Permanent very low deposits guaranteed by government has other negatives above the risk of bad loans.
What percentage of council houses sold are still in the hands of owner occupiers, as opposed to private rental companies?
40% of right to buy homes are now rented out privately.
PB likes to ignore the vast shifts in housing tenure in the last 14 years, but ultimately it's the reason why the country has become more unequal and why the number of natural Conservative voters has fallen. There is no evidence that a mass private housebuilding programme would reverse the trend and increase ownership - all the new homes will simply be hoovered up by those who have accumulated large savings.
That shows a gross ignorance of economics and follows your typical lame excuse-making for NIMBYism.
The reason for the vast shifts in housing tenure is the lack of building supply. If supply increases that will be reversed.
And of course in a healthy free housing economy typically 10% of homes are unoccupied [for very good reasons] which means homes in poor condition or are too expensive don't get let out and the owner is left paying their bills/mortgage and taxes without a tenant paying them any rent.
So why would those with savings snap up all homes if supply is increased and they can't let them out? It means price falls and people who want to buy to own have a choice, as well as tenants having a choice, on where to live.
There he blows!
New homes: 2.0 million Increase in households renting: 1.1 million Increase in households owning outright: 0.9 million Decrease in households with a mortgage: -0.4 million
It would have certainly been worse without any new homes. But the idea that an increase in supply is the only intervention required is nonsense - wealth inequality is now far too great in the UK for that to suffice.
That's been caused by the terrible shortage of new homes, meaning prices are far too high. Which is fundamental supply and demand in action.
An increase in supply may not be the only intervention required, I never said it is, but it is absolutely 100% needed and would help to reverse the damage that has been done.
Of course if supply increases and prices fall in real terms, then that would lower that inequality you mentioned too.
The number of new homes has increased faster than the population, by a wide margin. It's actually a glut.
The problem is that there are significant mismatches with where those houses are being built and where there is housing pressure. At risk of pissing off lots of PBers, here is my official assessment of LAs (bespoke assessments can be provided on request):
YIMBY Gold award:
Selby Huntingdonshire Mid Suffolk Telford and Wrekin West Lindsey
NIMBY Black Spot of Barty Doom
Pendle Thurrock Swale Epping Forest Peterborough
Urban Excellence award: Southwark Rural Excellence award: West Devon, Cotswolds, Uttlesford Leon award: Camden, Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea (fewer houses, population falling) Trooper award: Tower Hamlets, Bedford, Tewkesbury (massive effort, but simply can’t keep up) Breeze block award: Barking and Dagenham, Slough, Leicester (massive population growth, no attempt to deal with it) Barty award: Copeland, Richmondshire, Caerphilly, Allerdale (population falling but f*** it more houses anyway)
This glut is all in your head.
The number of new homes has nowhere near kept up with demand.
Again you show a shocking ignorance of the effects of demographics on housing requirements, talking again only of "population". 🤦♂️
8.2% increase in homes 6.1% increase in households 6.3% increase in population
Why are you lying?
Your households figure is a lie. You know this, so why repeat it?
People who are compelled to share a home as there's not enough houses are classed as one household. You know that, but you're repeating your lies anyway. 🤦♂️
The idea that t here's been a lesser increase in household demand than population increase, when our demographic changes mean there's even further household pressures, is so obviously false its remarkable your following through on this outright blatant lie.
The number of people per household has fallen, and overcrowding has fallen too.
Edit: sorry, the population per household has risen* This is explained by immigrants being much more efficient users of households than say older people
The number of people per household should have fallen as we have 4 million extra over 50s than we did. Who don't live with children.🤦♂️
Immigration doesn't counter that.
Your own data reveals the chronic housing shortage. Again!
In most LAs, housing pressure is actually falling. It's only in about 100 where you see this acute problem, and they are mostly in our cities.
There are 317 local authorities of England, 32 local authorities of Scotland, 22 principal councils of Wales and 11 local councils of Northern Ireland. So:
if you were referring to England, that's about 100/317 - say a third - of LAs under pressure.
If you were referring to the UK, that's 100/(317+32+22+11) = 100/382 - say 25-30% - of LAs under pressure
That's quite a lot
England and Wales. And yes, I agree - and some of them are under enormous pressure. Some have managed to cope to an extent, others not. And you get huge local imbalances - look at Camden's population actually falling, contributing to pressure in neighbouring areas.
A Scottish example would be the enormous growth in housing in the Lothians, taking off some pressure in Edinburgh, even while house prices in Greenock....
Sunak asking young people to do National Service or to volunteer one weekend a month and then couldn’t be arsed to spend a full day honouring veterans . This will be another take on events .
This latest own goal by him just feeds into other policy announcements .
If you’re on the left liberal wing and echoing that superb post by Big G North Wales we need to be worried about what’s to come.
So us liberal lefties are in the weird position of obviously wanting the Tories to lose but to not get pulverized and certainly we don’t want Farage winning in Clacton .
I’m sure the other parties will have their gaffes during the campaign and will have those very bad news days but Sunak really needs to get a grip .
No. We really really really want Farage to win and we want him to beat the Tories to death and we want him to be leader of the opposition and then become prime minister
Look at the polls. He’s the most popular politician in the land. Sure he’s also hated. But the same was true of thatcher. Very popular with some disliked by many - she got things done and didn’t care
What, in is history, makes you think Farage would be a competent, or even good, PM?
He just has to be better than Sunak. Or truss. Or Boris. Or may. Or Cameron. Or brown
It’s not a high bar and then suddenly he’s the best pm in a generation
If you had spent any time with him, talking in a relaxed situation, you would know he’s a complete lightweight, past the golf club bonhomie he’s fucking humourless and witless. He’s amusing for ten minutes but two hours later when you’ve tried to have interesting chats you realise there is nothing there apart from the most basic simplistic opinions in a very narrow sphere of politics.
Its why Trump loves him, he won’t have anything interesting to say, no interesting ideas but will happily parrot back what Trump says like an echo chamber and they all sit grinning about how great they are.
I know you think you are being a bit edgy calling for him to take over but you will the first crying like a baby when you realise what you’ve got. I don’t even live in the UK and worry about what would happen if he was in charge.
I have spent time with him and I also suspect he's rather lightweight. Does it matter? He's a tool with which to smash the Tories to death. He's too old to do grave policy damage, if he wins a lot of clever people will flock to Reform. The Right has to be renewed and the Tories cannot do it, their brand is beyond saving and at the top they are ruled by the most avaricious careerist clueless fucks. I hope they all lose their seats. Every single one of them
And anyway, if "Farage" is lightweight what does that make Sunak? If he can "do damage", what do you think Truss did? Or Cameron? Or Boris or May? WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT 2.4 MILLION MIGRANTS IN 3 YEARS - would Farage do that? Nope
Again and again we come back to what the Tories have acrually done in 14 years and there ain't nothing there, and what is there is nearly all disastrous. They did Brexit, but they have refused to exploit it. Fuck em. Time to die
Never underestimate the ability of any government to cause damage.
A Farage government would cause damage. Lots of damage.
It may also do some good things - whether the trade off is net positive is debateable.
As to what the Conservatives have done in government:
Full employment Housing more affordable in much of the country National insurance reductions Pensions reform Affluent oldies Exam grade inflation controlled Big increase in NHS workforce Environmental improvements
Whether you consider them positives or whether you consider them worth the negatives is again debateable.
The tories turning off their digital campaigns is really annoying me - it can't be money, surely it can't be a reset, so what is it?
Old lady Brady innit! I'm telling ya, he's fighting to keep his job
Hasn't Brady retired now? I hope that he's sitting by the pool somewhere warm, on his second G&T of the morning and counting his blessings that he's not having to deal with this mess anymore.
