BBC Verify were so desperate for big social media scandal stories during the GE to justify their existence / their "undercover" online project, and it never happened..
A classic modus operandi of trying to make news rather than reporting it.
A classic case of finding any old reason to attack the BBC! Lots of people were concerned about deep fakes being used in the campaign, including here. BBC Verify responded appropriately.
Bollocks. They have run several stories which basically tried to dress up we didn't find anything of note as a story of note e.g Reform "bots", was actually real people who for all the evidence BBC Verify found are erhhh supporters of Reform. They also ran the Trump deep fakes one that was an account that was very clear a parody meme account.
Bollocks to your bollocks. Numerous media outlets have raised this as a concern, in our recent general election and elsewhere. For example:
Yes, but media feeds on other media. As an academic you must have experienced this? I have - a story in the local Dorset press gets picked up by the Daily Mail which is then picked up by the BBC and the rest.
So how many of these stories that you list are stories about stories?
To be fair, after the campaign they have just fought, which managed to be both shameful and ineffective, I'd want to memory hole the whole thing. Presumably The Internet Never Forgets applies, though?
See also the joke about Isaac Levido's next job interview:
"About this gap in your CV in 2024..."
"Prison. I was in prision."
By all accounts, Levido wasn't listened to. He was against the premature election for a start.
Rachel Reeves has announced an immediate end to the “absurd” ban on new onshore wind developments in England as she unveiled a series of reforms to the planning system.
On shore wind is the cheapest form of energy there is, its absolutely bonkers its not been maximised. Any NIMBYs need to be told to mind their own business.
Same with housing. Looks like a disappointing lack of reform to be announced today, just a return of the pre-Sunak mandatory housing targets. That's not enough, more needs to be done.
What happens if all the Dukes and Earls refuse to put turbines up?
Then other landowners will and will make the profit instead.
Onshore wind is profitable, reliable, clean and cheap. That's why planning regulations were needed to block it, not people not wanting to put it up.
So you'll pander to rich NIMBYs?
No.
Nobody has a monopoly on land ownership. What people want to do with their own land is up to them, NIMBYism is trying to forbid other people from building on their (not your own) land.
You're thinking of NIOPBYS. Not in other people's back yards.
Would you be happy if someone were to buy small strips of land all over the country to prevent new roads being built?
As a last resort I'm OK with compulsory purchase orders being used for significant infrastructure needs that go across the country, like roads and rails.
But we're not talking about that. There's no need for wind farms to traverse the country, any more than any other type of farm, they can be wherever they get sited.
Actually its pylons etc that are more relevant for needing to be sorted out than wind farms as again they do need to traverse the country.
Perhaps they could put wind generators on pylons. Two birds…
Commission diverse vibrant multi ethnic young sculptors and painters to design phone masts and wind farms to be works of art. Seriously. Cathedrals when they were built were essential infrastructure with the beauty a desirable side effect, as were 19th c railway stations Three birds.
There was, I believe, a design competition for new HV pylons, with some really interesting entries, but the selected one(s) were pretty uninspiring, presumably as cheaper than the fancier ones
ETA: This wasn't what I was thinking of, but shows new pylon designs for UK at the end and some ideas from elsewhere. I'd guess the giant ones near the top would be quite expensive! The new ones in the UK, T design, do look better than the old. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66404487
They had a design comp;etition in the 1920s-30s IIRC too.
BBC Verify were so desperate for big social media scandal stories during the GE to justify their existence / their "undercover" online project, and it never happened..
A classic modus operandi of trying to make news rather than reporting it.
A classic case of finding any old reason to attack the BBC! Lots of people were concerned about deep fakes being used in the campaign, including here. BBC Verify responded appropriately.
Bollocks. They have run several stories which basically tried to dress up we didn't find anything of note as a story of note e.g Reform "bots", was actually real people who for all the evidence BBC Verify found are erhhh supporters of Reform. They also ran the Trump deep fakes one that was an account that was very clear a parody meme account.
Bollocks to your bollocks. Numerous media outlets have raised this as a concern, in our recent general election and elsewhere. For example:
Yes, but media feeds on other media. As an academic you must have experienced this? I have - a story in the local Dorset press gets picked up by the Daily Mail which is then picked up by the BBC and the rest.
So how many of these stories that you list are stories about stories?
The classic is wikipedia sourcing....a source links to a newspaper article, that links to another newspaper article, whose source is wikipedia / social media that got their info from the original wikipedia article.
BBC Verify were so desperate for big social media scandal stories during the GE to justify their existence / their "undercover" online project, and it never happened..
A classic modus operandi of trying to make news rather than reporting it.
A classic case of finding any old reason to attack the BBC! Lots of people were concerned about deep fakes being used in the campaign, including here. BBC Verify responded appropriately.
Bollocks. They have run several stories which basically tried to dress up we didn't find anything of note as a story of note e.g Reform "bots", was actually real people who for all the evidence BBC Verify found are erhhh supporters of Reform. They also ran the Trump deep fakes one that was an account that was very clear a parody meme account.
Bollocks to your bollocks. Numerous media outlets have raised this as a concern, in our recent general election and elsewhere. For example:
That wasn't my point. Its was BBC Verify have desperately tried to make a story when there wasn't one. They aren't reporting the news, they are trying to make news. The Reform one being a classic example, there was no story, but it lead major part of 10pm news.
People are always claiming conspiracies, that the news is highlighting what it shouldn’t or not highlighting what it should. Bollocks to it all. There was a broad and real concern about deep fakes, bots etc. The BBC, among hundreds of pieces, has written on this topic with the URL you gave first, claiming they were “desperate”. Unable to defend this characterisation, you are now moving the goalposts to pick on something else. Get over yourself. Everyone isn’t out to get you.
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
No need. There's a film they can watch, Io Capitano. From this they will learn that people smugglers appoint the most clued up looking clients as captain and have no presence on the boats and no need to be in the UK at all, it's not like they are waiting at this end with medals and goody bags for successful finishers. So how a Home Office op works is anyone's guess.
The fact that the BBC managed to get some people smugglers arrested following fairly simple investigation does rather point to the current Home Office not being up to the job.
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
BBC Verify were so desperate for big social media scandal stories during the GE to justify their existence / their "undercover" online project, and it never happened..
A classic modus operandi of trying to make news rather than reporting it.
A classic case of finding any old reason to attack the BBC! Lots of people were concerned about deep fakes being used in the campaign, including here. BBC Verify responded appropriately.
Bollocks. They have run several stories which basically tried to dress up we didn't find anything of note as a story of note e.g Reform "bots", was actually real people who for all the evidence BBC Verify found are erhhh supporters of Reform. They also ran the Trump deep fakes one that was an account that was very clear a parody meme account.
Bollocks to your bollocks. Numerous media outlets have raised this as a concern, in our recent general election and elsewhere. For example:
That wasn't my point. Its was BBC Verify have desperately tried to make a story when there wasn't one. They aren't reporting the news, they are trying to make news. The Reform one being a classic example, there was no story, but it lead major part of 10pm news.
People are always claiming conspiracies, that the news is highlighting what it shouldn’t or not highlighting what it should. Bollocks to it all. There was a broad and real concern about deep fakes, bots etc. The BBC, among hundreds of pieces, has written on this topic with the URL you gave first, claiming they were “desperate”. Unable to defend this characterisation, you are now moving the goalposts to pick on something else. Get over yourself. Everyone isn’t out to get you.
Nobody is out to get me. BBC Verify is just shit at their job and they have run a load of pieces that are bullshit and were desperate to find something, anything, and twisted things that weren't.
I actually know somebody who does this work for governments, investigating bots and misleading information disseminated via social media, and put it this way, they aren't doing what BBC Verify did.
BBC Verify were so desperate for big social media scandal stories during the GE to justify their existence / their "undercover" online project, and it never happened..
A classic modus operandi of trying to make news rather than reporting it.
A classic case of finding any old reason to attack the BBC! Lots of people were concerned about deep fakes being used in the campaign, including here. BBC Verify responded appropriately.
Bollocks. They have run several stories which basically tried to dress up we didn't find anything of note as a story of note e.g Reform "bots", was actually real people who for all the evidence BBC Verify found are erhhh supporters of Reform. They also ran the Trump deep fakes one that was an account that was very clear a parody meme account.
Bollocks to your bollocks. Numerous media outlets have raised this as a concern, in our recent general election and elsewhere. For example:
That wasn't my point. Its was BBC Verify have desperately tried to make a story when there wasn't one. They aren't reporting the news, they are trying to make news. The Reform one being a classic example, there was no story, but it lead major part of 10pm news.
Is there concern over generative AI yes. Have BBC Verify stories found real evidence of its widespread use influencing our general election, no.
There's also the Farage episode of QT where one of the 'plucky members of the voting public' asking a question was a BBC producer and the supposedly representative audience was somewhere to the left of Lenin.
The new Health Secretary, Wes Streeting says “the NHS is broken”, but instead of bringing in builders, he has a brought in a demolition man - Alan Milburn.
How many hours to save the NHS?
How many hours to hand the NHS to Streeting's private health donors more like
Missing the Tories already?
Why would you be missing them.
SKS Lab have same aim hand the NHS to private Sector health donors
An aim that the Tories have apparently never manage to achieve, despite being in power from 1979 to 1997, and then 2010 until last Friday. Hardly seems to be their number one priority.
The Tories are so incompetent, however, that their failure to do something doesn’t prove it wasn’t their number one priority. They said reducing immigration was a priority and look what happened there.
The most recent bunch were incompetent for sure, but I don't think they all have been.
