's red meat for DM and Express readers, most of whom assume all the brown faces they see came in illegally by boat to plot terrorists atrocities.
And, it's absolutely fascinating you see it through that prism.
It's about control, queue-jumping and fair play. Brits don't like it when people take the piss.
Transport secretary Mark Harper: "On the results this week, we would have a hung parliament. That means Keir Starmer's not on course to win a majority ... the polls are not correct, there's everything to fight for."
This is the point we've reached. Utter denial. Mark Harper knows this isn't true. Every member of the cabinet knows it isn't true. Every Conservative MP knows it isn't true. It's the Tory version of "Jeremy Corbyn won the argument".
I of course want rid of the Tories so don’t want them to change leader.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
Sunak's problems largely stem from having almost no knowledge of how most people in the UK live - the pressures they face, the aspirations they have - and of how things work for them. He has never lived anything close to an ordinary life. What's really strange is that he has never had any interest in finding out. But he's also not a narcissist or a grifter. So I genuinely don't see why he got into politics.
He rebelled against his parents wanting him to go into pharmacy?
There are two major reports - in the Indy and the FT - saying that Russia is intent on attacking all of Europe, sabotage, hacking, explosions, assassinations. The next five years of Labour might see us more or less at war with Russia
See what China is doing to Boeing
It's hard to imagine China is doing more to Boeing than Boeing is to itself.
Boeing might be an incompetent bus load of fools, managerially - but I just can’t see them murdering two whistleblowers.
China or Russia? Yes
If it were Russia, they would leave their fingerprints all over it. They always do.
There's a myth being propagated here which is in serious danger of becoming acknowledged "fact". During Truss's brief tenure bond rates rose because the UK no longer seemed a safe bet with irresponsible spending and cuts in taxes. The major problem was the uncosted open ended cheque in respect of peoples' fuel bills, the tax cuts themselves were more modest.
After Sunak and particularly Hunt took over we returned to trend. The gas subsidy, whilst still large, was costed and time limited. What was also happening, however, is that the burst of international inflation that had caused the spike in gas prices became much more generalised as fuel costs drove everything else higher, particularly food. This meant interest rates rose internationally as well as here.
The myth is that the current rise in mortgage rates as people come to the end of their fixed rates has anything to do with Truss, her economic incompetence or is in any way out of the norm. It's just not true. After more than a decade of incredibly low interest rates following the GFC bond rates have returned to the lower end of normal and mortgages have moved accordingly. Hard for those who had got used to practically free money but inevitable. And absolutely nothing to do with Truss.
Brown had nothing to do with those dodgy American mortgages, either, but thems the breaks.
It is however fair to blame him (and Darling actually, who as CST set up the regulatory regime) for not noticing that British banks were undercapitalised and heavily dependent on the American loan market to stay solvent.
And fair to blame Truss for the instability and credibility hit, as well as the direct financial cost, that her little escapade created. Like Brown, she is easily tarred with more than she was responsible for and won’t shake it off, however much ‘explaining’ people try to do.
The Truss problem was not just the budget, though I think the additional rate tax cut probably helped remind a lot of people of the Tories’ real priorities. It was the internal party chaos that ensued, and the string of bad news events over the following 12 months.
I know many on here were nonplussed by the debate over HS2 but to me the series of cutbacks starting under Boris and concluding under Sunak signified a government just giving up on the future. It suggested a country in decline, no longer able to afford to invest.
There’s not actually been much bad news recently. People had a tax cut, inflation is down, the economy is doing OK and the NHS crisis is no worse than it was a year ago by all accounts. But it’s too late.
Except the tax cuts scream desperation because they are based on unexplained and unidentified future cuts in spending.
At a time when I can look round and see multiple areas where government expenditure needs to be increased not decreased.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
What does Rwanda type mean, though? I can see the EU offshoring asylum requests. Some EU member states do so already.
On topic, the lesson from Black Wednesday (negative equity and repossession), GE2017 (dementia tax), Truss and the interest rate spike (very expensive mortages) is you don't touch people's houses. You just don't touch them.
By the same token, when the Tories launched RTB, liberalised banks to lend and had lots of houses built in the 80s, they did very well. Right now, lots of young people can't really afford them, so they're not.
The secret is to ease access for people to good homes at good and low prices. And then leave them alone.
Labour actually have a plan for that, if they have the balls to go big on it.
Labour will do precisely zero. In fact I think they will end up rolling back some of the first time buyer specific reliefs.
Interesting. Do you have a link for the rolling back proposal?
No link, there's just no money to do anything. Plus Labour just completely u turned on their workers "new deal". They've got form.
Their plan (which they've give very quiet on) would be net positive for the public finances. It doesn't involve tax giveaways.
But net negative for their image, pushing through planning reform in the UK is notoriously difficult. It's why successive governments since the 70s have all dodged the issue.
Unpopular but necessary decisions, if taken early enough, are exactly what you should be doing with a large majority.
If they went big on it, they could transform the housing market to the great benefit of the economy.
That's hopelessly naive. Labour will have the same local pressure as the Tories when it comes to planning reforms the same local councillors warning them of disaster if the reforms are pushed through and Keir doesn't strike me as the force of nature type to just do it anyway. He's fundamentally weak, even now his position on the next election is "I'm not sure but we're the red team not the blue one" which is fine to get into power but he'll have little to no mandate to actually do anything, just as Boris did in 2019 despite the huge 80 seat majority.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
Net migration to the UK is about 650,000/year of which approximately 30,000 are informal migrants arriving by boat. Why so much focus on the 4% and not the 96% that the government have absolute control over?
Because it's red meat for DM and Express readers, most of whom assume all the brown faces they see came in illegally by boat to plot terrorists atrocities.
TBF fair to the Daily Mail and their readers they didn't like white faces from Poland either.
Polish immigrants will trend white-British over time, and they're also socially-conservative and right-wing.
The issue was the rate of change and the numbers. It's probably true that sensitivities to that rate are greater the greater the level of cultural divergence of the source but there is a limit to any type if it's large enough in number. It even is for internal migration in Britain, i.e. Londoners buying up Cornish property.