I thought the low bar set by Brown in 2010 for GE campaign incompetence by a PM would never be surpassed, but Rishi is quite unbelievable in his staggering ineptitude.
I've been broadly sympathetic to his plight and much as it pains me to do so, expecting to put a cross in the blue box despite zero prospect of a Tory hold in my ultra marginal seat even if the polls had been neck and neck.
I'm resigned to Labour, have been for 3 years, and accept one party can't stay in power for more than 14/15 years, I'm fine with Keir as PM, dull as he'll probably be, but I'm utterly depressed at the thought of the Tories being wiped out and Labour having a stupendous majority that will keep them/ the left in power for a generation. And that I'll be totally disenfranchised if my only prospect is to vote for some Faragist rabble.
I'm 47. I could be approaching my 70s before the country swings back to the centre right, if it ever does at all.
I'm so depressed about this, as someone who's taken a close interest in politics for maybe 35 years. Sad.
Tories got a 10 year majority last time, things can turn much quicker than you think.
I admit as someone who thought Johnson had realigned politics for a generation, I was surprised how quickly it all fell apart. So we shouldn't make the same assumption about Starmer going on for ever. Nevertheless the opposite assumption is also a mistake. My impression of Starmer is he is very ambitious for a lengthy period in office and will do his utmost to win the following election.
So Starmer might crash and burn or he might be there for years and years. Not a particularly useful assessment for a site dedicated to political predictions, I accept.
Blair had a golden inheritance and held it together for just over a decade. Starmer is inheriting a broken country with no real plans to change it beyond a generic left-wing playbook imposed on an already record tax take. His chances of making it work are very slim.
Cobblers. He tried to make national defence a wedge issue, absurdly claiming that only he/the Tories are patriotic and will keep us safe.
Having done that, he tries to get out of going to Normandy at all. Campaigning - openly lying - was his priority. Reluctantly he goes to France, cosplays someone who cares about veterans, then comes back for an ITV interview which HE scheduled. To defend more lies and keep insisting his lie was not a lie despite it being completely demolished.
The tories turning off their digital campaigns is really annoying me - it can't be money, surely it can't be a reset, so what is it?
Perhaps they have been read the riot act with compliance. They've done something very naughty and the Electoral Commission have told them to pull them or else.
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
@breeallegretti A Tory candidate seeking reelection says of Sunak flying back early from D-Day commemorations:
“This is like when Theresa May didn’t meet victims of the Grenfell Tower in 2017. Then it was The Queen who stepped in, yesterday it was Keir Starmer.”
Concerns already being relayed to Sunak’s political secretary to make the strength of anger known.
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
Does it...I don't think colour will be the issue. I think more likely that it will severely limit anybody who is ultra wealthy from getting the top job.
Goodness knows. It's all piling up, and none of it is good for the Conservatives. All their defences are crumbling and all their attacks are petering out. I find it difficult to internalise the fact that the £2000 line died in less than 48hrs: an attack with some truth in it, that had previously proven lethal, was entirely ineffective. It's like that bit in Independence Day where they fire the missiles and the shields stop all of them. I have not got a clue what the Conservatives can or should do now.
Sunak is plainly smart, and hard working, and by political standards reasonably honest. He was perfectly fine as Chancellor.
The trouble is Sunak's political skills and instincts are woeful. He's absolutely out of his depth. It's a shame he didn't have enough self-awareness to realise that PM is not the job for him, a problem he shares with Gordon Brown.
Yes, as I said at the time the Conservatives should have kept Boris, as Labour should have kept Blair then too.
If they lost the subsequent GE fine and they could get a new leader in opposition but it would likely have been by a smaller margin than Brown lost or Sunak is likely to lose and a Boris led Conservative party would certainly not be polling less 20 to 25% or less and Reform would certainly not be on 15%+
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
Does it...I don't think colour will be the issue. I think more likely that it will severely limit anybody who is ultra wealthy from getting top job.
If it stops anyone so utterly crap from getting the job, it will have been a noble sacrifice...
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
Does it...I don't think colour will be the issue. I think more likely that it will severely limit anybody who is ultra wealthy from getting the top job.
It depends how they became ultra wealthy. It wouldn’t be a barrier for someone like JK Rowling.
Goodness knows. It's all piling up, and none of it is good for the Conservatives. All their defences are crumbling and all their attacks are petering out. I find it difficult to internalise the fact that the £2000 line died in less than 48hrs: an attack with some truth in it, that had previously proven lethal, was entirely ineffective. It's like that bit in Independence Day where they fire the missiles and the shields stop all of them. I have not got a clue what the Conservatives can or should do now.
But that line is going to get another outing next week, when they finally broadcast the interview that was so important to film yesterday
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
Not necessarily - some immigrants become 'more British than the British'.
What it might do is kill off anyone with an image of posho globalised wealth.
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
Does it...I don't think colour will be the issue. I think more likely that it will severely limit anybody who is ultra wealthy from getting the top job.
It depends how they became ultra wealthy. It wouldn’t be a barrier for someone like JK Rowling.
I don't know. Sunak background should be quite inspiring. Immigrant family who worked super hard and spent every penny to give their kid opportunity and he took it with success at school and work before giving that up to enter politics. But he isn't able to even fake that he is some what in touch.
The problem for the Tories is they have had Cameron followed by Boris and now Sunak. May and Truss were just weird. They need to find somebody with a middle ground of normal background and who isn't weird.
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
Not really - it has nothing to do with his skin colour, he’s just shite.
So imagine Reform entering the Commons with 3 MPs (Farage, Tice and Anderson). Tories come back with less than 100 and the two parties merge. What's the mechanism for Farage to become the leader of the merged party? What's then stopping the centre-right wing of the party to walk out in an echo of 1981?
I can't see how a party with 3 MPs would be in a position to control the party with nearer 100.
In Canada, the example that Farage likes to mention, the new Reform party had 52 seats (which would equate to around 115 in the UK), so had a lot more power.
If the result is 100-3, then clearly the Tory vote is still a lot more powerful in its concentration, and without PR, a lot of Tory MPs could be risking their seats to sign up with Reform. I think you're correct, that the centre-right would still hold quite a lot of power.
Unless Reform make a huge breakthrough - and frankly, given the way things are going, it's not impossible for the Tory vote to crash, then I'd be surprised if it worked out quite so easily for Farage.
Has anyone seen any polling on what the current Tory voters think of Reform? I know that we've seen a lot on Reform voters having a poor opinion of the Tories and Sunak (hence why a pact was probably never on the cards), but no the other way around.
Sunak is plainly smart, and hard working, and by political standards reasonably honest. He was perfectly fine as Chancellor.
The trouble is Sunak's political skills and instincts are woeful. He's absolutely out of his depth. It's a shame he didn't have enough self-awareness to realise that PM is not the job for him, a problem he shares with Gordon Brown.
Sunak's other problem shared with Gordon Brown is that instead of leaning into his own image (Not Flash, just Gordon) both Sunak and Brown have allowed themselves to be directed by their Party spin teams as continuations of their predecessors, hence Sunak's faux Boris act.
I'm quite worried yesterdays mess may mean they cancel Saturday's planned activity of *checks notes* Sunak personally strapping Paddington Bear onto a Rwanda Air plane.
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
I just don't buy that explanation. He grew up here. He went to school here. He will have experienced the poppies every November. He's done two Remembrance Sundays as PM. He will have seen the criticism of other MPs for minor transgressions at similar events.
He's clearly under a lot of pressure, and high levels of stress impair decision-making. But I think it's more that he systematically undervalues the front of house aspect of leadership, and that's the underlying instinct that led him astray, rather than that he didn't have a Grandpa with war stories. And, who knows what Grandpa Sunak did in the war in India?