Basically the idea that the Tories (and now the Red Tories) are just desperate to privatise ("sell-off") the NHS is a fake news story beloved of the left. What all governments should want is the NHS to be the best it can, giving as good a care as it can given the constraints it suffers. There is not infinite money, consultants, operating theatres, social care etc. If there are ways to use the private sector to do things better then so be it. If the state does it better then so be it.
Its just that here we are in 2024, with plenty of Tory government time in the past and the NHS has somehow NOT been sold off.
Does anyone know where I can get the full detailed results please? Lots of web sites claim they do, but don't. Invariably you have to enter a post code. I'm not doing that for every constituency (even if I were capable) I want a full list in full detail.
Even Wikipedia failed me as there are no vote numbers on their detailed list.
Honestly the internet sometimes takes us backwards. In the old days all the quality press would publish a full set of results.
"We will publish full vote counts and candidate-level data once we have verified local authority returns. We expect this to be around 12th July."
I've published the full vote counts in a single sheet. Have any results been changed after LA verification ever ? It must be an exceedingly rare event.
I do recall cases previously, although they were rare and minor.
Rachel Reeves has announced an immediate end to the “absurd” ban on new onshore wind developments in England as she unveiled a series of reforms to the planning system.
On shore wind is the cheapest form of energy there is, its absolutely bonkers its not been maximised. Any NIMBYs need to be told to mind their own business.
Same with housing. Looks like a disappointing lack of reform to be announced today, just a return of the pre-Sunak mandatory housing targets. That's not enough, more needs to be done.
What happens if all the Dukes and Earls refuse to put turbines up?
Then other landowners will and will make the profit instead.
Onshore wind is profitable, reliable, clean and cheap. That's why planning regulations were needed to block it, not people not wanting to put it up.
So you'll pander to rich NIMBYs?
No.
Nobody has a monopoly on land ownership. What people want to do with their own land is up to them, NIMBYism is trying to forbid other people from building on their (not your own) land.
You're thinking of NIOPBYS. Not in other people's back yards.
Would you be happy if someone were to buy small strips of land all over the country to prevent new roads being built?
As a last resort I'm OK with compulsory purchase orders being used for significant infrastructure needs that go across the country, like roads and rails.
But we're not talking about that. There's no need for wind farms to traverse the country, any more than any other type of farm, they can be wherever they get sited.
Actually its pylons etc that are more relevant for needing to be sorted out than wind farms as again they do need to traverse the country.
Perhaps they could put wind generators on pylons. Two birds…
Commission diverse vibrant multi ethnic young sculptors and painters to design phone masts and wind farms to be works of art. Seriously. Cathedrals when they were built were essential infrastructure with the beauty a desirable side effect, as were 19th c railway stations Three birds.
In Portugal, they have cell phone towers disguised as trees.
Specially for Horse: 200 years ago the Admiralty built a comms tower right next to the M25. And made provision for holiday residence. Clever clogs.
OT - anyone else get emails from LinkedIn and read Co-workers as cow workers?
Or just me?
It is usually stories of astonishing generosity from a well paid CEO of a business buying a bagel and a coffee for a tramp and then saying how wonderful it made them feel and it isn't all about working, or some other such guff, that seems to come to me.
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
No need. There's a film they can watch, Io Capitano. From this they will learn that people smugglers appoint the most clued up looking clients as captain and have no presence on the boats and no need to be in the UK at all, it's not like they are waiting at this end with medals and goody bags for successful finishers. So how a Home Office op works is anyone's guess.
The fact that the BBC managed to get some people smugglers arrested following fairly simple investigation does rather point to the current Home Office not being up to the job.
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
The new Health Secretary, Wes Streeting says “the NHS is broken”, but instead of bringing in builders, he has a brought in a demolition man - Alan Milburn.
How many hours to save the NHS?
How many hours to hand the NHS to Streeting's private health donors more like
Missing the Tories already?
Why would you be missing them.
SKS Lab have same aim hand the NHS to private Sector health donors
An aim that the Tories have apparently never manage to achieve, despite being in power from 1979 to 1997, and then 2010 until last Friday. Hardly seems to be their number one priority.
The Tories are so incompetent, however, that their failure to do something doesn’t prove it wasn’t their number one priority. They said reducing immigration was a priority and look what happened there.
The most recent bunch were incompetent for sure, but I don't think they all have been.
Basically the idea that the Tories (and now the Red Tories) are just desperate to privatise ("sell-off") the NHS is a fake news story beloved of the left. What all governments should want is the NHS to be the best it can, giving as good a care as it can given the constraints it suffers. There is not infinite money, consultants, operating theatres, social care etc. If there are ways to use the private sector to do things better then so be it. If the state does it better then so be it.
Its just that here we are in 2024, with plenty of Tory government time in the past and the NHS has somehow NOT been sold off.
Quite a bit has, if you look more closely. Patient data processing: the recent hack was in a commercial firm.
A shame that it seems we will have nothing on 4G/5G and planning changes for that, today.
My photo quota for the day. They need JOINED-UP planning for 5G phone masts, as with so many other things.
This one aka "Middle Finger" was built in the middle of the new strategic Active Travel route at the Pentagon Island, Derby, in 2023. The Active Travel route is one which is part of a £100m * package covering Nottingham and Derby allocated in iirc 2022, over 3-4 years.
* For the record, £100m is a pittance for an area of 750k people for active travel. There is currently £50m being spent on improving a single traffic island on the Nottingham Ring Road, one of many highways projects on that scale locally.
Is that malicious compliance with some stupid rules by a stupid person being stupid? Stupidly?
It's taking the easiest route, because you can get away with it.
Further example, the Council have planning permission, and imposed a condition to extend the shared path on the other side which is that mini-bit extra on the left opposite the post.
But the Planning Condition did not include required dimensions, so the phone company did an extensions about 1/3 of the width of the block they had caused, and the Council cannot enforce.
Just sheer lack of professionalism in addition to stupid policy / lack of sweating the detail.
You can see the same thing everywhere across the country.
This is the risk with Labour's planning reform. It could allow developers to build at lower cost but not increase supply (relative to what they would build under current regulations).
Developers seek to maximise profit. They do not see to build as much as possible. The constraint in supply is in their interest.
Generally constraining supply would only be in their interest of a producer if they have a monopoly or something close to one. Otherwise it's in your interests for your competitors to constrain supply, but it's in your interests to meet it. Do British developers have that?
I guess there may be some places with *local* monopolies, but I think the places where the housing shortages are the worst are mostly places where people already commute so they have a lot of choices which locality to live in?
I don't think they need to have a monopoly in a general sense. Even in a competitive market, the profit maximising quantity and type of house to provide is not necessarily the best for housing as many people as possible.
Even within the Edinburgh bypass, developers are building detached houses with tiny gardens. When my flat was built 150 years ago, they transformed a field into tenements. You can house 6x as many people on the same footprint as those detached houses, and it's still only medium density.
Planning guidance means that a certain density has to achieved (hence proliferation of three storey houses with small gardens) and not enough parking is provided (The bane of new build estates particularly at the end of a cul-de-sac.) In a free market we would see some development that had more space for more money, but most higher end builds are now redevelopment of a single older property to significantly enlarge and improve.
Rachel Reeves has announced an immediate end to the “absurd” ban on new onshore wind developments in England as she unveiled a series of reforms to the planning system.
On shore wind is the cheapest form of energy there is, its absolutely bonkers its not been maximised. Any NIMBYs need to be told to mind their own business.
Same with housing. Looks like a disappointing lack of reform to be announced today, just a return of the pre-Sunak mandatory housing targets. That's not enough, more needs to be done.
What happens if all the Dukes and Earls refuse to put turbines up?
Then other landowners will and will make the profit instead.
Onshore wind is profitable, reliable, clean and cheap. That's why planning regulations were needed to block it, not people not wanting to put it up.
So you'll pander to rich NIMBYs?
No.
Nobody has a monopoly on land ownership. What people want to do with their own land is up to them, NIMBYism is trying to forbid other people from building on their (not your own) land.
You're thinking of NIOPBYS. Not in other people's back yards.
Would you be happy if someone were to buy small strips of land all over the country to prevent new roads being built?
As a last resort I'm OK with compulsory purchase orders being used for significant infrastructure needs that go across the country, like roads and rails.
But we're not talking about that. There's no need for wind farms to traverse the country, any more than any other type of farm, they can be wherever they get sited.
Actually its pylons etc that are more relevant for needing to be sorted out than wind farms as again they do need to traverse the country.
Perhaps they could put wind generators on pylons. Two birds…
Commission diverse vibrant multi ethnic young sculptors and painters to design phone masts and wind farms to be works of art. Seriously. Cathedrals when they were built were essential infrastructure with the beauty a desirable side effect, as were 19th c railway stations Three birds.
In Portugal, they have cell phone towers disguised as trees.
I think Network Rail have also disguised trackside antennas as trees.
I can see one on the horizon from my kitchen, up on the downs above Fontmell Magna. It's pretty good tbf, you have to get quite close to see it's not a scots pine. We use it to mark the turning of winter as the sun rises directly behind it for just one or two days around 5th January.
Thats brilliant! I've also spent for too long working out exactly where that is!
ST 88456 16311
Cheers - I found it and then went for a drive on google maps! As you know I am not that far away in Warminster and we often head south for walks etc
It's not far from Melbury Beacon, you'll be able to see our house from there (along with quite a few others as I think you can see for 30 miles on a clear day).