This subject always seems to be dealt with in absolutes when, in reality, it's anything but.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
They might use third party countries to vet asylum seekers, but they won't choose unsafe countries and deem them safe.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
What does Rwanda type mean, though? I can see the EU offshoring asylum requests. Some EU member states do so already.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it?
We adopt morally reprehensible policies They offshore asylum requests
There are two major reports - in the Indy and the FT - saying that Russia is intent on attacking all of Europe, sabotage, hacking, explosions, assassinations. The next five years of Labour might see us more or less at war with Russia
See what China is doing to Boeing
It's hard to imagine China is doing more to Boeing than Boeing is to itself.
The death of the two whistleblowers is extraordinary. I'm amazed it isn't a bigger story. Can you imagine if it was a green activist from a fossil fuel company?
Why would Russia embark on such a 'crazy' policy. Well as the old saying goes it's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog. And Putin believes Europe doesn't have any fight. That's obviously a caricature but we all know of certain countries who prefer shameless isolation.
Boris Johnson (not necessarily a reliable witness) made a startling remark in a Putin documentary that he'd effectively been threatened with assassination. Even if the remark was made in a roundabout way the only sensible response should have been furious and to the point. Johnson gives no impression he even responded to it (if it was true).
On topic, the lesson from Black Wednesday (negative equity and repossession), GE2017 (dementia tax), Truss and the interest rate spike (very expensive mortages) is you don't touch people's houses. You just don't touch them.
By the same token, when the Tories launched RTB, liberalised banks to lend and had lots of houses built in the 80s, they did very well. Right now, lots of young people can't really afford them, so they're not.
The secret is to ease access for people to good homes at good and low prices. And then leave them alone.
Labour actually have a plan for that, if they have the balls to go big on it.
Labour will do precisely zero. In fact I think they will end up rolling back some of the first time buyer specific reliefs.
Interesting. Do you have a link for the rolling back proposal?
No link, there's just no money to do anything. Plus Labour just completely u turned on their workers "new deal". They've got form.
Their plan (which they've give very quiet on) would be net positive for the public finances. It doesn't involve tax giveaways.
But net negative for their image, pushing through planning reform in the UK is notoriously difficult. It's why successive governments since the 70s have all dodged the issue.
Unpopular but necessary decisions, if taken early enough, are exactly what you should be doing with a large majority.
If they went big on it, they could transform the housing market to the great benefit of the economy.
That's hopelessly naive. Labour will have the same local pressure as the Tories when it comes to planning reforms the same local councillors warning them of disaster if the reforms are pushed through and Keir doesn't strike me as the force of nature type to just do it anyway. He's fundamentally weak, even now his position on the next election is "I'm not sure but we're the red team not the blue one" which is fine to get into power but he'll have little to no mandate to actually do anything, just as Boris did in 2019 despite the huge 80 seat majority.
Being cruel to those on benefits seems likely to go to warp speed now .
To counter this the public should be reminded that one day it could be them .
No need. Going warp speed on "crush the scroungers" will only speed up still further the Tory slide towards ELE.
The 5 remaining Tory voters may think people on benefits are scroungers. That sick people need to be punished for faking. But in the real world, normal voters dislike wanton acts of cruelty, especially when they are told it is their priority.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
Net migration to the UK is about 650,000/year of which approximately 30,000 are informal migrants arriving by boat. Why so much focus on the 4% and not the 96% that the government have absolute control over?
Because it's red meat for DM and Express readers, most of whom assume all the brown faces they see came in illegally by boat to plot terrorists atrocities.
And, it's absolutely fascinating you see it through that prism.
It's about control, queue-jumping and fair play. Brits don't like it when people take the piss.
I don't see the same rabble-rousing in the DM against private healthcare*.
Seriously, you are right that Brits don't like queue-jumpers but I honestly don't believe that is the principle objection of most of those who get worked up about the boats. What I hear is stuff like 'the country is full up', 'we are being swamped', etc. Now those may be valid points but as Dura points out 96% of immigration is legal and controllable by the government.
Only my opinion of course - I'd love to see some polling on this.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
They might use third party countries to vet asylum seekers, but they won't choose unsafe countries and deem them safe.
Not true, plenty of EU bound migrants are sent to Libya. Rwanda is a land of milk and honey in comparison.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
What does Rwanda type mean, though? I can see the EU offshoring asylum requests. Some EU member states do so already.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it?
We adopt morally reprehensible policies They offshore asylum requests
Not really, there's a very big difference between offshoring asylum requests to a third country where they are processed with successful applicants then being allowed to return, and automatically refusing all asylum requests and sending the people who make them to a third country with no possible right of return.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
They might use third party countries to vet asylum seekers, but they won't choose unsafe countries and deem them safe.
Not true, plenty of EU bound migrants are sent to Libya. Rwanda is a land of milk and honey in comparison.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
Net migration to the UK is about 650,000/year of which approximately 30,000 are informal migrants arriving by boat. Why so much focus on the 4% and not the 96% that the government have absolute control over?
Because it's red meat for DM and Express readers, most of whom assume all the brown faces they see came in illegally by boat to plot terrorists atrocities.
And, it's absolutely fascinating you see it through that prism.
It's about control, queue-jumping and fair play. Brits don't like it when people take the piss.
Which - as your argument states - is why they are so determined to get the Tories out. The Tories have let immigration run wild. The Tories have no control of the border. The Tories keep losing illegal migrants, letting them work unchecked. The Tories have no plan to actually get things under control.
These are all things Tories say about Labour. But this is today's reality. Your reality. Your government's abject failure. Same with "keep Labour out or they will put taxes up" from the government who put taxes up to record levels. People aren't listening any more because everything they say is wrong.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
They might use third party countries to vet asylum seekers, but they won't choose unsafe countries and deem them safe.
Not true, plenty of EU bound migrants are sent to Libya. Rwanda is a land of milk and honey in comparison.
sent back to Libya...
Does it make a difference? They still end up in Libya.
There are two major reports - in the Indy and the FT - saying that Russia is intent on attacking all of Europe, sabotage, hacking, explosions, assassinations. The next five years of Labour might see us more or less at war with Russia
See what China is doing to Boeing
It's hard to imagine China is doing more to Boeing than Boeing is to itself.
Boeing might be an incompetent bus load of fools, managerially - but I just can’t see them murdering two whistleblowers.