I'm quite worried yesterdays mess may mean they cancel Saturday's planned activity of *checks notes* Sunak personally strapping Paddington Bear on a Rwanda Air plane.
They can pivot straight to drowning puppies instead
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
It really doesn’t. Unless you think it’s because he’s inept because of his ethnicity.
Sunak is plainly smart, and hard working, and by political standards reasonably honest. He was perfectly fine as Chancellor.
The trouble is Sunak's political skills and instincts are woeful. He's absolutely out of his depth. It's a shame he didn't have enough self-awareness to realise that PM is not the job for him, a problem he shares with Gordon Brown.
Sunak's other problem shared with Gordon Brown is that instead of leaning into his own image (Not Flash, just Gordon) both Sunak and Brown have allowed themselves to be directed by their Party spin teams as continuations of their predecessors, hence Sunak's faux Boris act.
Being seen as inauthentic is a killer for a politician. Once its gone, it gone.
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
That’s nonsense. It just means the next migrant PM should appoint Advisors on Innate Britishness. Because it is a thing. People with deep roots in a country understand it in a way recent arrivals do not. If your great great grandfather fought at the Somme and your grandfather at Normandy then you will understand Britain and its history a lot better - in your soul - than someone whose parents arrived after WW2
Migrants face this challenge whereevrr they go. But they also bring distinct advantages. A new eye. A fresh perspective. Fewer hang ups
Sunak’s problem seems to be a lack of good advisors. Someone with a sense of Britains military history should have been able to say “mate. You do D day. All of it. End of”
I'm quite worried yesterdays mess may mean they cancel Saturday's planned activity of *checks notes* Sunak personally strapping Paddington Bear on a Rwanda Air plane.
They can pivot straight to drowning puppies instead
Not unpopular enough. I think a hot mic of slagging off old queenie may have to take it's place.
Permanent very low deposits guaranteed by government has other negatives above the risk of bad loans.
What percentage of council houses sold are still in the hands of owner occupiers, as opposed to private rental companies?
40% of right to buy homes are now rented out privately.
PB likes to ignore the vast shifts in housing tenure in the last 14 years, but ultimately it's the reason why the country has become more unequal and why the number of natural Conservative voters has fallen. There is no evidence that a mass private housebuilding programme would reverse the trend and increase ownership - all the new homes will simply be hoovered up by those who have accumulated large savings.
That shows a gross ignorance of economics and follows your typical lame excuse-making for NIMBYism.
The reason for the vast shifts in housing tenure is the lack of building supply. If supply increases that will be reversed.
And of course in a healthy free housing economy typically 10% of homes are unoccupied [for very good reasons] which means homes in poor condition or are too expensive don't get let out and the owner is left paying their bills/mortgage and taxes without a tenant paying them any rent.
So why would those with savings snap up all homes if supply is increased and they can't let them out? It means price falls and people who want to buy to own have a choice, as well as tenants having a choice, on where to live.
There he blows!
New homes: 2.0 million Increase in households renting: 1.1 million Increase in households owning outright: 0.9 million Decrease in households with a mortgage: -0.4 million
It would have certainly been worse without any new homes. But the idea that an increase in supply is the only intervention required is nonsense - wealth inequality is now far too great in the UK for that to suffice.
That's been caused by the terrible shortage of new homes, meaning prices are far too high. Which is fundamental supply and demand in action.
An increase in supply may not be the only intervention required, I never said it is, but it is absolutely 100% needed and would help to reverse the damage that has been done.
Of course if supply increases and prices fall in real terms, then that would lower that inequality you mentioned too.
The number of new homes has increased faster than the population, by a wide margin. It's actually a glut.
The problem is that there are significant mismatches with where those houses are being built and where there is housing pressure. At risk of pissing off lots of PBers, here is my official assessment of LAs (bespoke assessments can be provided on request):
YIMBY Gold award:
Selby Huntingdonshire Mid Suffolk Telford and Wrekin West Lindsey
NIMBY Black Spot of Barty Doom
Pendle Thurrock Swale Epping Forest Peterborough
Urban Excellence award: Southwark Rural Excellence award: West Devon, Cotswolds, Uttlesford Leon award: Camden, Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea (fewer houses, population falling) Trooper award: Tower Hamlets, Bedford, Tewkesbury (massive effort, but simply can’t keep up) Breeze block award: Barking and Dagenham, Slough, Leicester (massive population growth, no attempt to deal with it) Barty award: Copeland, Richmondshire, Caerphilly, Allerdale (population falling but f*** it more houses anyway)
Where on earth did that come from? Epping Forest is building new council homes as well as 11,000 new homes over the next decade under its Local Plan.
Hence Nimbys have been voting LD and Independent, though the Tories just held the council in May
Permanent very low deposits guaranteed by government has other negatives above the risk of bad loans.
What percentage of council houses sold are still in the hands of owner occupiers, as opposed to private rental companies?
40% of right to buy homes are now rented out privately.
PB likes to ignore the vast shifts in housing tenure in the last 14 years, but ultimately it's the reason why the country has become more unequal and why the number of natural Conservative voters has fallen. There is no evidence that a mass private housebuilding programme would reverse the trend and increase ownership - all the new homes will simply be hoovered up by those who have accumulated large savings.
That shows a gross ignorance of economics and follows your typical lame excuse-making for NIMBYism.
The reason for the vast shifts in housing tenure is the lack of building supply. If supply increases that will be reversed.
And of course in a healthy free housing economy typically 10% of homes are unoccupied [for very good reasons] which means homes in poor condition or are too expensive don't get let out and the owner is left paying their bills/mortgage and taxes without a tenant paying them any rent.
So why would those with savings snap up all homes if supply is increased and they can't let them out? It means price falls and people who want to buy to own have a choice, as well as tenants having a choice, on where to live.
There he blows!
New homes: 2.0 million Increase in households renting: 1.1 million Increase in households owning outright: 0.9 million Decrease in households with a mortgage: -0.4 million
It would have certainly been worse without any new homes. But the idea that an increase in supply is the only intervention required is nonsense - wealth inequality is now far too great in the UK for that to suffice.
That's been caused by the terrible shortage of new homes, meaning prices are far too high. Which is fundamental supply and demand in action.
An increase in supply may not be the only intervention required, I never said it is, but it is absolutely 100% needed and would help to reverse the damage that has been done.
Of course if supply increases and prices fall in real terms, then that would lower that inequality you mentioned too.
The number of new homes has increased faster than the population, by a wide margin. It's actually a glut.
The problem is that there are significant mismatches with where those houses are being built and where there is housing pressure. At risk of pissing off lots of PBers, here is my official assessment of LAs (bespoke assessments can be provided on request):
YIMBY Gold award:
Selby Huntingdonshire Mid Suffolk Telford and Wrekin West Lindsey
NIMBY Black Spot of Barty Doom
Pendle Thurrock Swale Epping Forest Peterborough
Urban Excellence award: Southwark Rural Excellence award: West Devon, Cotswolds, Uttlesford Leon award: Camden, Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea (fewer houses, population falling) Trooper award: Tower Hamlets, Bedford, Tewkesbury (massive effort, but simply can’t keep up) Breeze block award: Barking and Dagenham, Slough, Leicester (massive population growth, no attempt to deal with it) Barty award: Copeland, Richmondshire, Caerphilly, Allerdale (population falling but f*** it more houses anyway)
This glut is all in your head.
The number of new homes has nowhere near kept up with demand.
Again you show a shocking ignorance of the effects of demographics on housing requirements, talking again only of "population". 🤦♂️
8.2% increase in homes 6.1% increase in households 6.3% increase in population
Why are you lying?
Your households figure is a lie. You know this, so why repeat it?