"I voted SDP. They gave me something to believe in Our liberal order is failing. Farage understands this, but so too does the Social Democratic Party Tim Stanley"
To quote a film in a setting not unadjacent to the constituency he ran in, 'You're a big man, but you're in bad shape. With me it's a full time job. Now behave yourself.' Though he's not averse to using his fists in certain advantageous circumstance I believe.
Ah Caine, I'm thinking. That film where he comes out of a house bollock naked holding a shotgun.
No, that's not Liddle. Not the shotgun part anyway.
BBC Verify were so desperate for big social media scandal stories during the GE to justify their existence / their "undercover" online project, and it never happened..
A classic modus operandi of trying to make news rather than reporting it.
A classic case of finding any old reason to attack the BBC! Lots of people were concerned about deep fakes being used in the campaign, including here. BBC Verify responded appropriately.
Bollocks. They have run several stories which basically tried to dress up we didn't find anything of note as a story of note e.g Reform "bots", was actually real people who for all the evidence BBC Verify found are erhhh supporters of Reform. They also ran the Trump deep fakes one that was an account that was very clear a parody meme account.
Bollocks to your bollocks. Numerous media outlets have raised this as a concern, in our recent general election and elsewhere. For example:
Yes, but media feeds on other media. As an academic you must have experienced this? I have - a story in the local Dorset press gets picked up by the Daily Mail which is then picked up by the BBC and the rest.
So how many of these stories that you list are stories about stories?
I have experienced media feeding on media. I appeared on the Today programme and then got flooded with requests by all and sundry! However, on a quick scan, none of the articles I posted are sourced to BBC investigation. FU’s claim that the BBC are pushing a line to create a story is baloney.
Rachel Reeves has announced an immediate end to the “absurd” ban on new onshore wind developments in England as she unveiled a series of reforms to the planning system.
On shore wind is the cheapest form of energy there is, its absolutely bonkers its not been maximised. Any NIMBYs need to be told to mind their own business.
Same with housing. Looks like a disappointing lack of reform to be announced today, just a return of the pre-Sunak mandatory housing targets. That's not enough, more needs to be done.
What happens if all the Dukes and Earls refuse to put turbines up?
Then other landowners will and will make the profit instead.
Onshore wind is profitable, reliable, clean and cheap. That's why planning regulations were needed to block it, not people not wanting to put it up.
So you'll pander to rich NIMBYs?
No.
Nobody has a monopoly on land ownership. What people want to do with their own land is up to them, NIMBYism is trying to forbid other people from building on their (not your own) land.
You're thinking of NIOPBYS. Not in other people's back yards.
Would you be happy if someone were to buy small strips of land all over the country to prevent new roads being built?
As a last resort I'm OK with compulsory purchase orders being used for significant infrastructure needs that go across the country, like roads and rails.
But we're not talking about that. There's no need for wind farms to traverse the country, any more than any other type of farm, they can be wherever they get sited.
Actually its pylons etc that are more relevant for needing to be sorted out than wind farms as again they do need to traverse the country.
Perhaps they could put wind generators on pylons. Two birds…
Commission diverse vibrant multi ethnic young sculptors and painters to design phone masts and wind farms to be works of art. Seriously. Cathedrals when they were built were essential infrastructure with the beauty a desirable side effect, as were 19th c railway stations Three birds.
There was, I believe, a design competition for new HV pylons, with some really interesting entries, but the selected one(s) were pretty uninspiring, presumably as cheaper than the fancier ones
ETA: This wasn't what I was thinking of, but shows new pylon designs for UK at the end and some ideas from elsewhere. I'd guess the giant ones near the top would be quite expensive! The new ones in the UK, T design, do look better than the old. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66404487
They had a design comp;etition in the 1920s-30s IIRC too.
I kinda wanted them to go with an Anthony Gormley style man/woman holding the wires in upraised hands, but would have been a little bit Gates of Argonath...
Does anyone know where I can get the full detailed results please? Lots of web sites claim they do, but don't. Invariably you have to enter a post code. I'm not doing that for every constituency (even if I were capable) I want a full list in full detail.
Even Wikipedia failed me as there are no vote numbers on their detailed list.
Honestly the internet sometimes takes us backwards. In the old days all the quality press would publish a full set of results.
Parliament will publish a research paper in due course
I saw that Ian, but I need it NOW. I have withdrawal symptoms. Thanks everyone else also.
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
No need. There's a film they can watch, Io Capitano. From this they will learn that people smugglers appoint the most clued up looking clients as captain and have no presence on the boats and no need to be in the UK at all, it's not like they are waiting at this end with medals and goody bags for successful finishers. So how a Home Office op works is anyone's guess.
The fact that the BBC managed to get some people smugglers arrested following fairly simple investigation does rather point to the current Home Office not being up to the job.
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
Rachel Reeves has announced an immediate end to the “absurd” ban on new onshore wind developments in England as she unveiled a series of reforms to the planning system.
On shore wind is the cheapest form of energy there is, its absolutely bonkers its not been maximised. Any NIMBYs need to be told to mind their own business.
Same with housing. Looks like a disappointing lack of reform to be announced today, just a return of the pre-Sunak mandatory housing targets. That's not enough, more needs to be done.
What happens if all the Dukes and Earls refuse to put turbines up?
Then other landowners will and will make the profit instead.
Onshore wind is profitable, reliable, clean and cheap. That's why planning regulations were needed to block it, not people not wanting to put it up.
So you'll pander to rich NIMBYs?
No.
Nobody has a monopoly on land ownership. What people want to do with their own land is up to them, NIMBYism is trying to forbid other people from building on their (not your own) land.
You're thinking of NIOPBYS. Not in other people's back yards.
Would you be happy if someone were to buy small strips of land all over the country to prevent new roads being built?
As a last resort I'm OK with compulsory purchase orders being used for significant infrastructure needs that go across the country, like roads and rails.
But we're not talking about that. There's no need for wind farms to traverse the country, any more than any other type of farm, they can be wherever they get sited.
Actually its pylons etc that are more relevant for needing to be sorted out than wind farms as again they do need to traverse the country.
Perhaps they could put wind generators on pylons. Two birds…
Commission diverse vibrant multi ethnic young sculptors and painters to design phone masts and wind farms to be works of art. Seriously. Cathedrals when they were built were essential infrastructure with the beauty a desirable side effect, as were 19th c railway stations Three birds.
In Portugal, they have cell phone towers disguised as trees.
I think Network Rail have also disguised trackside antennas as trees.
I can see one on the horizon from my kitchen, up on the downs above Fontmell Magna. It's pretty good tbf, you have to get quite close to see it's not a scots pine. We use it to mark the turning of winter as the sun rises directly behind it for just one or two days around 5th January.
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
No need. There's a film they can watch, Io Capitano. From this they will learn that people smugglers appoint the most clued up looking clients as captain and have no presence on the boats and no need to be in the UK at all, it's not like they are waiting at this end with medals and goody bags for successful finishers. So how a Home Office op works is anyone's guess.
The fact that the BBC managed to get some people smugglers arrested following fairly simple investigation does rather point to the current Home Office not being up to the job.
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
I think the Home Office not being fit for purpose has been going on for as long as the Home Office been about. It is why it was also thought of as the job no aspiring politician wanted as likely to damage your career. Also why a reason given that May might actually be good, because she survived her time there, obviously reality didn't quite work out like that.
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
We already have a Small Boats Operational Command which was recruiting over 700 additional staff to add to the people already working on the problem. Apparenly creating a new Border Security Command will magically solve the problem.
Awaits to see an open and fair application process for the head of the Command. Does not hold breath. Will be member of the new 10K. An ex post office worker could do it...
— Reeves looking to convene Treasury investors’ taskforce tomorrow bringing in private finance — Border Security Command launching imminently, as soon as Tues — new non-dom figures published Tues ahead of crackdown — GB Energy launch next week
BBC Verify were so desperate for big social media scandal stories during the GE to justify their existence / their "undercover" online project, and it never happened..
A classic modus operandi of trying to make news rather than reporting it.
A classic case of finding any old reason to attack the BBC! Lots of people were concerned about deep fakes being used in the campaign, including here. BBC Verify responded appropriately.
Bollocks. They have run several stories which basically tried to dress up we didn't find anything of note as a story of note e.g Reform "bots", was actually real people who for all the evidence BBC Verify found are erhhh supporters of Reform. They also ran the Trump deep fakes one that was an account that was very clear a parody meme account.
Bollocks to your bollocks. Numerous media outlets have raised this as a concern, in our recent general election and elsewhere. For example:
Yes, but media feeds on other media. As an academic you must have experienced this? I have - a story in the local Dorset press gets picked up by the Daily Mail which is then picked up by the BBC and the rest.
So how many of these stories that you list are stories about stories?
I have experienced media feeding on media. I appeared on the Today programme and then got flooded with requests by all and sundry! However, on a quick scan, none of the articles I posted are sourced to BBC investigation. FU’s claim that the BBC are pushing a line to create a story is baloney.
They literally did....I gave you two concentrate examples where they ran absolute horseshit stories on this topic.
Rachel Reeves has announced an immediate end to the “absurd” ban on new onshore wind developments in England as she unveiled a series of reforms to the planning system.
On shore wind is the cheapest form of energy there is, its absolutely bonkers its not been maximised. Any NIMBYs need to be told to mind their own business.
Same with housing. Looks like a disappointing lack of reform to be announced today, just a return of the pre-Sunak mandatory housing targets. That's not enough, more needs to be done.
What happens if all the Dukes and Earls refuse to put turbines up?
Then other landowners will and will make the profit instead.
Onshore wind is profitable, reliable, clean and cheap. That's why planning regulations were needed to block it, not people not wanting to put it up.