China or Russia? Yes
If it were Russia, they would leave their fingerprints all over it. They always do.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
They might use third party countries to vet asylum seekers, but they won't choose unsafe countries and deem them safe.
Not true, plenty of EU bound migrants are sent to Libya. Rwanda is a land of milk and honey in comparison.
sent back to Libya...
Does it make a difference? They still end up in Libya.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
Net migration to the UK is about 650,000/year of which approximately 30,000 are informal migrants arriving by boat. Why so much focus on the 4% and not the 96% that the government have absolute control over?
Because it's red meat for DM and Express readers, most of whom assume all the brown faces they see came in illegally by boat to plot terrorists atrocities.
And, it's absolutely fascinating you see it through that prism.
It's about control, queue-jumping and fair play. Brits don't like it when people take the piss.
Which is why the Tories were fucked the day Partygate hit the news. And why “fair play” includes assuming every poor sod who can’t work doesn’t want to work baffles most fair minded voters. Tories have caught the socialist disease of looking for enemies everywhere. People are realising they are one serious accident at work from being one of them.
Newsagents report rocketing demand for the Sunday Telegraph in the Camden area.
I’m beyond caring. Of COURSE it came from the fucking lab. Anyone who now thinks otherwise offers compelling evidence they have a sub-80 IQ
Here is someone winning $100000 by convincing someone with an IQ probably in excess of 80 that it was not a lab leak. I think it was, but it ain't clear cut
I of course want rid of the Tories so don’t want them to change leader.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
Sunak's problems largely stem from having almost no knowledge of how most people in the UK live - the pressures they face, the aspirations they have - and of how things work for them. He has never lived anything close to an ordinary life. What's really strange is that he has never had any interest in finding out. But he's also not a narcissist or a grifter. So I genuinely don't see why he got into politics.
I think that's a ridiculous statement. His background is far more ordinary than Cameron, Osborne and Clegg. Comfortable yes and his parents sent him to a top school where he has since been a very high achiever.
So far as I'm aware his parents were not millionaires but came here as aspirational refugees. He may be rather nerdy but I seriously question if you would make that remark about someone who was white.
There's a myth being propagated here which is in serious danger of becoming acknowledged "fact". During Truss's brief tenure bond rates rose because the UK no longer seemed a safe bet with irresponsible spending and cuts in taxes. The major problem was the uncosted open ended cheque in respect of peoples' fuel bills, the tax cuts themselves were more modest.
After Sunak and particularly Hunt took over we returned to trend. The gas subsidy, whilst still large, was costed and time limited. What was also happening, however, is that the burst of international inflation that had caused the spike in gas prices became much more generalised as fuel costs drove everything else higher, particularly food. This meant interest rates rose internationally as well as here.
The myth is that the current rise in mortgage rates as people come to the end of their fixed rates has anything to do with Truss, her economic incompetence or is in any way out of the norm. It's just not true. After more than a decade of incredibly low interest rates following the GFC bond rates have returned to the lower end of normal and mortgages have moved accordingly. Hard for those who had got used to practically free money but inevitable. And absolutely nothing to do with Truss.
Brown had nothing to do with those dodgy American mortgages, either, but thems the breaks.
He had plenty to do with dodgy British mortgages though.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
They might use third party countries to vet asylum seekers, but they won't choose unsafe countries and deem them safe.
Not true, plenty of EU bound migrants are sent to Libya. Rwanda is a land of milk and honey in comparison.
sent back to Libya...
Does it make a difference? They still end up in Libya.
I think there is a difference, yes.
You might but those people who get shipped to Libya probably don't.
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
What does Rwanda type mean, though? I can see the EU offshoring asylum requests. Some EU member states do so already.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it?
We adopt morally reprehensible policies They offshore asylum requests
Not really, there's a very big difference between offshoring asylum requests to a third country where they are processed with successful applicants then being allowed to return, and automatically refusing all asylum requests and sending the people who make them to a third country with no possible right of return.
And not having any legal routes open for asylum. Meaning the UK is essentially pulling back from any obligations under the UNRC.
There are two major reports - in the Indy and the FT - saying that Russia is intent on attacking all of Europe, sabotage, hacking, explosions, assassinations. The next five years of Labour might see us more or less at war with Russia
See what China is doing to Boeing
It's hard to imagine China is doing more to Boeing than Boeing is to itself.
The death of the two whistleblowers is extraordinary. I'm amazed it isn't a bigger story. Can you imagine if it was a green activist from a fossil fuel company?
Why would Russia embark on such a 'crazy' policy. Well as the old saying goes it's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog. And Putin believes Europe doesn't have any fight. That's obviously a caricature but we all know of certain countries who prefer shameless isolation.
Boris Johnson (not necessarily a reliable witness) made a startling remark in a Putin documentary that he'd effectively been threatened with assassination. Even if the remark was made in a roundabout way the only sensible response should have been furious and to the point. Johnson gives no impression he even responded to it (if it was true).
The second death is likely coincidence. It's hard to see (if confirmed on autopsy) how an assassin would bring about these symptoms.
"He was a healthy individual who ate well and exercised," Turkewitz told NBC News. "So it just seems odd that he went so fast."
Dean had been sick for two weeks and had been struggling to breathe, forcing him to be put on a ventilator...
The first - "self-inflicted gunshot" in a hotel parking lot - is rather more open to question. Though equally, being a whistleblower against a large company is extremely stressful. It's also possible that Boeing's treatment of him drove him to suicide.
There are two major reports - in the Indy and the FT - saying that Russia is intent on attacking all of Europe, sabotage, hacking, explosions, assassinations. The next five years of Labour might see us more or less at war with Russia
See what China is doing to Boeing
It's hard to imagine China is doing more to Boeing than Boeing is to itself.
Boeing might be an incompetent bus load of fools, managerially - but I just can’t see them murdering two whistleblowers.
China or Russia? Yes
That’s very naive. There are plenty of stakeholders in Boeing beyond its management who don’t want its share price to tank further than it already has. Equally the travails of an iconic American corporate and industrial giant are grist to the propaganda mill best fed by live whistleblowers as to its incompetence.