People who are compelled to share a home as there's not enough houses are classed as one household. You know that, but you're repeating your lies anyway. 🤦♂️
The idea that t here's been a lesser increase in household demand than population increase, when our demographic changes mean there's even further household pressures, is so obviously false its remarkable your following through on this outright blatant lie.
The number of people per household has fallen, and overcrowding has fallen too.
Edit: sorry, the population per household has risen* This is explained by immigrants being much more efficient users of households than say older people
The number of people per household should have fallen as we have 4 million extra over 50s than we did. Who don't live with children.🤦♂️
Immigration doesn't counter that.
Your own data reveals the chronic housing shortage. Again!
In most LAs, housing pressure is actually falling. It's only in about 100 where you see this acute problem, and they are mostly in our cities.
There are 317 local authorities of England, 32 local authorities of Scotland, 22 principal councils of Wales and 11 local councils of Northern Ireland. So:
if you were referring to England, that's about 100/317 - say a third - of LAs under pressure.
If you were referring to the UK, that's 100/(317+32+22+11) = 100/382 - say 25-30% - of LAs under pressure
That's quite a lot
England and Wales. And yes, I agree - and some of them are under enormous pressure. Some have managed to cope to an extent, others not. And you get huge local imbalances - look at Camden's population actually falling, contributing to pressure in neighbouring areas.
A Scottish example would be the enormous growth in housing in the Lothians, taking off some pressure in Edinburgh, even while house prices in Greenock....
In fact, I think the house building in the Lothians will have the perverse effect of supercharging the housing market in Edinburgh.
Cities are snowballing. The supply of people and demand for housing are not independent. As Edinburgh and its economy grows, more and more people will want to live and work there.
I'm quite worried yesterdays mess may mean they cancel Saturday's planned activity of *checks notes* Sunak personally strapping Paddington Bear on a Rwanda Air plane.
They can pivot straight to drowning puppies instead
Not unpopular enough. I think a hot mic of slagging off old queenie may have to take it's place.
The King, who has cancer, stayed all day. Richi couldn't be arsed.
Maybe he needs to call them "suckers and losers" ?
For those of you not inclined to follow the link, it takes you to a clip of last night’s QT. Fiona Bruce asks the audience ‘Who here is seeing the benefits of Brexit?’
Permanent very low deposits guaranteed by government has other negatives above the risk of bad loans.
What percentage of council houses sold are still in the hands of owner occupiers, as opposed to private rental companies?
40% of right to buy homes are now rented out privately.
PB likes to ignore the vast shifts in housing tenure in the last 14 years, but ultimately it's the reason why the country has become more unequal and why the number of natural Conservative voters has fallen. There is no evidence that a mass private housebuilding programme would reverse the trend and increase ownership - all the new homes will simply be hoovered up by those who have accumulated large savings.
That shows a gross ignorance of economics and follows your typical lame excuse-making for NIMBYism.
The reason for the vast shifts in housing tenure is the lack of building supply. If supply increases that will be reversed.
And of course in a healthy free housing economy typically 10% of homes are unoccupied [for very good reasons] which means homes in poor condition or are too expensive don't get let out and the owner is left paying their bills/mortgage and taxes without a tenant paying them any rent.
So why would those with savings snap up all homes if supply is increased and they can't let them out? It means price falls and people who want to buy to own have a choice, as well as tenants having a choice, on where to live.
There he blows!
New homes: 2.0 million Increase in households renting: 1.1 million Increase in households owning outright: 0.9 million Decrease in households with a mortgage: -0.4 million
It would have certainly been worse without any new homes. But the idea that an increase in supply is the only intervention required is nonsense - wealth inequality is now far too great in the UK for that to suffice.
That's been caused by the terrible shortage of new homes, meaning prices are far too high. Which is fundamental supply and demand in action.
An increase in supply may not be the only intervention required, I never said it is, but it is absolutely 100% needed and would help to reverse the damage that has been done.
Of course if supply increases and prices fall in real terms, then that would lower that inequality you mentioned too.
The number of new homes has increased faster than the population, by a wide margin. It's actually a glut.
The problem is that there are significant mismatches with where those houses are being built and where there is housing pressure. At risk of pissing off lots of PBers, here is my official assessment of LAs (bespoke assessments can be provided on request):
YIMBY Gold award:
Selby Huntingdonshire Mid Suffolk Telford and Wrekin West Lindsey
NIMBY Black Spot of Barty Doom
Pendle Thurrock Swale Epping Forest Peterborough
Urban Excellence award: Southwark Rural Excellence award: West Devon, Cotswolds, Uttlesford Leon award: Camden, Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea (fewer houses, population falling) Trooper award: Tower Hamlets, Bedford, Tewkesbury (massive effort, but simply can’t keep up) Breeze block award: Barking and Dagenham, Slough, Leicester (massive population growth, no attempt to deal with it) Barty award: Copeland, Richmondshire, Caerphilly, Allerdale (population falling but f*** it more houses anyway)
Where on earth did that come from? Epping Forest is building new council homes as well as 11,000 new homes over the next decade under its Local Plan.
Hence Nimbys have been voting LD and Independent, though the Tories just held the council in May
I've received a poster from the party displaying the nice simple message: Vote Labour. At first I thought I wouldn't be able to put it up because it has a big Union Jack on it and from a distance (ie from the street) that could look a bit seamy. However I've managed to fold it such that the flag disappears and all you can see is the red. So up it's gone, smaller than it would have been but I don't think that matters.
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
I just don't buy that explanation. He grew up here. He went to school here. He will have experienced the poppies every November. He's done two Remembrance Sundays as PM. He will have seen the criticism of other MPs for minor transgressions at similar events.
He's clearly under a lot of pressure, and high levels of stress impair decision-making. But I think it's more that he systematically undervalues the front of house aspect of leadership, and that's the underlying instinct that led him astray, rather than that he didn't have a Grandpa with war stories. And, who knows what Grandpa Sunak did in the war in India?
Done a little reading, and both Sunak's Grandparents were in East Africa during the war, working for the British colonial authorities.
Sunak is getting the wrong sort of international exposure. Front page on NBC. It really would be quite something if he managed to have such a disastrous campaign that he limits even his future prospects as a tech-bro CEO. ~AA
Number 10 has issued a formal denial of claims that Rishi Sunak was originally considering missing the D-Day commemorations *entirely*
No 10 spokesman: 'The PM was always scheduled to attend D-Day commemorations, including the UK National Commemoration event in Normandy, and it is incorrect to suggest otherwise'
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
I just don't buy that explanation. He grew up here. He went to school here. He will have experienced the poppies every November. He's done two Remembrance Sundays as PM. He will have seen the criticism of other MPs for minor transgressions at similar events.
He's clearly under a lot of pressure, and high levels of stress impair decision-making. But I think it's more that he systematically undervalues the front of house aspect of leadership, and that's the underlying instinct that led him astray, rather than that he didn't have a Grandpa with war stories. And, who knows what Grandpa Sunak did in the war in India?
300 Indian soldiers fought at Dunkirk, as part of 2.5m Indians who volunteered to fight with us.
I'm quite worried yesterdays mess may mean they cancel Saturday's planned activity of *checks notes* Sunak personally strapping Paddington Bear onto a Rwanda Air plane.
Sunak is getting the wrong sort of international exposure. Front page on NBC. It really would be quite something if he managed to have such a disastrous campaign that he limits even his future prospects as a tech-bro CEO. ~AA
What I would be offering Farage right now if I were Sunak.
Alliance between Con and Ref. Reform stand down in all Tory seats where the sitting MP is going for reelection (except Clacton) Tories stand down in all other Tory seats Everywhere else is 50/50. Sunak promises to resign immediately post election. Leader of a merged party to be elected with the MPs of both parties voting for a final two and the final vote being an electoral college of Tory members (50%) and Reform members (50%).