So you'll pander to rich NIMBYs?
No.
Nobody has a monopoly on land ownership. What people want to do with their own land is up to them, NIMBYism is trying to forbid other people from building on their (not your own) land.
You're thinking of NIOPBYS. Not in other people's back yards.
Would you be happy if someone were to buy small strips of land all over the country to prevent new roads being built?
As a last resort I'm OK with compulsory purchase orders being used for significant infrastructure needs that go across the country, like roads and rails.
But we're not talking about that. There's no need for wind farms to traverse the country, any more than any other type of farm, they can be wherever they get sited.
Actually its pylons etc that are more relevant for needing to be sorted out than wind farms as again they do need to traverse the country.
Perhaps they could put wind generators on pylons. Two birds…
Commission diverse vibrant multi ethnic young sculptors and painters to design phone masts and wind farms to be works of art. Seriously. Cathedrals when they were built were essential infrastructure with the beauty a desirable side effect, as were 19th c railway stations Three birds.
In Portugal, they have cell phone towers disguised as trees.
I think Network Rail have also disguised trackside antennas as trees.
I can see one on the horizon from my kitchen, up on the downs above Fontmell Magna. It's pretty good tbf, you have to get quite close to see it's not a scots pine. We use it to mark the turning of winter as the sun rises directly behind it for just one or two days around 5th January.
Thats brilliant! I've also spent for too long working out exactly where that is!
ST 88456 16311
Cheers - I found it and then went for a drive on google maps! As you know I am not that far away in Warminster and we often head south for walks etc
It's not far from Melbury Beacon, you'll be able to see our house from there (along with quite a few others as I think you can see for 30 miles on a clear day).
I wonder how far north you can see - maybe the Longleat woods? Tip of Cley Hill?
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
No need. There's a film they can watch, Io Capitano. From this they will learn that people smugglers appoint the most clued up looking clients as captain and have no presence on the boats and no need to be in the UK at all, it's not like they are waiting at this end with medals and goody bags for successful finishers. So how a Home Office op works is anyone's guess.
The fact that the BBC managed to get some people smugglers arrested following fairly simple investigation does rather point to the current Home Office not being up to the job.
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
I now have a vision of Starmer as Prospero up on the Dover cliffs whipping up a series of squalls to put-off the people smugglers. Seems to be working so far.
— Reeves looking to convene Treasury investors’ taskforce tomorrow bringing in private finance — Border Security Command launching imminently, as soon as Tues — new non-dom figures published Tues ahead of crackdown — GB Energy launch next week
— Reeves looking to convene Treasury investors’ taskforce tomorrow bringing in private finance — Border Security Command launching imminently, as soon as Tues — new non-dom figures published Tues ahead of crackdown — GB Energy launch next week
I am not sure government figures published as always is "plan", and the first two are basically rebadging existing approaches.
What is obviously important is delivery. If they can get the Home Office running smoothly that will be amazing achievement that virtually no politician has managed, regardless of party. Last time in power, Labour, was it Darling? said it wasn't fit for purpose and they split it, and it was still a disaster zone.
Here's an interesting fact, the Lib Dems got more votes in Winchester than the entire voting population in three constituencies.
Orkney and Shetland & Western Isles are no surprise as they're particularly small constituencies (By population) but the third was Manchester Rusholme.
BBC Verify were so desperate for big social media scandal stories during the GE to justify their existence / their "undercover" online project, and it never happened..
A classic modus operandi of trying to make news rather than reporting it.
A classic case of finding any old reason to attack the BBC! Lots of people were concerned about deep fakes being used in the campaign, including here. BBC Verify responded appropriately.
Bollocks. They have run several stories which basically tried to dress up we didn't find anything of note as a story of note e.g Reform "bots", was actually real people who for all the evidence BBC Verify found are erhhh supporters of Reform. They also ran the Trump deep fakes one that was an account that was very clear a parody meme account.
Bollocks to your bollocks. Numerous media outlets have raised this as a concern, in our recent general election and elsewhere. For example:
That wasn't my point. Its was BBC Verify have desperately tried to make a story when there wasn't one. They aren't reporting the news, they are trying to make news. The Reform one being a classic example, there was no story, but it lead major part of 10pm news.
People are always claiming conspiracies, that the news is highlighting what it shouldn’t or not highlighting what it should. Bollocks to it all. There was a broad and real concern about deep fakes, bots etc. The BBC, among hundreds of pieces, has written on this topic with the URL you gave first, claiming they were “desperate”. Unable to defend this characterisation, you are now moving the goalposts to pick on something else. Get over yourself. Everyone isn’t out to get you.
Nobody is out to get me. BBC Verify is just shit at their job and they have run a load of pieces that are bullshit and were desperate to find something, anything, and twisted things that weren't.
I actually know somebody who does this work for governments, investigating bots and misleading information disseminated via social media, and put it this way, they aren't doing what BBC Verify did.
I have literally dozens of followers on TwiX, yet have posted nothing. I'd not rule out their being bot accounts building credibility. If your mate knows anything...
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
We already have a Small Boats Operational Command which was recruiting over 700 additional staff to add to the people already working on the problem. Apparenly creating a new Border Security Command will magically solve the problem.
Awaits to see an open and fair application process for the head of the Command. Does not hold breath. Will be member of the new 10K. An ex post office worker could do it...
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
No need. There's a film they can watch, Io Capitano. From this they will learn that people smugglers appoint the most clued up looking clients as captain and have no presence on the boats and no need to be in the UK at all, it's not like they are waiting at this end with medals and goody bags for successful finishers. So how a Home Office op works is anyone's guess.
The fact that the BBC managed to get some people smugglers arrested following fairly simple investigation does rather point to the current Home Office not being up to the job.
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
I'm old enough to recall Luckyguy's dogged scepticism about the Russian strike on a maternity hospital, back at the beginning of the war.
I am sorry if I seem sarcastic. It is exasperating seeing people downplay this. It is an act of barbaric terrorism. Targeting hospitals, intentionally. A CHILDRENS HOSPITAL. I have seen a video of a young child covered in surgical scars being treated for shrapnel wounds. I don't know what those scars are from. Maybe a cancer? Why should a children then be shot at with missiles? Only a terrorist would target them.
Rachel Reeves has announced an immediate end to the “absurd” ban on new onshore wind developments in England as she unveiled a series of reforms to the planning system.
On shore wind is the cheapest form of energy there is, its absolutely bonkers its not been maximised. Any NIMBYs need to be told to mind their own business.
Same with housing. Looks like a disappointing lack of reform to be announced today, just a return of the pre-Sunak mandatory housing targets. That's not enough, more needs to be done.
What happens if all the Dukes and Earls refuse to put turbines up?
Then other landowners will and will make the profit instead.
Onshore wind is profitable, reliable, clean and cheap. That's why planning regulations were needed to block it, not people not wanting to put it up.
So you'll pander to rich NIMBYs?
No.
Nobody has a monopoly on land ownership. What people want to do with their own land is up to them, NIMBYism is trying to forbid other people from building on their (not your own) land.
You're thinking of NIOPBYS. Not in other people's back yards.
Would you be happy if someone were to buy small strips of land all over the country to prevent new roads being built?
As a last resort I'm OK with compulsory purchase orders being used for significant infrastructure needs that go across the country, like roads and rails.
But we're not talking about that. There's no need for wind farms to traverse the country, any more than any other type of farm, they can be wherever they get sited.
Actually its pylons etc that are more relevant for needing to be sorted out than wind farms as again they do need to traverse the country.
Perhaps they could put wind generators on pylons. Two birds…
Commission diverse vibrant multi ethnic young sculptors and painters to design phone masts and wind farms to be works of art. Seriously. Cathedrals when they were built were essential infrastructure with the beauty a desirable side effect, as were 19th c railway stations Three birds.
There was, I believe, a design competition for new HV pylons, with some really interesting entries, but the selected one(s) were pretty uninspiring, presumably as cheaper than the fancier ones
ETA: This wasn't what I was thinking of, but shows new pylon designs for UK at the end and some ideas from elsewhere. I'd guess the giant ones near the top would be quite expensive! The new ones in the UK, T design, do look better than the old. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66404487
Does anyone know where I can get the full detailed results please? Lots of web sites claim they do, but don't. Invariably you have to enter a post code. I'm not doing that for every constituency (even if I were capable) I want a full list in full detail.
Even Wikipedia failed me as there are no vote numbers on their detailed list.
Honestly the internet sometimes takes us backwards. In the old days all the quality press would publish a full set of results.
Supreme Court immunity ruling raises questions about military orders https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4757168-supreme-court-immunity-military-orders/ ...Victor Hansen, professor of law at the New England School of Law in Boston, explained that service members still have to adhere to legal standards even if the president does not and said the Supreme Court ruling “flips the dynamic on its head.” “Now you have the subordinates who have not all of the authority but all of the responsibility,” said Hansen, who served a 20-year career as a military lawyer in the U.S. Army. “And you have a guy at the top who has all the authority and none of the responsibility.” “It is, in my humble opinion, an absurd and damaging ruling,” he added. ..
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
No need. There's a film they can watch, Io Capitano. From this they will learn that people smugglers appoint the most clued up looking clients as captain and have no presence on the boats and no need to be in the UK at all, it's not like they are waiting at this end with medals and goody bags for successful finishers. So how a Home Office op works is anyone's guess.
The fact that the BBC managed to get some people smugglers arrested following fairly simple investigation does rather point to the current Home Office not being up to the job.
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
Yep - I was going to suggest the HO / NCA could just get a transcript of the BBC scorpion podcast and leave it at that.