I of course want rid of the Tories so don’t want them to change leader.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
Sunak's problems largely stem from having almost no knowledge of how most people in the UK live - the pressures they face, the aspirations they have - and of how things work for them. He has never lived anything close to an ordinary life. What's really strange is that he has never had any interest in finding out. But he's also not a narcissist or a grifter. So I genuinely don't see why he got into politics.
I think that's a ridiculous statement. His background is far more ordinary than Cameron, Osborne and Clegg. Comfortable yes and his parents sent him to a top school where he has since been a very high achiever.
So far as I'm aware his parents were not millionaires but came here as aspirational refugees. He may be rather nerdy but I seriously question if you would make that remark about someone who was white.
The same applies to Cameron etc. They are all the girl in Pulp's Common People.
I of course want rid of the Tories so don’t want them to change leader.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
Sunak's problems largely stem from having almost no knowledge of how most people in the UK live - the pressures they face, the aspirations they have - and of how things work for them. He has never lived anything close to an ordinary life. What's really strange is that he has never had any interest in finding out. But he's also not a narcissist or a grifter. So I genuinely don't see why he got into politics.
I think that's a ridiculous statement. His background is far more ordinary than Cameron, Osborne and Clegg. Comfortable yes and his parents sent him to a top school where he has since been a very high achiever.
So far as I'm aware his parents were not millionaires but came here as aspirational refugees. He may be rather nerdy but I seriously question if you would make that remark about someone who was white.
Don't be silly. Sunak went to Winchester College (fees £36k pa); there was nothing ordinary about his upbringing.
(And the accusation of implied racism was rather nasty btw.)
Newsagents report rocketing demand for the Sunday Telegraph in the Camden area.
I’m beyond caring. Of COURSE it came from the fucking lab. Anyone who now thinks otherwise offers compelling evidence they have a sub-80 IQ
I’m just going to throw this out there.
Maybe, just maybe, you’re not as clever as you think you are? I know that you think I’m an imbecile. Let’s take that as read. But have you ever considered in your whole life that maybe, just maybe, you might be wrong about something? Doing so may make you less the significant object of derision you are.
Just a bit of fun.
Derision? Yeah, right
I am happy to be mocked for my multiple personal failings - from pathological narcissism to a weird obsession with Newent - go right ahead. I mock myself
But on these big things I am consistently right, and consistently six-twelve months and 17 IQ points ahead of almost everyone on PB. Sorry
"A speeding cyclist involved in a fatal collision with a pensioner could not be prosecuted because speed limits do not apply to bicycles, a court heard.
Brian Fitzgerald, a director at Credit Suisse, was in a “fast group” of cyclists doing timed laps of Regent’s Park in London when Hilda Griffiths, 81, crossed the road they were on to try to reach a pedestrian island.
Despite a 20mph speed limit, Mr Fitzgerald, a member of the Muswell Hill Peloton cycling club, told a coroner they were travelling at up to 29 mph in aerodynamic “pace line” formation to maximise momentum when he struck the retired nursery teacher walking her dog.
He said he had “zero-reaction time”, adding how cyclists are not required to obey 20mph signs because “the legal speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists [the same] as motorists”."
I was very nearly knocked over yesterday by a twat on a Surron doing estimated 35mph on the pavement while on his phone. If I hadn't jumped there's a very good chance I'd have been killed.
He's been riding around a lot recently at high speed including on the paths, through the parks and on the wrong side of the road.
But the police do not care. They're spooked by what happened in Cardiff where the parents of those two tossers blamed the police for their deaths while riding like lunatics.
Hopefully when he crashes he will kill himself rather than somebody else.
But certainly cracking down on inconsiderate and dangerous cyclists and e-bikes including that idiot Drakeford to fuck off when he supports them (a compelling sign he doesn't really give a shit about dangerous driving despite his 20mph nonsense) would be a good start by any government. They're not a pest, they're a real menace.
I've spotted a number of near misses in London, both pedestrians and cyclists, who have their headphones on whilst entering traffic - often at odds with traffic signals. Sooner or later someone will be killed.
Are you crossing the road or on the road? If so, remove your headphones.
Lewis Goodall @lewis_goodall · 57m January election remains underpriced
I bet on that yesterday, and December.
I think September underpriced. I don't think Sunak fancies conference season.
Yes I don’t know how to second guess the timing so I’m not in on this market yet.
January feels like utter lunacy and might lead to a Canadageddon.
December would be tricky. I know it happened last time but that had a specific set of justifications which don’t really pertain this time.
We’re too late for May and (I think) June. So that leaves 5 options: July through November.
The problem from a betting POV is that we’re dealing with a volatile Party, in febrile mood. I have no way of applying my head over heart metric to this one at the moment. Almost anything could happen with the current Conservative Party.
The only sure bet is that they’re going to lose.
Latest parliament can dissolve is 17 December 2024, and then polling day will be Tuesday 28 January 2025. You'd have a v. soft campaign over the week before Christmas, and it wouldn't really heat up until Boxing Day. It could work, although the January payday point is a good one. I wouldn't recommend it but it's possible.
The point on "go now because otherwise it will be even worse" is almost always made by political opponents desperate to get into office trying to goad the Government into dissolving early so they get in early. There's no reason the Government should play that game; there's plenty on the upside that might work out for them.
Rwanda and the Summer boat crossings is probably the biggest political risk, and after that the performance of the NHS through another Winter. But, it's possible the former 'works' and a big cash injection is delivered on the latter, as the economy recovers, and that strengthens Sunak's GE defensive strategy.
I thought it traditional that elections take place on a Thursday which gives us the 23rd January. If he hangs on until the following Tuesday he really is desperate for his black swan event.
But maybe you are right and 9 more months of performative cruelty will swing the dial. I am not sure Sunak pulls of "nasty" to electoral benefit in the way a real piece of work like Braverman or Jenrick would. He's just not convincing.
You say "performative cruelty" and throw around other charming words like nasty and piece of work. That rigid blend of moral sanctimony and tribalism that's so very Labour.
How do I see it?
I look upon a prospective Labour government with unabashed horror: I think it will be very negative for me and my family. Not to mention the country with pointless nationalisations, class war, an expansion of public sector entitlements and taxes, without any commensurate increase in output, turning identity politics back up to 11 and making ill-thought through and partisan changes to fundamental parts of our constitution.