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
Wow. That's currently in the running for daft take of the day.
I've received a poster from the party displaying the nice simple message: Vote Labour. At first I thought I wouldn't be able to put it up because it has a big Union Jack on it and from a distance (ie from the street) that could look a bit seamy. However I've managed to fold it such that the flag disappears and all you can see is the red. So up it's gone, smaller than it would have been but I don't think that matters.
If you have a sudden urge to come to Scotland to campaign for SLab, fear not, nary a sign of a UJ on their election literature.
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
That’s nonsense. It just means the next migrant PM should appoint Advisors on Innate Britishness. Because it is a thing. People with deep roots in a country understand it in a way recent arrivals do not. If your great great grandfather fought at the Somme and your grandfather at Normandy then you will understand Britain and its history a lot better - in your soul - than someone whose parents arrived after WW2
Migrants face this challenge whereevrr they go. But they also bring distinct advantages. A new eye. A fresh perspective. Fewer hang ups
Sunak’s problem seems to be a lack of good advisors. Someone with a sense of Britains military history should have been able to say “mate. You do D day. All of it. End of”
No it isn't. You may not like it but if an ethnic minority PM loses by a landslide to a white male like Starmer the main parties will conclude the UK electorate are just not ready for a non white PM (even Obama of course lost the US white vote in 2008 and 2012, it was the massive black turnout for him, especially in 2012 and most of the Hispanic vote that got him elected and re elected but the UK Hindu population is far smaller than the US African American population).
As you have said only those with direct family links to fighters in WW2 can truly emotionally feel it, that means on your argument white British almost certainly.
In 10 or 20 years when WW2 is as far away as WW1 is now and all veterans are dead it may be less of an issue but for now it is
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
That is a very silly post. And totally misguided.
Many of the front runners to be the next Tory leader happen to be non-white. They'll be evaluated on their policies and abilities, in the same way as Sunak.
The lesson from Sunak is don't choose someone who is shite.
What I would be offering Farage right now if I were Sunak.
Alliance between Con and Ref. Reform stand down in all Tory seats where the sitting MP is going for reelection (except Clacton) Tories stand down in all other Tory seats Everywhere else is 50/50. Sunak promises to resign immediately post election. Leader of a merged party to be elected with the MPs of both parties voting for a final two and the final vote being an electoral college of Tory members (50%) and Reform members (50%).
They have about 4 hours to organise it.
That would be accepted and Farage would lead the new party without any doubt.
I'm quite worried yesterdays mess may mean they cancel Saturday's planned activity of *checks notes* Sunak personally strapping Paddington Bear on a Rwanda Air plane.
They can pivot straight to drowning puppies instead
Not unpopular enough. I think a hot mic of slagging off old queenie may have to take it's place.
The King, who has cancer, stayed all day. Richi couldn't be arsed.
Maybe he needs to call them "suckers and losers" ?
Worked for Trump
An item on the very long list of Trump statements that you'd have thought would finish him yet somehow did not.
For those of you not inclined to follow the link, it takes you to a clip of last night’s QT. Fiona Bruce asks the audience ‘Who here is seeing the benefits of Brexit?’
One guy raises his hand.
The only thing achieved as far as I can see is that we now do have more sovereignty and can pass laws without worrying about eu directives and so on.
But that is too abstract an achievement for most people other than the Bill Cashs of the world.
Migration was a major, if not the major factor, in the vote and that has exploded with non-eu from S Asia and Africa.
What I would be offering Farage right now if I were Sunak.
Alliance between Con and Ref. Reform stand down in all Tory seats where the sitting MP is going for reelection (except Clacton) Tories stand down in all other Tory seats Everywhere else is 50/50. Sunak promises to resign immediately post election. Leader of a merged party to be elected with the MPs of both parties voting for a final two and the final vote being an electoral college of Tory members (50%) and Reform members (50%).
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
Not really - it has nothing to do with his skin colour, he’s just shite.
Do you really think Reform would be polling 15-20% if the Tory leader was a white male? I don't, sadly
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
That’s nonsense. It just means the next migrant PM should appoint Advisors on Innate Britishness. Because it is a thing. People with deep roots in a country understand it in a way recent arrivals do not. If your great great grandfather fought at the Somme and your grandfather at Normandy then you will understand Britain and its history a lot better - in your soul - than someone whose parents arrived after WW2
Migrants face this challenge whereevrr they go. But they also bring distinct advantages. A new eye. A fresh perspective. Fewer hang ups
Sunak’s problem seems to be a lack of good advisors. Someone with a sense of Britains military history should have been able to say “mate. You do D day. All of it. End of”
No it isn't. You may not like it but if an ethnic minority PM loses by a landslide to a white male like Starmer the main parties will conclude the UK electorate are just not ready for a non white PM (even Obama of course lost the US white vote in 2008 and 2012, it was the massive black turnout for him, especially in 2012 and most of the Hispanic vote that got him elected and re elected but the UK Hindu population is far smaller than the US African American population).
As you have said only those with direct family links to fighters in WW2 can truly emotionally feel it, that means on your argument white British almost certainly.
In 10 or 20 years when WW2 is as far away as WW1 is now and all veterans are dead it may be less of an issue but for now it is
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
That’s nonsense. It just means the next migrant PM should appoint Advisors on Innate Britishness. Because it is a thing. People with deep roots in a country understand it in a way recent arrivals do not. If your great great grandfather fought at the Somme and your grandfather at Normandy then you will understand Britain and its history a lot better - in your soul - than someone whose parents arrived after WW2
Migrants face this challenge whereevrr they go. But they also bring distinct advantages. A new eye. A fresh perspective. Fewer hang ups
Sunak’s problem seems to be a lack of good advisors. Someone with a sense of Britains military history should have been able to say “mate. You do D day. All of it. End of”
No it isn't. You may not like it but if an ethnic minority PM loses by a landslide to a white male like Starmer the main parties will conclude the UK electorate are just not ready for a non white PM (even Obama of course lost the US white vote in 2008 and 2012, it was the massive black turnout for him, especially in 2012 and most of the Hispanic vote that got him elected and re elected but the UK Hindu population is far smaller than the US African American population).
As you have said only those with direct family links to fighters in WW2 can truly emotionally feel it, that means on your argument white British almost certainly.
In 10 or 20 years when WW2 is as far away as WW1 is now and all veterans are dead it may be less of an issue but for now it is
So imagine Reform entering the Commons with 3 MPs (Farage, Tice and Anderson). Tories come back with less than 100 and the two parties merge. What's the mechanism for Farage to become the leader of the merged party? What's then stopping the centre-right wing of the party to walk out in an echo of 1981?
I can't see how a party with 3 MPs would be in a position to control the party with nearer 100.
In Canada, the example that Farage likes to mention, the new Reform party had 52 seats (which would equate to around 115 in the UK), so had a lot more power.
If the result is 100-3, then clearly the Tory vote is still a lot more powerful in its concentration, and without PR, a lot of Tory MPs could be risking their seats to sign up with Reform. I think you're correct, that the centre-right would still hold quite a lot of power.
Unless Reform make a huge breakthrough - and frankly, given the way things are going, it's not impossible for the Tory vote to crash, then I'd be surprised if it worked out quite so easily for Farage.
Has anyone seen any polling on what the current Tory voters think of Reform? I know that we've seen a lot on Reform voters having a poor opinion of the Tories and Sunak (hence why a pact was probably never on the cards), but no the other way around.
Yes - that's why I'd like to see some polling on Tory voters views of Reform.