On that point, what struck me in that boats were the cheapest (and most dangerous way) over. However, trucks are still an option, and in that documentary they even covered a VIP option where you get to go on the ferry as an ordinary passenger.
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
No need. There's a film they can watch, Io Capitano. From this they will learn that people smugglers appoint the most clued up looking clients as captain and have no presence on the boats and no need to be in the UK at all, it's not like they are waiting at this end with medals and goody bags for successful finishers. So how a Home Office op works is anyone's guess.
The fact that the BBC managed to get some people smugglers arrested following fairly simple investigation does rather point to the current Home Office not being up to the job.
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
Yep - I was going to suggest the HO / NCA could just get a transcript of the BBC scorpion podcast and leave it at that.
On that point, what struck me in that boats were the cheapest (and most dangerous way) over. However, trucks are still an option, and in that documentary they even covered a VIP option where you get to go on the ferry as an ordinary passenger.
This problem wasn't new with small boats. In 2000s it was trucks, but over the years they made it harder and harder to get on to them and so the approach transferred to using boats.
BBC Verify were so desperate for big social media scandal stories during the GE to justify their existence / their "undercover" online project, and it never happened..
A classic modus operandi of trying to make news rather than reporting it.
A classic case of finding any old reason to attack the BBC! Lots of people were concerned about deep fakes being used in the campaign, including here. BBC Verify responded appropriately.
Bollocks. They have run several stories which basically tried to dress up we didn't find anything of note as a story of note e.g Reform "bots", was actually real people who for all the evidence BBC Verify found are erhhh supporters of Reform. They also ran the Trump deep fakes one that was an account that was very clear a parody meme account.
Bollocks to your bollocks. Numerous media outlets have raised this as a concern, in our recent general election and elsewhere. For example:
That wasn't my point. Its was BBC Verify have desperately tried to make a story when there wasn't one. They aren't reporting the news, they are trying to make news. The Reform one being a classic example, there was no story, but it lead major part of 10pm news.
People are always claiming conspiracies, that the news is highlighting what it shouldn’t or not highlighting what it should. Bollocks to it all. There was a broad and real concern about deep fakes, bots etc. The BBC, among hundreds of pieces, has written on this topic with the URL you gave first, claiming they were “desperate”. Unable to defend this characterisation, you are now moving the goalposts to pick on something else. Get over yourself. Everyone isn’t out to get you.
Nobody is out to get me. BBC Verify is just shit at their job and they have run a load of pieces that are bullshit and were desperate to find something, anything, and twisted things that weren't.
I actually know somebody who does this work for governments, investigating bots and misleading information disseminated via social media, and put it this way, they aren't doing what BBC Verify did.
BBC Verify were so desperate for big social media scandal stories during the GE to justify their existence / their "undercover" online project, and it never happened..
A classic modus operandi of trying to make news rather than reporting it.
A classic case of finding any old reason to attack the BBC! Lots of people were concerned about deep fakes being used in the campaign, including here. BBC Verify responded appropriately.
Bollocks. They have run several stories which basically tried to dress up we didn't find anything of note as a story of note e.g Reform "bots", was actually real people who for all the evidence BBC Verify found are erhhh supporters of Reform. They also ran the Trump deep fakes one that was an account that was very clear a parody meme account.
Bollocks to your bollocks. Numerous media outlets have raised this as a concern, in our recent general election and elsewhere. For example:
That wasn't my point. Its was BBC Verify have desperately tried to make a story when there wasn't one. They aren't reporting the news, they are trying to make news. The Reform one being a classic example, there was no story, but it lead major part of 10pm news.
People are always claiming conspiracies, that the news is highlighting what it shouldn’t or not highlighting what it should. Bollocks to it all. There was a broad and real concern about deep fakes, bots etc. The BBC, among hundreds of pieces, has written on this topic with the URL you gave first, claiming they were “desperate”. Unable to defend this characterisation, you are now moving the goalposts to pick on something else. Get over yourself. Everyone isn’t out to get you.
Nobody is out to get me. BBC Verify is just shit at their job and they have run a load of pieces that are bullshit and were desperate to find something, anything, and twisted things that weren't.
I actually know somebody who does this work for governments, investigating bots and misleading information disseminated via social media, and put it this way, they aren't doing what BBC Verify did.
I'm old enough to recall Luckyguy's dogged scepticism about the Russian strike on a maternity hospital, back at the beginning of the war.
I am sorry if I seem sarcastic. It is exasperating seeing people downplay this. It is an act of barbaric terrorism. Targeting hospitals, intentionally. A CHILDRENS HOSPITAL. I have seen a video of a young child covered in surgical scars being treated for shrapnel wounds. I don't know what those scars are from. Maybe a cancer? Why should a children then be shot at with missiles? Only a terrorist would target them.
PMQs writes itself. Will the PM condemn blowing up hospitals in Ukraine? Followed by will the PM condemn blowing up hospitals in Gaza? It would not surprise me if VVP set the trap himself.
Supreme Court immunity ruling raises questions about military orders https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4757168-supreme-court-immunity-military-orders/ ...Victor Hansen, professor of law at the New England School of Law in Boston, explained that service members still have to adhere to legal standards even if the president does not and said the Supreme Court ruling “flips the dynamic on its head.” “Now you have the subordinates who have not all of the authority but all of the responsibility,” said Hansen, who served a 20-year career as a military lawyer in the U.S. Army. “And you have a guy at the top who has all the authority and none of the responsibility.” “It is, in my humble opinion, an absurd and damaging ruling,” he added. ..
It is an insane ruling, and SCOTUS know it. They just don't care, because they've set it up in a way that means it always comes back up to them. So, if they like it and it's done by a Republican, it will be immune, and if they don't like it and it's done by a Democrat, it won't be. This is pure political power being wielded from the bench - and the sooner the Dems wake up to that fact and start fighting back, the better.
I'm old enough to recall Luckyguy's dogged scepticism about the Russian strike on a maternity hospital, back at the beginning of the war.
I am sorry if I seem sarcastic. It is exasperating seeing people downplay this. It is an act of barbaric terrorism. Targeting hospitals, intentionally. A CHILDRENS HOSPITAL. I have seen a video of a young child covered in surgical scars being treated for shrapnel wounds. I don't know what those scars are from. Maybe a cancer? Why should a children then be shot at with missiles? Only a terrorist would target them.
PMQs writes itself. Will the PM condemn blowing up hospitals in Ukraine? Followed by will the PM condemn blowing up hospitals in Gaza? It would not surprise me if VVP set the trap himself.
Blackadder had the answer in series 4, when discussing spies.
Does anyone know where I can get the full detailed results please? Lots of web sites claim they do, but don't. Invariably you have to enter a post code. I'm not doing that for every constituency (even if I were capable) I want a full list in full detail.
Even Wikipedia failed me as there are no vote numbers on their detailed list.
Honestly the internet sometimes takes us backwards. In the old days all the quality press would publish a full set of results.
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
I'm old enough to recall Luckyguy's dogged scepticism about the Russian strike on a maternity hospital, back at the beginning of the war.
I am sorry if I seem sarcastic. It is exasperating seeing people downplay this. It is an act of barbaric terrorism. Targeting hospitals, intentionally. A CHILDRENS HOSPITAL. I have seen a video of a young child covered in surgical scars being treated for shrapnel wounds. I don't know what those scars are from. Maybe a cancer? Why should a children then be shot at with missiles? Only a terrorist would target them.
PMQs writes itself. Will the PM condemn blowing up hospitals in Ukraine? Followed by will the PM condemn blowing up hospitals in Gaza? It would not surprise me if VVP set the trap himself.
Blackadder had the answer in series 4, when discussing spies.
You know that was actually based in fact? Churchill sent a memo:-
Enemy submarines are to be called U-boats. The term "submarine" is to be reserved for Allied underwater vessels.
U-boats are those dastardly villains who sink our ships, while submarines are those gallant and noble craft which sink theirs.
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
No need. There's a film they can watch, Io Capitano. From this they will learn that people smugglers appoint the most clued up looking clients as captain and have no presence on the boats and no need to be in the UK at all, it's not like they are waiting at this end with medals and goody bags for successful finishers. So how a Home Office op works is anyone's guess.
The fact that the BBC managed to get some people smugglers arrested following fairly simple investigation does rather point to the current Home Office not being up to the job.
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
Rachel Reeves has announced an immediate end to the “absurd” ban on new onshore wind developments in England as she unveiled a series of reforms to the planning system.
On shore wind is the cheapest form of energy there is, its absolutely bonkers its not been maximised. Any NIMBYs need to be told to mind their own business.
Same with housing. Looks like a disappointing lack of reform to be announced today, just a return of the pre-Sunak mandatory housing targets. That's not enough, more needs to be done.
What happens if all the Dukes and Earls refuse to put turbines up?
Then other landowners will and will make the profit instead.
Onshore wind is profitable, reliable, clean and cheap. That's why planning regulations were needed to block it, not people not wanting to put it up.
So you'll pander to rich NIMBYs?
No.
Nobody has a monopoly on land ownership. What people want to do with their own land is up to them, NIMBYism is trying to forbid other people from building on their (not your own) land.
You're thinking of NIOPBYS. Not in other people's back yards.
Would you be happy if someone were to buy small strips of land all over the country to prevent new roads being built?
As a last resort I'm OK with compulsory purchase orders being used for significant infrastructure needs that go across the country, like roads and rails.
But we're not talking about that. There's no need for wind farms to traverse the country, any more than any other type of farm, they can be wherever they get sited.
Actually its pylons etc that are more relevant for needing to be sorted out than wind farms as again they do need to traverse the country.