I'm delighted if he cockblocks you for as long as possible.
Performative cruelty looks like Braverman "dreaming of flights to Rwanda" Jenrick painting over Disney characters at a reception centre for children ". And more recently Sunak's war on PiP recipients.
You say I am partisan, and it is true I would prefer to see a Labour Government over this current outrage, but to be honest I would be happy to see any party, with the exception of Reform and the Workers Party replace this shower.
You list your objections which are essentially ideological issues. You state you and your family would be worse off under a Labour Government, which is a fair analysis to conclude, however were you and your family enhanced by Truss's budget. Were you and your family enhanced by spending £2m per refugee on removals to Rwanda. Did you or your family benefit from the PPE scandal or from Boris Johnson's parties. I suspect the answers are all no.
I don't have any problem with Rwanda. Flying migrants who've come here illegally with the aid of people smugglers to a nice hotel in Kigali could break the business model of the people smugglers, save lives, prevent exploitation, and aid social harmony here.
Unchecked migration and loose border control will not have a happy ending.
I wholly agree with your last paragraph.
The trouble is Rwanda is expensive performative nonsense that doesn't touch the sides. We need some pan-European remedy, because you could rightly comment that it is equally chaotic in Europe. We need to sit down with the EU and ask what they are planning to do with boats from Africa and Turkey and how can we help? The current Government refuses to engage with Europe over practical solutions
What would you say if the whole EU adopted a Rwanda type solution?
They might use third party countries to vet asylum seekers, but they won't choose unsafe countries and deem them safe.
They don’t fiddle with the system to say that black is white!
In other, non-political, news our Blue-tits nest now has four chicks in it. Hatching has begun!
I of course want rid of the Tories so don’t want them to change leader.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
Sunak's problems largely stem from having almost no knowledge of how most people in the UK live - the pressures they face, the aspirations they have - and of how things work for them. He has never lived anything close to an ordinary life. What's really strange is that he has never had any interest in finding out. But he's also not a narcissist or a grifter. So I genuinely don't see why he got into politics.
I think that's a ridiculous statement. His background is far more ordinary than Cameron, Osborne and Clegg. Comfortable yes and his parents sent him to a top school where he has since been a very high achiever.
So far as I'm aware his parents were not millionaires but came here as aspirational refugees. He may be rather nerdy but I seriously question if you would make that remark about someone who was white.
I would make that argument about anyone who had progressed seamlessly from an elite UK public school to Oxbridge to Silicon Valley to the City, while marrying the daughter of a multi-billionaire along the way.
Newsagents report rocketing demand for the Sunday Telegraph in the Camden area.
I’m beyond caring. Of COURSE it came from the fucking lab. Anyone who now thinks otherwise offers compelling evidence they have a sub-80 IQ
Here is someone winning $100000 by convincing someone with an IQ probably in excess of 80 that it was not a lab leak. I think it was, but it ain't clear cut
I of course want rid of the Tories so don’t want them to change leader.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
Sunak's problems largely stem from having almost no knowledge of how most people in the UK live - the pressures they face, the aspirations they have - and of how things work for them. He has never lived anything close to an ordinary life. What's really strange is that he has never had any interest in finding out. But he's also not a narcissist or a grifter. So I genuinely don't see why he got into politics.
I think that's a ridiculous statement. His background is far more ordinary than Cameron, Osborne and Clegg. Comfortable yes and his parents sent him to a top school where he has since been a very high achiever.
So far as I'm aware his parents were not millionaires but came here as aspirational refugees. He may be rather nerdy but I seriously question if you would make that remark about someone who was white.
The same applies to Cameron etc. They are all the girl in Pulp's Common People.
Not really. At least the 'girl from Greece' made some sort of attempt to understand common people. AFAIK Sunak never has.
It seems the biggest problem is that construction is noisy. Unfortunately they also are going to have a film studio not terribly far from the same location so suspect that will be inconvenient too. Im not convinced that folk are too bothered as the Tory run council lost no seats and precious few votes from what I can see. Twenty years ago when I was a candidate down that way the complaints were that nothing ever happened and no new opportunities were attracted to the area, now it seems that the complaints are from the opposite direction.
I of course want rid of the Tories so don’t want them to change leader.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
Sunak's problems largely stem from having almost no knowledge of how most people in the UK live - the pressures they face, the aspirations they have - and of how things work for them. He has never lived anything close to an ordinary life. What's really strange is that he has never had any interest in finding out. But he's also not a narcissist or a grifter. So I genuinely don't see why he got into politics.
I think that's a ridiculous statement. His background is far more ordinary than Cameron, Osborne and Clegg. Comfortable yes and his parents sent him to a top school where he has since been a very high achiever.
So far as I'm aware his parents were not millionaires but came here as aspirational refugees. He may be rather nerdy but I seriously question if you would make that remark about someone who was white.
Don't be silly. Sunak went to Winchester College (fees £36k pa); there was nothing ordinary about his upbringing.
(And the accusation of implied racism was rather nasty btw.)
I of course want rid of the Tories so don’t want them to change leader.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
Sunak's problems largely stem from having almost no knowledge of how most people in the UK live - the pressures they face, the aspirations they have - and of how things work for them. He has never lived anything close to an ordinary life. What's really strange is that he has never had any interest in finding out. But he's also not a narcissist or a grifter. So I genuinely don't see why he got into politics.
I think that's a ridiculous statement. His background is far more ordinary than Cameron, Osborne and Clegg. Comfortable yes and his parents sent him to a top school where he has since been a very high achiever.
So far as I'm aware his parents were not millionaires but came here as aspirational refugees. He may be rather nerdy but I seriously question if you would make that remark about someone who was white.
Don't be silly. Sunak went to Winchester College (fees £36k pa); there was nothing ordinary about his upbringing.
(And the accusation of implied racism was rather nasty btw.)
There are two major reports - in the Indy and the FT - saying that Russia is intent on attacking all of Europe, sabotage, hacking, explosions, assassinations. The next five years of Labour might see us more or less at war with Russia
See what China is doing to Boeing
It's hard to imagine China is doing more to Boeing than Boeing is to itself.
Boeing might be an incompetent bus load of fools, managerially - but I just can’t see them murdering two whistleblowers.