There was some polling by Redfield this week, asking about voter priorities, which showed some significant clear blue water between the two parties. Tories cared about immigration, but for Reform voters it's by far the most important issue. More Tory voters said the economy was an issue than any other party, with Reform caring the least.
I can see Sunak getting into a doom loop of being portrayed as a loser, and that collapse is then possible - Voting for Reform would be an anti-Labour vote that feels more like a "win". However, hopefully the Tories that are left have a big more sense that to go down Reform's rabbit hole.
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
Does it...I don't think colour will be the issue. I think more likely that it will severely limit anybody who is ultra wealthy from getting the top job.
Trump, JFK, Berlusconi all ultra wealthy, all won as they had had charisma and could connect with voters
What I would be offering Farage right now if I were Sunak.
Alliance between Con and Ref. Reform stand down in all Tory seats where the sitting MP is going for reelection (except Clacton) Tories stand down in all other Tory seats Everywhere else is 50/50. Sunak promises to resign immediately post election. Leader of a merged party to be elected with the MPs of both parties voting for a final two and the final vote being an electoral college of Tory members (50%) and Reform members (50%).
They have about 4 hours to organise it.
That would be accepted and Farage would lead the new party without any doubt.
Not much there foir Sunak. If you think he puts party above self then you have not been watching.
Permanent very low deposits guaranteed by government has other negatives above the risk of bad loans.
What percentage of council houses sold are still in the hands of owner occupiers, as opposed to private rental companies?
40% of right to buy homes are now rented out privately.
PB likes to ignore the vast shifts in housing tenure in the last 14 years, but ultimately it's the reason why the country has become more unequal and why the number of natural Conservative voters has fallen. There is no evidence that a mass private housebuilding programme would reverse the trend and increase ownership - all the new homes will simply be hoovered up by those who have accumulated large savings.
That shows a gross ignorance of economics and follows your typical lame excuse-making for NIMBYism.
The reason for the vast shifts in housing tenure is the lack of building supply. If supply increases that will be reversed.
And of course in a healthy free housing economy typically 10% of homes are unoccupied [for very good reasons] which means homes in poor condition or are too expensive don't get let out and the owner is left paying their bills/mortgage and taxes without a tenant paying them any rent.
So why would those with savings snap up all homes if supply is increased and they can't let them out? It means price falls and people who want to buy to own have a choice, as well as tenants having a choice, on where to live.
There he blows!
New homes: 2.0 million Increase in households renting: 1.1 million Increase in households owning outright: 0.9 million Decrease in households with a mortgage: -0.4 million
It would have certainly been worse without any new homes. But the idea that an increase in supply is the only intervention required is nonsense - wealth inequality is now far too great in the UK for that to suffice.
That's been caused by the terrible shortage of new homes, meaning prices are far too high. Which is fundamental supply and demand in action.
An increase in supply may not be the only intervention required, I never said it is, but it is absolutely 100% needed and would help to reverse the damage that has been done.
Of course if supply increases and prices fall in real terms, then that would lower that inequality you mentioned too.
The number of new homes has increased faster than the population, by a wide margin. It's actually a glut.
The problem is that there are significant mismatches with where those houses are being built and where there is housing pressure. At risk of pissing off lots of PBers, here is my official assessment of LAs (bespoke assessments can be provided on request):
YIMBY Gold award:
Selby Huntingdonshire Mid Suffolk Telford and Wrekin West Lindsey
NIMBY Black Spot of Barty Doom
Pendle Thurrock Swale Epping Forest Peterborough
Urban Excellence award: Southwark Rural Excellence award: West Devon, Cotswolds, Uttlesford Leon award: Camden, Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea (fewer houses, population falling) Trooper award: Tower Hamlets, Bedford, Tewkesbury (massive effort, but simply can’t keep up) Breeze block award: Barking and Dagenham, Slough, Leicester (massive population growth, no attempt to deal with it) Barty award: Copeland, Richmondshire, Caerphilly, Allerdale (population falling but f*** it more houses anyway)
This glut is all in your head.
The number of new homes has nowhere near kept up with demand.
Again you show a shocking ignorance of the effects of demographics on housing requirements, talking again only of "population". 🤦♂️
8.2% increase in homes 6.1% increase in households 6.3% increase in population
Why are you lying?
Your households figure is a lie. You know this, so why repeat it?
People who are compelled to share a home as there's not enough houses are classed as one household. You know that, but you're repeating your lies anyway. 🤦♂️
The idea that t here's been a lesser increase in household demand than population increase, when our demographic changes mean there's even further household pressures, is so obviously false its remarkable your following through on this outright blatant lie.
The number of people per household has fallen, and overcrowding has fallen too.
Edit: sorry, the population per household has risen* This is explained by immigrants being much more efficient users of households than say older people
The number of people per household should have fallen as we have 4 million extra over 50s than we did. Who don't live with children.🤦♂️
Immigration doesn't counter that.
Your own data reveals the chronic housing shortage. Again!
In most LAs, housing pressure is actually falling. It's only in about 100 where you see this acute problem, and they are mostly in our cities.
Don't believe you - please provide evidence because even this week I saw issues in 3 local authorities round here..
Absolutely.
I'd love to know these mythical local authorities without housing shortages.
Goodness knows. It's all piling up, and none of it is good for the Conservatives. All their defences are crumbling and all their attacks are petering out. I find it difficult to internalise the fact that the £2000 line died in less than 48hrs: an attack with some truth in it, that had previously proven lethal, was entirely ineffective. It's like that bit in Independence Day where they fire the missiles and the shields stop all of them. I have not got a clue what the Conservatives can or should do now.
But that line is going to get another outing next week, when they finally broadcast the interview that was so important to film yesterday
Filming the interview six days before the scheduled broadcast seems like an odd choice for the Tories to make, even without the tactlessness of skipping out of the commemoration of the Normandy landings.
Presumably they filmed so far ahead to avoid the potential risk of Sunak being grilled on any bad news that crops up over the weekend or early next week? Another misjudgement, if so.
As you say, it’ll just return attention to this week’s blunders like Sunak’s £2000 lie and Sunak’s early retreat from France when the news cycle would otherwise have moved on.
Number 10 has issued a formal denial of claims that Rishi Sunak was originally considering missing the D-Day commemorations *entirely*
No 10 spokesman: 'The PM was always scheduled to attend D-Day commemorations, including the UK National Commemoration event in Normandy, and it is incorrect to suggest otherwise'
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
That is a very silly post. And totally misguided.
Many of the front runners to be the next Tory leader happen to be non-white. They'll be evaluated on their policies and abilities, in the same way as Sunak.
The lesson from Sunak is don't choose someone who is shite.
In fairness after the Trussterfuck he was the only viable option to impose without a contest. Whoever is the next leader should revise the party constitution particularly the leadership election rules.
You know how Heathener was saying this was the worst Con GE campaign ever a couple of weeks back. Well it turns out No 10 was just getting warmed up...
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
I just don't buy that explanation. He grew up here. He went to school here. He will have experienced the poppies every November. He's done two Remembrance Sundays as PM. He will have seen the criticism of other MPs for minor transgressions at similar events.
He's clearly under a lot of pressure, and high levels of stress impair decision-making. But I think it's more that he systematically undervalues the front of house aspect of leadership, and that's the underlying instinct that led him astray, rather than that he didn't have a Grandpa with war stories. And, who knows what Grandpa Sunak did in the war in India?
Also, when he was at school, he would have walked through three dirty Great War memorials several times a day - The Boer War Gate, The War Cloister and the Crimea Gate plus a memorial for those who died in war after WW2.
He would have seen hundreds of names of young men like him who had everything ahead of them and then died so there is no way he doesn’t have any concept of it deep in his development.