Perhaps they could put wind generators on pylons. Two birds…
Commission diverse vibrant multi ethnic young sculptors and painters to design phone masts and wind farms to be works of art. Seriously. Cathedrals when they were built were essential infrastructure with the beauty a desirable side effect, as were 19th c railway stations Three birds.
In Portugal, they have cell phone towers disguised as trees.
I think Network Rail have also disguised trackside antennas as trees.
I can see one on the horizon from my kitchen, up on the downs above Fontmell Magna. It's pretty good tbf, you have to get quite close to see it's not a scots pine. We use it to mark the turning of winter as the sun rises directly behind it for just one or two days around 5th January.
Thats brilliant! I've also spent for too long working out exactly where that is!
ST 88456 16311
Cheers - I found it and then went for a drive on google maps! As you know I am not that far away in Warminster and we often head south for walks etc
It's not far from Melbury Beacon, you'll be able to see our house from there (along with quite a few others as I think you can see for 30 miles on a clear day).
I wonder how far north you can see - maybe the Longleat woods? Tip of Cley Hill?
I'm afraid Shaftesbury (249m) will be in the way of Cley Hill (245m). NW you can see the Mendips 30-40 miles away. NNW Long Knoll (288m) is just south of Longleat.
UEFA - corrupt as fuck if England lose on Wednesday
I remember the story about the corrupt German refs. If I remember it was a big piece in the Athletic, it was incredibly serious yet swept under the carpet. How are they even still working?
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
We already have a Small Boats Operational Command which was recruiting over 700 additional staff to add to the people already working on the problem. Apparenly creating a new Border Security Command will magically solve the problem.
Awaits to see an open and fair application process for the head of the Command. Does not hold breath. Will be member of the new 10K. An ex post office worker could do it...
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
No need. There's a film they can watch, Io Capitano. From this they will learn that people smugglers appoint the most clued up looking clients as captain and have no presence on the boats and no need to be in the UK at all, it's not like they are waiting at this end with medals and goody bags for successful finishers. So how a Home Office op works is anyone's guess.
The fact that the BBC managed to get some people smugglers arrested following fairly simple investigation does rather point to the current Home Office not being up to the job.
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
In all fairness, she's not entirely wrong.
Paul Johnson of the IFS rather amusing said this is what she will do and then in a few weeks will express shock and horror that things are far worse than anybody knew. He said its all play acting, all the information you need is available these days should you want to do your own assessment.
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
The new Health Secretary, Wes Streeting says “the NHS is broken”, but instead of bringing in builders, he has a brought in a demolition man - Alan Milburn.
How many hours to save the NHS?
How many hours to hand the NHS to Streeting's private health donors more like
Missing the Tories already?
Why would you be missing them.
SKS Lab have same aim hand the NHS to private Sector health donors
An aim that the Tories have apparently never manage to achieve, despite being in power from 1979 to 1997, and then 2010 until last Friday. Hardly seems to be their number one priority.
I'd be convinced to vote Labour if they were look at some form of NHS insurance model. In mad right wing failing states like France and Germany. I did a couple of days work experience during my German A-level in a health insurance office and was surprised to find out that everyone is entitled to free healthcare and the Government pays the insurance premium of those not in work. The big downside to this type of model is that healthcare outcomes are better and the whole system costs less money - sorry I meant upside. The downside is that we lose a national religion.
Supreme Court immunity ruling raises questions about military orders https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4757168-supreme-court-immunity-military-orders/ ...Victor Hansen, professor of law at the New England School of Law in Boston, explained that service members still have to adhere to legal standards even if the president does not and said the Supreme Court ruling “flips the dynamic on its head.” “Now you have the subordinates who have not all of the authority but all of the responsibility,” said Hansen, who served a 20-year career as a military lawyer in the U.S. Army. “And you have a guy at the top who has all the authority and none of the responsibility.” “It is, in my humble opinion, an absurd and damaging ruling,” he added. ..
It is an insane ruling, and SCOTUS know it. They just don't care, because they've set it up in a way that means it always comes back up to them. So, if they like it and it's done by a Republican, it will be immune, and if they don't like it and it's done by a Democrat, it won't be. This is pure political power being wielded from the bench - and the sooner the Dems wake up to that fact and start fighting back, the better.
They're quite awake to it.
The dilemma is how to respond without showing the same utter disregard for law and constitution that the conservatives on the court - and in Congress - have displayed.
Without reliable majorities in Congress, and particularly a few months before an election, their room for manoeuvre is limited.
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
Rachel Reeves has announced an immediate end to the “absurd” ban on new onshore wind developments in England as she unveiled a series of reforms to the planning system.
On shore wind is the cheapest form of energy there is, its absolutely bonkers its not been maximised. Any NIMBYs need to be told to mind their own business.
Same with housing. Looks like a disappointing lack of reform to be announced today, just a return of the pre-Sunak mandatory housing targets. That's not enough, more needs to be done.
What happens if all the Dukes and Earls refuse to put turbines up?
Then other landowners will and will make the profit instead.
Onshore wind is profitable, reliable, clean and cheap. That's why planning regulations were needed to block it, not people not wanting to put it up.
So you'll pander to rich NIMBYs?
No.
Nobody has a monopoly on land ownership. What people want to do with their own land is up to them, NIMBYism is trying to forbid other people from building on their (not your own) land.
You're thinking of NIOPBYS. Not in other people's back yards.
Would you be happy if someone were to buy small strips of land all over the country to prevent new roads being built?
As a last resort I'm OK with compulsory purchase orders being used for significant infrastructure needs that go across the country, like roads and rails.
But we're not talking about that. There's no need for wind farms to traverse the country, any more than any other type of farm, they can be wherever they get sited.
Actually its pylons etc that are more relevant for needing to be sorted out than wind farms as again they do need to traverse the country.
Perhaps they could put wind generators on pylons. Two birds…
Commission diverse vibrant multi ethnic young sculptors and painters to design phone masts and wind farms to be works of art. Seriously. Cathedrals when they were built were essential infrastructure with the beauty a desirable side effect, as were 19th c railway stations Three birds.
In Portugal, they have cell phone towers disguised as trees.
I think Network Rail have also disguised trackside antennas as trees.
I can see one on the horizon from my kitchen, up on the downs above Fontmell Magna. It's pretty good tbf, you have to get quite close to see it's not a scots pine. We use it to mark the turning of winter as the sun rises directly behind it for just one or two days around 5th January.
Thats brilliant! I've also spent for too long working out exactly where that is!
ST 88456 16311
Cheers - I found it and then went for a drive on google maps! As you know I am not that far away in Warminster and we often head south for walks etc
It's not far from Melbury Beacon, you'll be able to see our house from there (along with quite a few others as I think you can see for 30 miles on a clear day).
I wonder how far north you can see - maybe the Longleat woods? Tip of Cley Hill?
I'm afraid Shaftesbury (249m) will be in the way of Cley Hill (245m). NW you can see the Mendips 30-40 miles away. NNW Long Knoll (288m) is just south of Longleat.
You can probably see the mendip aerial then, I'm guessing? I find that helps orienting myself pretty much anywhere round the area!
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
In all fairness, she's not entirely wrong.
All together now...
"Now I've opened the books, I've discovered that the Tories left an even worse mess than I thought.."
Utterly predictable, but respect for saying it so well.
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
In all fairness, she's not entirely wrong.
Worse than 2010?
Yes by miles.
Just look at our roads, local government, NHS...
...prisons, justice system, social care, education...
I'm old enough to recall Luckyguy's dogged scepticism about the Russian strike on a maternity hospital, back at the beginning of the war.
I am sorry if I seem sarcastic. It is exasperating seeing people downplay this. It is an act of barbaric terrorism. Targeting hospitals, intentionally. A CHILDRENS HOSPITAL. I have seen a video of a young child covered in surgical scars being treated for shrapnel wounds. I don't know what those scars are from. Maybe a cancer? Why should a children then be shot at with missiles? Only a terrorist would target them.
PMQs writes itself. Will the PM condemn blowing up hospitals in Ukraine? Followed by will the PM condemn blowing up hospitals in Gaza? It would not surprise me if VVP set the trap himself.
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
In all fairness, she's not entirely wrong.
Worse than 2010?
2008 left us with a bankrupt banking sector, the costs of which were allocated according to political priorities.
In 2024 we’re left with the legacy of failing to invest in infrastructure for 15 years, with arguably years of under-investment before that: The Treasury even wanted to cancel Crossrail!
UEFA - corrupt as fuck if England lose on Wednesday
I remember the story about the corrupt German refs. If I remember it was a big piece in the Athletic, it was incredibly serious yet swept under the carpet. How are they even still working?
He basically snitched and helped the prosecution which got him brownie points when they convicted the ref who offered him the bribe.
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
In all fairness, she's not entirely wrong.
All together now...
"Now I've opened the books, I've discovered that the Tories left an even worse mess than I thought.."
Utterly predictable, but respect for saying it so well.
UEFA - corrupt as fuck if England lose on Wednesday
Or inspired, if we win.
31 years ago it was a shit German referee whose performance cost England a place at 1994 World Cup when he gave a shit performance in our match against the Netherlands.
He failed to send off Ronald Koeman for a blatant red card offence and Koeman a few minutes later scored the winning goal.
Whilst I'm against, they would solve a whole list of problems - including, partially, immigration.
Although we would have to work out whether to regularize or deport the million or so illegal immigrants - does anyone have the stomach to deport fifty thousand indian grandmas who've overstayed their visa by ten years?