China or Russia? Yes
But, what would be the motive? Sow discard and suspicion in the US? Protect Boeing because they like their planes?
I can fully believe it might be the former, but that's a pretty extreme and high-risk way to do it and I'd be amazed if they had assassin-agents on the loose in Western countries who were not known.
Er, what???
Yes they have assassins and the whole idea is to pitch Boeing into roiled despair and decline - even as China tries to break the airbus/boeing duopoly
I of course want rid of the Tories so don’t want them to change leader.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
Sunak's problems largely stem from having almost no knowledge of how most people in the UK live - the pressures they face, the aspirations they have - and of how things work for them. He has never lived anything close to an ordinary life. What's really strange is that he has never had any interest in finding out. But he's also not a narcissist or a grifter. So I genuinely don't see why he got into politics.
I think that's a ridiculous statement. His background is far more ordinary than Cameron, Osborne and Clegg. Comfortable yes and his parents sent him to a top school where he has since been a very high achiever.
So far as I'm aware his parents were not millionaires but came here as aspirational refugees. He may be rather nerdy but I seriously question if you would make that remark about someone who was white.
Don't be silly. Sunak went to Winchester College (fees (36k pa); there was nothing ordinary about his upbringing.
(And the accusation of implied racism was rather nasty btw.)
So his entire upbringing is defined by where his parents sent him for his post 13 education? What a lazy and outdated view. By all accounts he helped out at the pharmacy. I doubt all the customers were millionaires.
Parents will sacrifice quite a lot in paying school fees. They might not actually have had the most luxurious holidays.
Newsagents report rocketing demand for the Sunday Telegraph in the Camden area.
I’m beyond caring. Of COURSE it came from the fucking lab. Anyone who now thinks otherwise offers compelling evidence they have a sub-80 IQ
I’m just going to throw this out there.
Maybe, just maybe, you’re not as clever as you think you are? I know that you think I’m an imbecile. Let’s take that as read. But have you ever considered in your whole life that maybe, just maybe, you might be wrong about something? Doing so may make you less the significant object of derision you are.
Just a bit of fun.
Derision? Yeah, right
I am happy to be mocked for my multiple personal failings - from pathological narcissism to a weird obsession with Newent - go right ahead. I mock myself
But on these big things I am consistently right, and consistently six-twelve months and 17 IQ points ahead of almost everyone on PB. Sorry
Maybe, just maybe, you don’t. You confidently predicted we would all be dead in a nuclear annihilation 18 months ago. But you never did get to the point in Threads where the bomb was dropped. A pretty big thing to get wrong, no? Also the assertion you made that Covid rates in Manaus rendered a vaccine impossible was wrong. And let’s not get started on Liz “the Tories have unearthed a star” Truss.
You’re really really knowledgeable but that’s different to being clever. Really intelligent people don’t bang on about their IQ all the time. They don’t have to.
I of course want rid of the Tories so don’t want them to change leader.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
Sunak's problems largely stem from having almost no knowledge of how most people in the UK live - the pressures they face, the aspirations they have - and of how things work for them. He has never lived anything close to an ordinary life. What's really strange is that he has never had any interest in finding out. But he's also not a narcissist or a grifter. So I genuinely don't see why he got into politics.
I think that's a ridiculous statement. His background is far more ordinary than Cameron, Osborne and Clegg. Comfortable yes and his parents sent him to a top school where he has since been a very high achiever.
So far as I'm aware his parents were not millionaires but came here as aspirational refugees. He may be rather nerdy but I seriously question if you would make that remark about someone who was white.
Don't be silly. Sunak went to Winchester College (fees £36k pa); there was nothing ordinary about his upbringing.
(And the accusation of implied racism was rather nasty btw.)
That's day boys. 52k for the full Monty
He was a day boy tbf
Don't think so. The website says dayboy status is 6th form only and he went at 13.
The extent of the lies and coverup exceed those in the Post Office scandal.
And it seems almost incontrovertible that unauthorised - and secret - medical experiments were deliberately done on a large number of individuals.
The ST front page suggests a £10 billion compensation fund will shortly be announced. Whether this is to dish Labour or compensate those affected (at least, the ones still living) is a question for another day.
On topic, the lesson from Black Wednesday (negative equity and repossession), GE2017 (dementia tax), Truss and the interest rate spike (very expensive mortages) is you don't touch people's houses. You just don't touch them.
By the same token, when the Tories launched RTB, liberalised banks to lend and had lots of houses built in the 80s, they did very well. Right now, lots of young people can't really afford them, so they're not.
The secret is to ease access for people to good homes at good and low prices. And then leave them alone.
Labour actually have a plan for that, if they have the balls to go big on it.
Labour will do precisely zero. In fact I think they will end up rolling back some of the first time buyer specific reliefs.
Interesting. Do you have a link for the rolling back proposal?
No link, there's just no money to do anything. Plus Labour just completely u turned on their workers "new deal". They've got form.
Their plan (which they've give very quiet on) would be net positive for the public finances. It doesn't involve tax giveaways.
But net negative for their image, pushing through planning reform in the UK is notoriously difficult. It's why successive governments since the 70s have all dodged the issue.
Unpopular but necessary decisions, if taken early enough, are exactly what you should be doing with a large majority.
If they went big on it, they could transform the housing market to the great benefit of the economy.
That's hopelessly naive. Labour will have the same local pressure as the Tories when it comes to planning reforms the same local councillors warning them of disaster if the reforms are pushed through and Keir doesn't strike me as the force of nature type to just do it anyway. He's fundamentally weak, even now his position on the next election is "I'm not sure but we're the red team not the blue one" which is fine to get into power but he'll have little to no mandate to actually do anything, just as Boris did in 2019 despite the huge 80 seat majority.
Yes, but what do you think of the idea itself ?
Does it matter?
Yes. "No one's going to do anything", and "nothing can be done" are two very different things.
I don't have any great hopes of the next government, but I'm not going to write them off before they start. And I'm interested in what they *could* do to make a difference.
Newsagents report rocketing demand for the Sunday Telegraph in the Camden area.
I’m beyond caring. Of COURSE it came from the fucking lab. Anyone who now thinks otherwise offers compelling evidence they have a sub-80 IQ
I’m just going to throw this out there.