He’s just a certain type of geeky maths type who isn’t overly interested in things that aren’t measurable and can be analysed to create a result. Great sort to have in the Treasury, not the best to be Ring Master at the circus.
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
That’s nonsense. It just means the next migrant PM should appoint Advisors on Innate Britishness. Because it is a thing. People with deep roots in a country understand it in a way recent arrivals do not. If your great great grandfather fought at the Somme and your grandfather at Normandy then you will understand Britain and its history a lot better - in your soul - than someone whose parents arrived after WW2
Migrants face this challenge whereevrr they go. But they also bring distinct advantages. A new eye. A fresh perspective. Fewer hang ups
Sunak’s problem seems to be a lack of good advisors. Someone with a sense of Britains military history should have been able to say “mate. You do D day. All of it. End of”
...the next migrant PM...? I see your true colours.
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
Not really - it has nothing to do with his skin colour, he’s just shite.
Do you really think Reform would be polling 15-20% if the Tory leader was a white male? I don't, sadly
I was reading some of the comments on the DT and you have a point . But Sunak is really a poor campaigner and has scored a huge own goal . I still can’t believe he decided with advisors that it was okay to leave early and rush back to do a tv interview.
This trashes so many aspects of the Tory campaign .
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
That is a very silly post. And totally misguided.
Many of the front runners to be the next Tory leader happen to be non-white. They'll be evaluated on their policies and abilities, in the same way as Sunak.
The lesson from Sunak is don't choose someone who is shite.
In fairness after the Trussterfuck he was the only viable option to impose without a contest. Whoever is the next leader should revise the party constitution particularly the leadership election rules.
To what purpose - if it hadn't been for the membership vote the only difference would have been Rishi winning the initial MP vote and becoming PM a few months earlier...
I hesitate to mention this, but could Sunak’s background be an issue. He’s of Indian descent and his family are fairly recent migrants
For a British politician with that innate sense if British history - parents who remember the war or grandparents who were in wars - etc etc - then D Day is iconic. It’s in your blood. No way you make this howling error
For someone like Sunak D Day may appear like some quaint ceremony of a long ago war. He might appreciate it intellectually but doesn’t get it emotionally. Because of his background
I hasten to add I have no problem with a migrant prime minister. Just as long as they are competent! I’d have no problem with a bloody robot premier - they’d probably be better
Sunak doesn’t quite grasp Britain or Britishness. His wife is also Indian and billionaire. He is detached in multiple ways
Yes but if the UK's first non white PM loses his first election by a landslide that also kills off the prospect of any further ethnic minority leaders of a major UK party for a generation unfortunately
That’s nonsense. It just means the next migrant PM should appoint Advisors on Innate Britishness. Because it is a thing. People with deep roots in a country understand it in a way recent arrivals do not. If your great great grandfather fought at the Somme and your grandfather at Normandy then you will understand Britain and its history a lot better - in your soul - than someone whose parents arrived after WW2
Migrants face this challenge whereevrr they go. But they also bring distinct advantages. A new eye. A fresh perspective. Fewer hang ups
Sunak’s problem seems to be a lack of good advisors. Someone with a sense of Britains military history should have been able to say “mate. You do D day. All of it. End of”
No it isn't. You may not like it but if an ethnic minority PM loses by a landslide to a white male like Starmer the main parties will conclude the UK electorate are just not ready for a non white PM (even Obama of course lost the US white vote in 2008 and 2012, it was the massive black turnout for him, especially in 2012 and most of the Hispanic vote that got him elected and re elected but the UK Hindu population is far smaller than the US African American population).
As you have said only those with direct family links to fighters in WW2 can truly emotionally feel it, that means on your argument white British almost certainly.
In 10 or 20 years when WW2 is as far away as WW1 is now and all veterans are dead it may be less of an issue but for now it is
Plenty of non-white Britons have ancestors who fought in WW2. There was a substantial British Indian army who fought in Asia but also in Europe. Also plenty of West Indians (who were all volunteers, none were conscripted). Plus of course mixed race Britons whose White British ancestors fought. If Sunak is disconnected from the "normal" British experience perhaps that's his parents' fault for sending him to an elitist school whose entire raison d'etre is to prevent mixing with "normal" British people? I suspect Sunak's real problem is a lack of empathy and curiosity. He seems to lack able advisors. It should also be evident that he is being lined up as the fall guy for the multiple governing failures of the British right.
Latest candidate totals at approx 11am Lab 631 (-) Green (combined) - 613 (+6) Conservative - 593 (+35) Lib Dem - 566 (+5) Reform UK - 470 (+5) Workers Party - 242 (+8) Ind - 148 (+6) SDP - 125 (-) SNP - 57 (-) Plaid Cymru - 32 (-)
Where are the SDP getting money for around 120 lost deposits? I know you can get lost deposit insurance, but I would have thought they would be uninsurable. Their 2022 accounts show £52k income.
Starmer, and Labour should probably think about how far to push attacks, demands for apologies etc. They are on for a landslide anyway and the more things they over-react about the more they are setting themselves up as hostages to fortune when they inevitably fuck up in power.
I imagine Starmer thinks he’s being ruthless but he doesn’t need to be, his enemies are killing themselves, but he’s not being totally smart.
Number 10 has issued a formal denial of claims that Rishi Sunak was originally considering missing the D-Day commemorations *entirely*
No 10 spokesman: 'The PM was always scheduled to attend D-Day commemorations, including the UK National Commemoration event in Normandy, and it is incorrect to suggest otherwise'
That looks like a pretty forceful denial. They will be so screwed if someone leaks to the contrary.
"I wasn't planing to miss the entire thing" is perhaps not the best way to put an end to the story.
Either it is badly worded or, worse, it is legalistic sophistry that will have unravelled by the end of the day. However, we should bear in mind that malign, often foreign, actors are already trolling during this election campaign.
Goodness knows. It's all piling up, and none of it is good for the Conservatives. All their defences are crumbling and all their attacks are petering out. I find it difficult to internalise the fact that the £2000 line died in less than 48hrs: an attack with some truth in it, that had previously proven lethal, was entirely ineffective. It's like that bit in Independence Day where they fire the missiles and the shields stop all of them. I have not got a clue what the Conservatives can or should do now.
But that line is going to get another outing next week, when they finally broadcast the interview that was so important to film yesterday
Filming the interview six days before the scheduled broadcast seems like an odd choice for the Tories to make, even without the tactlessness of skipping out of the commemoration of the Normandy landings.
Presumably they filmed so far ahead to avoid the potential risk of Sunak being grilled on any bad news that crops up over the weekend or early next week? Another misjudgement, if so.
As you say, it’ll just return attention to this week’s blunders like Sunak’s £2000 lie and Sunak’s early retreat from France when the news cycle would otherwise have moved on.
Not doing the interview live is a weird choice, you need to react to the news from that day.
A doctored video of Labour's Wes Streeting has been pushed to X users - making it seem as though he called fellow politician Diane Abbott a "silly woman". A network of X accounts has been creating and sharing such clips of politicians ahead of the general election - and then posting misleading comments alongside to bolster the impression they are real. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg33x9jm02ko
For those of you not inclined to follow the link, it takes you to a clip of last night’s QT. Fiona Bruce asks the audience ‘Who here is seeing the benefits of Brexit?’
Comments
Starmer: "The PM will have to answer for his choices"
A Scottish example would be the enormous growth in housing in the Lothians, taking off some pressure in Edinburgh, even while house prices in Greenock....
A Farage government would cause damage. Lots of damage.
It may also do some good things - whether the trade off is net positive is debateable.