The new Health Secretary, Wes Streeting says “the NHS is broken”, but instead of bringing in builders, he has a brought in a demolition man - Alan Milburn.
How many hours to save the NHS?
How many hours to hand the NHS to Streeting's private health donors more like
Missing the Tories already?
Why would you be missing them.
SKS Lab have same aim hand the NHS to private Sector health donors
An aim that the Tories have apparently never manage to achieve, despite being in power from 1979 to 1997, and then 2010 until last Friday. Hardly seems to be their number one priority.
I'd be convinced to vote Labour if they were look at some form of NHS insurance model. In mad right wing failing states like France and Germany. I did a couple of days work experience during my German A-level in a health insurance office and was surprised to find out that everyone is entitled to free healthcare and the Government pays the insurance premium of those not in work. The big downside to this type of model is that healthcare outcomes are better and the whole system costs less money - sorry I meant upside. The downside is that we lose a national religion.
The Germans spend more as a percent of GDP than we do. So is healthcare cheaper in Germany?
UEFA - corrupt as fuck if England lose on Wednesday
I remember the story about the corrupt German refs. If I remember it was a big piece in the Athletic, it was incredibly serious yet swept under the carpet. How are they even still working?
He basically snitched and helped the prosecution which got him brownie points when they convicted the ref who offered him the bribe.
If I remember correctly, the story was three brothers from Balkans who organised widespread match fixing by bribing the refs and players, and made millions betting on the outcomes.
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
In all fairness, she's not entirely wrong.
All together now...
"Now I've opened the books, I've discovered that the Tories left an even worse mess than I thought.."
Utterly predictable, but respect for saying it so well.
The worst of it is it's also utterly believable.
And it's believeable because, at some level, we all know it's true. There aren't any easy ways out of this.
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
In all fairness, she's not entirely wrong.
All together now...
"Now I've opened the books, I've discovered that the Tories left an even worse mess than I thought.."
Utterly predictable, but respect for saying it so well.
ie There's No Money.
Perhaps she found a jokey little note to that effect from Jeremy Hunt that Labour can keep referring to in every election for the next 20 years.
Supreme Court immunity ruling raises questions about military orders https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4757168-supreme-court-immunity-military-orders/ ...Victor Hansen, professor of law at the New England School of Law in Boston, explained that service members still have to adhere to legal standards even if the president does not and said the Supreme Court ruling “flips the dynamic on its head.” “Now you have the subordinates who have not all of the authority but all of the responsibility,” said Hansen, who served a 20-year career as a military lawyer in the U.S. Army. “And you have a guy at the top who has all the authority and none of the responsibility.” “It is, in my humble opinion, an absurd and damaging ruling,” he added. ..
It is an insane ruling, and SCOTUS know it. They just don't care, because they've set it up in a way that means it always comes back up to them. So, if they like it and it's done by a Republican, it will be immune, and if they don't like it and it's done by a Democrat, it won't be. This is pure political power being wielded from the bench - and the sooner the Dems wake up to that fact and start fighting back, the better.
They're quite awake to it.
The dilemma is how to respond without showing the same utter disregard for law and constitution that the conservatives on the court - and in Congress - have displayed.
Without reliable majorities in Congress, and particularly a few months before an election, their room for manoeuvre is limited.
They aren't - Biden basically made a speech where he was like "the SC ruled this way, but be assured, I won't use any of the powers given to me". And there are lots of things congress can do - even if they don't achieve it - such as starting the impeachment process for all the justices who signed on to that ruling. It is a disqualifying ruling and should be treated as such. But, once again, the Dems refuse to fight. The tools of and respect for the system cannot constrain one side and not the other - I'm sorry, but the Dems will have to discard norms to deal with this. Because accepting norms assumes good faith by both sides.
The new Health Secretary, Wes Streeting says “the NHS is broken”, but instead of bringing in builders, he has a brought in a demolition man - Alan Milburn.
How many hours to save the NHS?
How many hours to hand the NHS to Streeting's private health donors more like
Missing the Tories already?
Why would you be missing them.
SKS Lab have same aim hand the NHS to private Sector health donors
An aim that the Tories have apparently never manage to achieve, despite being in power from 1979 to 1997, and then 2010 until last Friday. Hardly seems to be their number one priority.
I'd be convinced to vote Labour if they were look at some form of NHS insurance model. In mad right wing failing states like France and Germany. I did a couple of days work experience during my German A-level in a health insurance office and was surprised to find out that everyone is entitled to free healthcare and the Government pays the insurance premium of those not in work. The big downside to this type of model is that healthcare outcomes are better and the whole system costs less money - sorry I meant upside. The downside is that we lose a national religion.
The Germans spend more as a percent of GDP than we do. So is healthcare cheaper in Germany?
Also your doctor/dentist asks you to check with your insurance if you are covered before they start non urgent treatment, as each of the "public health insurers" has a different policy.
Also I am forced to have 50% private and 50% public insurance as I have a permanent public sector job.
There are many other frustrating aspects with the fundingg side of German health care, in short, it is a beauracratic jungle.
We had an interesting and balanced debate about road pricing earlier. I personally think per mile pricing is wrong, as it punishes the wrong kind of journey. It's the shorter, urban journeys where alternatives exist that you want to make relatively less attractive, while making journeys in rural areas much cheaper.
A general policy of reducing the fixed costs of motoring while increasing the marginal costs can only be a good thing though.
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
In all fairness, she's not entirely wrong.
All together now...
"Now I've opened the books, I've discovered that the Tories left an even worse mess than I thought.."
Utterly predictable, but respect for saying it so well.
ie There's No Money.
Perhaps she found a jokey little note to that effect from Jeremy Hunt that Labour can keep referring to in every election for the next 20 years.
BBC Verify were so desperate for big social media scandal stories during the GE to justify their existence / their "undercover" online project, and it never happened..
A classic modus operandi of trying to make news rather than reporting it.
A classic case of finding any old reason to attack the BBC! Lots of people were concerned about deep fakes being used in the campaign, including here. BBC Verify responded appropriately.
Bollocks. They have run several stories which basically tried to dress up we didn't find anything of note as a story of note
e.g Reform "bots", was actually real people who for all the evidence BBC Verify found are erhhh supporters of Reform. The only account they found that could be a bot had 150 followers. And this made the big headline on 10 o' clock news....
They also ran the Trump deep fakes one that was an account that was very clear a parody meme account, there was no attempt to try to disguise it was real.
are you a failed BBC journalist? you seem to spend an inordinate amount of time bitching about them
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
In all fairness, she's not entirely wrong.
All together now...
"Now I've opened the books, I've discovered that the Tories left an even worse mess than I thought.."
Utterly predictable, but respect for saying it so well.
ie There's No Money.
Perhaps she found a jokey little note to that effect from Jeremy Hunt that Labour can keep referring to in every election for the next 20 years.
The thing is, there is money. The government just have to be willing to go and get it. Instead of waiting for the private sector to magically invest in things and only providing carrots - provide sticks as well. You have lots of profit just going to shareholders and less and less reinvestment into anything productive - tax. You have lots of capital just sloshing around growing because of computerised number crunching and no productive labour output - tax. You have properties / land sitting empty, accruing value due to speculating and taking debts out against this speculative value - tax. You don't have to balance the budget - you are a sovereign government, not a family; money gets printed in a way you have some influence over.
But no - only neoliberalism allowed. Red puppet or blue puppet - just don't question the man who operates them both...
They ended up with more votes than SKS IN 2024 though
You're a football fan aren't you? Would you rather win 3-0 or lose 5-4?
Jeremy Corbyn was the greatest recruiter of tory voters ever. Completely devoid from reality and open about it - there was no way to fund his policies except additional borrowing. Keir is a return to sensible Labour politics where implementation is actually considered.
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
No need. There's a film they can watch, Io Capitano. From this they will learn that people smugglers appoint the most clued up looking clients as captain and have no presence on the boats and no need to be in the UK at all, it's not like they are waiting at this end with medals and goody bags for successful finishers. So how a Home Office op works is anyone's guess.
The fact that the BBC managed to get some people smugglers arrested following fairly simple investigation does rather point to the current Home Office not being up to the job.
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
Check out "Telegraph readers respond to Reeves’ first speech" further down. If that's representative and Telegraph readers have gone over to the red side then the Tories really are doomed.
Rachel Reeves has announced an immediate end to the “absurd” ban on new onshore wind developments in England as she unveiled a series of reforms to the planning system.
On shore wind is the cheapest form of energy there is, its absolutely bonkers its not been maximised. Any NIMBYs need to be told to mind their own business.
Same with housing. Looks like a disappointing lack of reform to be announced today, just a return of the pre-Sunak mandatory housing targets. That's not enough, more needs to be done.
What happens if all the Dukes and Earls refuse to put turbines up?
Then other landowners will and will make the profit instead.
Onshore wind is profitable, reliable, clean and cheap. That's why planning regulations were needed to block it, not people not wanting to put it up.
So you'll pander to rich NIMBYs?
No.
Nobody has a monopoly on land ownership. What people want to do with their own land is up to them, NIMBYism is trying to forbid other people from building on their (not your own) land.
You're thinking of NIOPBYS. Not in other people's back yards.
Would you be happy if someone were to buy small strips of land all over the country to prevent new roads being built?
As a last resort I'm OK with compulsory purchase orders being used for significant infrastructure needs that go across the country, like roads and rails.
But we're not talking about that. There's no need for wind farms to traverse the country, any more than any other type of farm, they can be wherever they get sited.
Actually its pylons etc that are more relevant for needing to be sorted out than wind farms as again they do need to traverse the country.