Maybe, just maybe, you’re not as clever as you think you are? I know that you think I’m an imbecile. Let’s take that as read. But have you ever considered in your whole life that maybe, just maybe, you might be wrong about something? Doing so may make you less the significant object of derision you are.
Just a bit of fun.
Derision? Yeah, right
I am happy to be mocked for my multiple personal failings - from pathological narcissism to a weird obsession with Newent - go right ahead. I mock myself
But on these big things I am consistently right, and consistently six-twelve months and 17 IQ points ahead of almost everyone on PB. Sorry
Maybe, just maybe, you don’t. You confidently predicted we would all be dead in a nuclear annihilation 18 months ago. But you never did get to the point in Threads where the bomb was dropped. A pretty big thing to get wrong, no? Also the assertion you made that Covid rates in Manaus rendered a vaccine impossible was wrong. And let’s not get started on Liz “the Tories have unearthed a star” Truss.
You’re really really knowledgeable but that’s different to being clever. Really intelligent people don’t bang on about their IQ all the time. They don’t have to.
Unfortunately I do because dumb and dumber people need it spelt out to them. With basics like “iq”
I was also right we were perilously close to nuclear conflagration, which was kept secret at the time but has since been leaked by White House insiders
There are two major reports - in the Indy and the FT - saying that Russia is intent on attacking all of Europe, sabotage, hacking, explosions, assassinations. The next five years of Labour might see us more or less at war with Russia
See what China is doing to Boeing
It's hard to imagine China is doing more to Boeing than Boeing is to itself.
Boeing might be an incompetent bus load of fools, managerially - but I just can’t see them murdering two whistleblowers.
China or Russia? Yes
But, what would be the motive? Sow discard and suspicion in the US? Protect Boeing because they like their planes?
I can fully believe it might be the former, but that's a pretty extreme and high-risk way to do it and I'd be amazed if they had assassin-agents on the loose in Western countries who were not known.
Er, what???
Yes they have assassins and the whole idea is to pitch Boeing into roiled despair and decline - even as China tries to break the airbus/boeing duopoly
There is now plentiful evidence it’s China pumping fentanyl into the USA killing tens of thousands. A couple of whistleblowers? Pff!
How is killing whistleblowers whose testimony will harm Boeing in the interests of those who want it to decline? China and Russia would want to scream such adverse evidence from the rooftops. Now they can’t. Your thesis makes zero logical sense. More likely, if it were murder, it was a shareholder or a contractor. Americans killing Americans is not exactly unheard of.
If that Braverman BBC interview is anything to go by, the Tory civil war if they lose the GE (and maybe even if they don't) is going to be absolutely brutal.
@Haggis_UK Watch Suella Braverman spit her dummy out.
"Keir Starmer has the charisma of a peanut... Labour is a party of hard left maniacs, who would undo brexit, who would open our borders & who would indoctrinated our institutions & schools with PC madness.. "
Comments
The long term trend from 2011 to 2021 was a 28% increase in the number of households renting, and a 13% increase in the number who own their homes outright. The Tories have overseen a new feudalism, and private renters have very long and very bitter memories even if they manage to get on the ladder.
And then they got slapped by mortgage rates.
If they went big on it, they could transform the housing market to the great benefit of the economy.
Starmer's coalition can basically tell them to suck it up. Will of the people and all that.
China or Russia? Yes
Maybe, just maybe, you’re not as clever as you think you are? I know that you think I’m an imbecile. Let’s take that as read. But have you ever considered in your whole life that maybe, just maybe, you might be wrong about something? Doing so may make you less the significant object of derision you are.
Just a bit of fun.
London trended strongly Labour as tenants took over from home owners and younger residents moved in while older residents moved out. Nowadays, many of the young can’t afford to live in London and I know that some commute in to jobs from far away, simply because of having to live somewhere affordable; my brother’s son commutes from Southend. And running a London BTL is not as attractive as it was. It’s quite likely that London is no longer getting younger and more rented; indeed it would be interesting to see if these trends are starting to reverse? Hence we may be past peak Labour in London?
That clear enough for you?
Suella Braverman is on telly, a Truss-like gift to Labour in her analysis, agenda and popularity.
Asked by @bbclaurak why the Tories lost in London with a right-wing candidate, she says a) cos Susan Hall was 'unsupported' by the party but also b) the party botched the selection.
Farage wants to destroy the existing party so that he can own the ruins and rebuild it in his own image. No deals, no mercy.
Worse for the moron party is that they can't out FUK the FUKers. First of all Farage is far more politically intelligent than they are. Secondly the more the Tories do performative cruelty, the fewer votes they get. Because FUKers always want MORE performative cruelty, and actual human being with a soul think painting over Mickey is a Bad Thing.
It falls on me once again to state the bleeding obvious, that people will be voting (and are being polled) on whether they want Rishi Sunak to be their PM for another term, not Liz Truss.
I can fully believe it might be the former, but that's a pretty extreme and high-risk way to do it and I'd be amazed if they had assassin-agents on the loose in Western countries who were not known.
The problem is that housing is seen as an investment so first time buyers are squeezed by cash buyers, second home owners and BTL landlords.
The only laboratory that most of the Telegraph hacks know anything about is one that makes intoxicating chemicals, which probably explains why they publish such pish so often.
But LibDem national VI, and actual vote, doesn’t really matter. As I’ve said before, if LibDems in Labour target seats vote Labour but Labour voters in (the fewer) LibDem targets vote LibDem, the LD vote share goes down but their seat tally goes up.
The LibDems just beat the Tories in seat count when their poll VI is about 10% and their estimated NEV from Thursday about 16%, when the Tories are on 20-25% and 25% respectively. That’s what should really worry the Tories.
Not scientific by any means but I’ve noticed a marked change of opinion amongst friends . We were all so relieved to see the back of Johnson . And thought Sunak would be much better . He’s just loathed now .
It’s noticeable how Sunak who started out viewed more favourably than his party is now plumbing the same depths of unpopularity.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/may/05/revealed-key-files-shredded-as-uk-government-panic-grew-over-infected-blood-deaths-lawsuit
The extent of the lies and coverup exceed those in the Post Office scandal.