As to what the Conservatives have done in government:
Full employment
Housing more affordable in much of the country
National insurance reductions
Pensions reform
Affluent oldies
Exam grade inflation controlled
Big increase in NHS workforce
Environmental improvements
Whether you consider them positives or whether you consider them worth the negatives is again debateable.
@SkyNews
BREAKING: Sir Keir Starmer has reacted to Rishi Sunak's apology for leaving the D-Day ceremony early
https://x.com/SkyNews/status/1799017514888048853
Still waiting for Richi to poke his head out
We'll certainly hear more, possibly after the election, about who knew what and who thought what.
I can't believe Rupert will fence sit. The article SKS did the other day reminded me of that one Blair did prior to 1997 on Europe.
Having done that, he tries to get out of going to Normandy at all. Campaigning - openly lying - was his priority. Reluctantly he goes to France, cosplays someone who cares about veterans, then comes back for an ITV interview which HE scheduled. To defend more lies and keep insisting his lie was not a lie despite it being completely demolished.
A Tory candidate seeking reelection says of Sunak flying back early from D-Day commemorations:
“This is like when Theresa May didn’t meet victims of the Grenfell Tower in 2017. Then it was The Queen who stepped in, yesterday it was Keir Starmer.”
Concerns already being relayed to Sunak’s political secretary to make the strength of anger known.
If they lost the subsequent GE fine and they could get a new leader in opposition but it would likely have been by a smaller margin than Brown lost or Sunak is likely to lose and a Boris led Conservative party would certainly not be polling less 20 to 25% or less and Reform would certainly not be on 15%+
What it might do is kill off anyone with an image of posho globalised wealth.
The problem for the Tories is they have had Cameron followed by Boris and now Sunak. May and Truss were just weird. They need to find somebody with a middle ground of normal background and who isn't weird.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=10&LAB=43&LIB=10&Reform=28&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17&SCOTLAB=36.8&SCOTLIB=8.4&SCOTReform=1.9&SCOTGreen=1.4&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=31.1&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
He's clearly under a lot of pressure, and high levels of stress impair decision-making. But I think it's more that he systematically undervalues the front of house aspect of leadership, and that's the underlying instinct that led him astray, rather than that he didn't have a Grandpa with war stories. And, who knows what Grandpa Sunak did in the war in India?
Spoiler alert, that’s not the reason.
Migrants face this challenge whereevrr they go. But they also bring distinct advantages. A new eye. A fresh perspective. Fewer hang ups
Sunak’s problem seems to be a lack of good advisors. Someone with a sense of Britains military history should have been able to say “mate. You do D day. All of it. End of”
Hence Nimbys have been voting LD and Independent, though the Tories just held the council in May
https://x.com/cat_headley/status/1798953416225669253?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
Cities are snowballing. The supply of people and demand for housing are not independent. As Edinburgh and its economy grows, more and more people will want to live and work there.
Maybe he needs to call them "suckers and losers" ?
Worked for Trump
And the promise of Brexit dies…
…not with a bang, but a whimper of gibberish.
https://x.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1799011913806057907?s=61&t=R6lKH2EZT0v_boZqogHuwA
For those of you not inclined to follow the link, it takes you to a clip of last night’s QT. Fiona Bruce asks the audience ‘Who here is seeing the benefits of Brexit?’
One guy raises his hand.
RemindMe! 10 years
https://x.com/danwootton/status/1798805785751011587?s=19
Sunak is getting the wrong sort of international exposure. Front page on NBC. It really would be quite something if he managed to have such a disastrous campaign that he limits even his future prospects as a tech-bro CEO. ~AA
https://x.com/BestForBritain/status/1799022507108028897
Number 10 has issued a formal denial of claims that Rishi Sunak was originally considering missing the D-Day commemorations *entirely*
No 10 spokesman: 'The PM was always scheduled to attend D-Day commemorations, including the UK National Commemoration event in Normandy, and it is incorrect to suggest otherwise'
https://x.com/steven_swinford/status/1799022387997893087?s=46
That looks like a pretty forceful denial. They will be so screwed if someone leaks to the contrary.
"This D-Day cock-up is final proof that Rishi Sunak is an embarrassment to Britain"
Alongside:
"I may have to vote for Rishi Sunak after all"
(Though admittedly the latter is by AEP, which is another kiss of death.)
https://x.com/SkyNews/status/1799023143593590951
Alliance between Con and Ref.
Reform stand down in all Tory seats where the sitting MP is going for reelection (except Clacton)
Tories stand down in all other Tory seats
Everywhere else is 50/50.
Sunak promises to resign immediately post election.
Leader of a merged party to be elected with the MPs of both parties voting for a final two and the final vote being an electoral college of Tory members (50%) and Reform members (50%).
They have about 4 hours to organise it.
That's currently in the running for daft take of the day.
Best you can get on a Labour win is 1/14.
As you have said only those with direct family links to fighters in WW2 can truly emotionally feel it, that means on your argument white British almost certainly.
In 10 or 20 years when WW2 is as far away as WW1 is now and all veterans are dead it may be less of an issue but for now it is
Many of the front runners to be the next Tory leader happen to be non-white. They'll be evaluated on their policies and abilities, in the same way as Sunak.
The lesson from Sunak is don't choose someone who is shite.
Every PM seems to think that sucking up to him is helpful to them; it isn't.
But that is too abstract an achievement for most people other than the Bill Cashs of the world.
Migration was a major, if not the major factor, in the vote and that has exploded with non-eu from S Asia and Africa.
Daft take of the day is officially yours.
There was some polling by Redfield this week, asking about voter priorities, which showed some significant clear blue water between the two parties. Tories cared about immigration, but for Reform voters it's by far the most important issue. More Tory voters said the economy was an issue than any other party, with Reform caring the least.
I can see Sunak getting into a doom loop of being portrayed as a loser, and that collapse is then possible - Voting for Reform would be an anti-Labour vote that feels more like a "win". However, hopefully the Tories that are left have a big more sense that to go down Reform's rabbit hole.
https://x.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1798750446309577088
Name any LAs without housing pressure.
Presumably they filmed so far ahead to avoid the potential risk of Sunak being grilled on any bad news that crops up over the weekend or early next week? Another misjudgement, if so.
As you say, it’ll just return attention to this week’s blunders like Sunak’s £2000 lie and Sunak’s early retreat from France when the news cycle would otherwise have moved on.
Lab 631 (-)
Green (combined) - 613 (+6)
Conservative - 593 (+35)
Lib Dem - 566 (+5)
Reform UK - 470 (+5)
Workers Party - 242 (+8)
Ind - 148 (+6)
SDP - 125 (-)
SNP - 57 (-)
Plaid Cymru - 32 (-)
You know how Heathener was saying this was the worst Con GE campaign ever a couple of weeks back. Well it turns out No 10 was just getting warmed up...
He would have seen hundreds of names of young men like him who had everything ahead of them and then died so there is no way he doesn’t have any concept of it deep in his development.
He’s just a certain type of geeky maths type who isn’t overly interested in things that aren’t measurable and can be analysed to create a result. Great sort to have in the Treasury, not the best to be Ring Master at the circus.
This trashes so many aspects of the Tory campaign .
Lab 41 (+1)
Con 19. (=)
Ref 16 (-1)
LD 11 (+1)
I suspect Sunak's real problem is a lack of empathy and curiosity. He seems to lack able advisors. It should also be evident that he is being lined up as the fall guy for the multiple governing failures of the British right.
I imagine Starmer thinks he’s being ruthless but he doesn’t need to be, his enemies are killing themselves, but he’s not being totally smart.
"Vote for me to let the LDs in. If by any chance I am elected I promise to defect to Labour or the LDs - whoever makes me the best offer tbh."
Doing it a week in advance is utterly insane....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg33x9jm02ko
Nigel Farage and Luke Akehurst are also named.