And it seems almost incontrovertible that unauthorised - and secret - medical experiments were deliberately done on a large number of individuals.
Can you give some numbers as the common assumption is it is the other way round.
The EU is insisting that the UK takes an agreed percentage of migrants across Europe. The UK is not willing to do that deal.
I know many on here were nonplussed by the debate over HS2 but to me the series of cutbacks starting under Boris and concluding under Sunak signified a government just giving up on the future. It suggested a country in decline, no longer able to afford to invest.
There’s not actually been much bad news recently. People had a tax cut, inflation is down, the economy is doing OK and the NHS crisis is no worse than it was a year ago by all accounts. But it’s too late.
To counter this the public should be reminded that one day it could be them .
It's about control, queue-jumping and fair play. Brits don't like it when people take the piss.
Transport secretary Mark Harper: "On the results this week, we would have a hung parliament. That means Keir Starmer's not on course to win a majority ... the polls are not correct, there's everything to fight for."
Pure delusion.
@DPJHodges
This is the point we've reached. Utter denial. Mark Harper knows this isn't true. Every member of the cabinet knows it isn't true. Every Conservative MP knows it isn't true. It's the Tory version of "Jeremy Corbyn won the argument".
At a time when I can look round and see multiple areas where government expenditure needs to be increased not decreased.
The issue was the rate of change and the numbers. It's probably true that sensitivities to that rate are greater the greater the level of cultural divergence of the source but there is a limit to any type if it's large enough in number. It even is for internal migration in Britain, i.e. Londoners buying up Cornish property.
This subject always seems to be dealt with in absolutes when, in reality, it's anything but.
We adopt morally reprehensible policies
They offshore asylum requests
Why would Russia embark on such a 'crazy' policy. Well as the old saying goes it's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog. And Putin believes Europe doesn't have any fight. That's obviously a caricature but we all know of certain countries who prefer shameless isolation.
Boris Johnson (not necessarily a reliable witness) made a startling remark in a Putin documentary that he'd effectively been threatened with assassination. Even if the remark was made in a roundabout way the only sensible response should have been furious and to the point. Johnson gives no impression he even responded to it (if it was true).
This was Tory former prime minister John Major after the local elections in 1996. Remind you of anybody?
The 5 remaining Tory voters may think people on benefits are scroungers. That sick people need to be punished for faking. But in the real world, normal voters dislike wanton acts of cruelty, especially when they are told it is their priority.
Seriously, you are right that Brits don't like queue-jumpers but I honestly don't believe that is the principle objection of most of those who get worked up about the boats. What I hear is stuff like 'the country is full up', 'we are being swamped', etc. Now those may be valid points but as Dura points out 96% of immigration is legal and controllable by the government.
Only my opinion of course - I'd love to see some polling on this.
(* For the avoidance of doubt, this is a joke)
These are all things Tories say about Labour. But this is today's reality. Your reality. Your government's abject failure. Same with "keep Labour out or they will put taxes up" from the government who put taxes up to record levels. People aren't listening any more because everything they say is wrong.
https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/practically-a-book-review-rootclaim
So far as I'm aware his parents were not millionaires but came here as aspirational refugees. He may be rather nerdy but I seriously question if you would make that remark about someone who was white.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/boeing-whistleblower-dies-brief-illness-weeks-suicide-another-rcna150381
...Joshua Dean, 45, of Wichita, Kansas, died Tuesday after he received multiple diagnoses that included the flu, pneumonia and MRSA, prompting his family to seek an autopsy, attorney Robert Turkewitz said.
"He was a healthy individual who ate well and exercised," Turkewitz told NBC News. "So it just seems odd that he went so fast."
Dean had been sick for two weeks and had been struggling to breathe, forcing him to be put on a ventilator...
The first - "self-inflicted gunshot" in a hotel parking lot - is rather more open to question.
Though equally, being a whistleblower against a large company is extremely stressful. It's also possible that Boeing's treatment of him drove him to suicide.
(And the accusation of implied racism was rather nasty btw.)
I am happy to be mocked for my multiple personal failings - from pathological narcissism to a weird obsession with Newent - go right ahead. I mock myself
But on these big things I am consistently right, and consistently six-twelve months and 17 IQ points ahead of almost everyone on PB. Sorry
In other, non-political, news our Blue-tits nest now has four chicks in it. Hatching has begun!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13370455/Google-lives-Residents-data-centre-Hertfordshire-house-prices-ill.html
It seems the biggest problem is that construction is noisy. Unfortunately they also are going to have a film studio not terribly far from the same location so suspect that will be inconvenient too. Im not convinced that folk are too bothered as the Tory run council lost no seats and precious few votes from what I can see. Twenty years ago when I was a candidate down that way the complaints were that nothing ever happened and no new opportunities were attracted to the area, now it seems that the complaints are from the opposite direction.
Yes they have assassins and the whole idea is to pitch Boeing into roiled despair and decline - even as China tries to break the airbus/boeing duopoly
https://skift.com/2024/04/29/chinas-new-plane-wins-two-big-orders-should-airbus-and-boeing-be-worried/
There is now plentiful evidence it’s China pumping fentanyl into the USA killing tens of thousands. A couple of whistleblowers? Pff!
Parents will sacrifice quite a lot in paying school fees. They might not actually have had the most luxurious holidays.
You’re really really knowledgeable but that’s different to being clever. Really intelligent people don’t bang on about their IQ all the time. They don’t have to.
"No one's going to do anything", and "nothing can be done" are two very different things.
I don't have any great hopes of the next government, but I'm not going to write them off before they start. And I'm interested in what they *could* do to make a difference.
I was also right we were perilously close to nuclear conflagration, which was kept secret at the time but has since been leaked by White House insiders
The Tories internal dramas could result in Truss Mk 2 who will trash the economy and put your mortgage up .
I think that’s one of many winning campaign slogans Labour should go with .
Watch Suella Braverman spit her dummy out.
"Keir Starmer has the charisma of a peanut... Labour is a party of hard left maniacs, who would undo brexit, who would open our borders & who would indoctrinated our institutions & schools with PC madness.. "
@mikeysmith
Possible we’re watching it dawning on the Conservative Party that Britain isn’t the country they think it is in real time.