Your problem is that at the end of the day, you'll tolerate NIMBYism as long as it is consistent with your personal views on how the country should work. In this case, property rights versus a very specific type of national energy infrastructure - wind turbines.
I don't see why any landowner should be allowed to stymie the progress of the country. OTOH, I also don't think you should sacrifice an area of outstanding beauty like the Lake District for turbines. We're both NIMBYs, like it or not.
Bullshit.
NIMBYism is telling people they can't build what they want to build. It is deeply illiberal.
People not wanting to build anything on their own land is their own free choice. It is completely liberal.
No landowner should be allowed to stymie the progress of the country, if any landowner wants their own land to stagnate in value then that's their own choice, let others make a profit instead.
However as I've said many times before, I would tax all land based on its undeveloped value, since land is a finite resource for this country and all landowners should pay their fair share of the upkeep of the country.
So someone who develops their land should be paying no more taxation than someone who does not - conversely not developing land still gets the same tax as if you do.
“The Home Secretary has also commissioned an investigation from the Home Office and the National Crime Agency into the tactics used by people smuggling gangs to inform a major law enforcement drive over the coming months”
Can’t believe the Home Office didn’t think of this before.
No need. There's a film they can watch, Io Capitano. From this they will learn that people smugglers appoint the most clued up looking clients as captain and have no presence on the boats and no need to be in the UK at all, it's not like they are waiting at this end with medals and goody bags for successful finishers. So how a Home Office op works is anyone's guess.
The fact that the BBC managed to get some people smugglers arrested following fairly simple investigation does rather point to the current Home Office not being up to the job.
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
Check out "Telegraph readers respond to Reeves’ first speech" further down. If that's representative and Telegraph readers have gone over to the red side then the Tories really are doomed.
Labour are delivering on the deregulation agenda. It's what we would have got if Truss hadn't been brought down.
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
In all fairness, she's not entirely wrong.
All together now...
"Now I've opened the books, I've discovered that the Tories left an even worse mess than I thought.."
Utterly predictable, but respect for saying it so well.
The worst of it is it's also utterly believable.
Albeit clearly scheduled in weeks ago.
The Tories would respond only the CCHQ geniuses have deleted their Twitter.
Reform will be finding themselves the real opposition a bit quicker than expected if this carries on.
UEFA - corrupt as fuck if England lose on Wednesday
I remember the story about the corrupt German refs. If I remember it was a big piece in the Athletic, it was incredibly serious yet swept under the carpet. How are they even still working?
He basically snitched and helped the prosecution which got him brownie points when they convicted the ref who offered him the bribe.
If I remember correctly, the story was three brothers from Balkans who organised widespread match fixing by bribing the refs and players, and made millions betting on the outcomes.
At least they did it for money,TSE. When I was an active referee the usual drill for ambitious referees was simply to check out who was sitting in the stands and if it was anyone important you made sure you leaned the way of the club with which that person was associated.
Pierluigi Collina did a great deal to stamp out this kind of thing at international level, but it's practically impossible to stop completely. He was certainly very successful at the Qatar World Cup, although the Brazilian in charge of the charge of the England/France game was an exception, and was plainly dishonest. In his case, I suspect it was straight bribery rather than a desire to ingratiate himself with the right people, You can never be sure though. He was roundly condemned in his own country, but Brazilians see far worse daily in their own domestic competitons so at home he would have shrugged it off easily enough.
Reeves getting her rebuttals in before any opposition attacks.
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second. We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility. That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess. This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
In all fairness, she's not entirely wrong.
All together now...
"Now I've opened the books, I've discovered that the Tories left an even worse mess than I thought.."
Utterly predictable, but respect for saying it so well.
ie There's No Money.
Perhaps she found a jokey little note to that effect from Jeremy Hunt that Labour can keep referring to in every election for the next 20 years.
The thing is, there is money. The government just have to be willing to go and get it. Instead of waiting for the private sector to magically invest in things and only providing carrots - provide sticks as well. You have lots of profit just going to shareholders and less and less reinvestment into anything productive - tax. You have lots of capital just sloshing around growing because of computerised number crunching and no productive labour output - tax. You have properties / land sitting empty, accruing value due to speculating and taking debts out against this speculative value - tax. You don't have to balance the budget - you are a sovereign government, not a family; money gets printed in a way you have some influence over.
But no - only neoliberalism allowed. Red puppet or blue puppet - just don't question the man who operates them both...
It astonishes me that people think like this. "You don't have to balance the budget" implies a belief you can make money magically appear. You can't. If you try, you destroy the value of money which already exists.
The new Health Secretary, Wes Streeting says “the NHS is broken”, but instead of bringing in builders, he has a brought in a demolition man - Alan Milburn.
How many hours to save the NHS?
How many hours to hand the NHS to Streeting's private health donors more like
Missing the Tories already?
Why would you be missing them.
SKS Lab have same aim hand the NHS to private Sector health donors
An aim that the Tories have apparently never manage to achieve, despite being in power from 1979 to 1997, and then 2010 until last Friday. Hardly seems to be their number one priority.
I'd be convinced to vote Labour if they were look at some form of NHS insurance model. In mad right wing failing states like France and Germany. I did a couple of days work experience during my German A-level in a health insurance office and was surprised to find out that everyone is entitled to free healthcare and the Government pays the insurance premium of those not in work. The big downside to this type of model is that healthcare outcomes are better and the whole system costs less money - sorry I meant upside. The downside is that we lose a national religion.
Doesn't it also have a massive political upside too? If healthcare is provided by insurance companies rather than the state, every scandal, crisis and disaster is one step further away from being the direct responsibility of the Department of Health and their minister. Obviously less so if you are the minister who's just privatised it, but that's a one hit for someone, and then every successor reaps the benefits.
Comments
So how many of these stories that you list are stories about stories?
Perhaps someone should tell her.....
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/property/buying-selling/market-1m-plus-homes-slowing-families-are-suffering/
Incidentally, no new small boats so far under the Starmer government.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats-last-7-days
I actually know somebody who does this work for governments, investigating bots and misleading information disseminated via social media, and put it this way, they aren't doing what BBC Verify did.
Basically the idea that the Tories (and now the Red Tories) are just desperate to privatise ("sell-off") the NHS is a fake news story beloved of the left. What all governments should want is the NHS to be the best it can, giving as good a care as it can given the constraints it suffers. There is not infinite money, consultants, operating theatres, social care etc. If there are ways to use the private sector to do things better then so be it. If the state does it better then so be it.
Its just that here we are in 2024, with plenty of Tory government time in the past and the NHS has somehow NOT been sold off.
https://www.landmarktrust.org.uk/search-and-book/properties/semaphore-tower-58731/#Overview
No, that's not Liddle. Not the shotgun part anyway.
Presumably she is besties with the Tel property editor and getting free advertising for her actually £1.0m house
Exclusive:
— Reeves looking to convene Treasury investors’ taskforce tomorrow bringing in private finance
— Border Security Command launching imminently, as soon as Tues
— new non-dom figures published Tues ahead of crackdown
— GB Energy launch next week
https://x.com/alexwickham/status/1810261295129583730
Not bad for a party with "No plan".
Pretty impressive range.
— Planning regulations to change
— Data centre planning applications that have been refused called in.
Which party was supposed to be the party of business again?
What is obviously important is delivery. If they can get the Home Office running smoothly that will be amazing achievement that virtually no politician has managed, regardless of party. Last time in power, Labour, was it Darling? said it wasn't fit for purpose and they split it, and it was still a disaster zone.
Orkney and Shetland & Western Isles are no surprise as they're particularly small constituencies (By population) but the third was Manchester Rusholme.
Some things never change do they?
Personally, I like the giant ants or - of the sane ones - the Arup one
Supreme Court immunity ruling raises questions about military orders
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4757168-supreme-court-immunity-military-orders/
...Victor Hansen, professor of law at the New England School of Law in Boston, explained that service members still have to adhere to legal standards even if the president does not and said the Supreme Court ruling “flips the dynamic on its head.”
“Now you have the subordinates who have not all of the authority but all of the responsibility,” said Hansen, who served a 20-year career as a military lawyer in the U.S. Army. “And you have a guy at the top who has all the authority and none of the responsibility.”
“It is, in my humble opinion, an absurd and damaging ruling,” he added. ..
On that point, what struck me in that boats were the cheapest (and most dangerous way) over. However, trucks are still an option, and in that documentary they even covered a VIP option where you get to go on the ferry as an ordinary passenger.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3grw7l19v2o
..I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the second world war.
What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that. Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first and country second.
We face the legacy of 14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility.
That is why over the weekend, I instructed Treasury officials to provide an assessment of the state of our spending inheritance so that I can understand the full scale of the challenge. And I will present this to parliament before the summer recess.
This will be separate from a budget that will be held later this year...
In all fairness, she's not entirely wrong.
Enemy submarines are to be called U-boats. The term "submarine" is to be reserved for Allied underwater vessels.
U-boats are those dastardly villains who sink our ships, while submarines are those gallant and noble craft which sink theirs.
Border Force brings small boat migrants ashore in Dover today
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/08/politics-election-keir-starmer-tories-latest-news/
Just look at our roads, local government, NHS...
The dilemma is how to respond without showing the same utter disregard for law and constitution that the conservatives on the court - and in Congress - have displayed.
Without reliable majorities in Congress, and particularly a few months before an election, their room for manoeuvre is limited.
"Now I've opened the books, I've discovered that the Tories left an even worse mess than I thought.."
Utterly predictable, but respect for saying it so well.
The answer is yes.
In 2024 we’re left with the legacy of failing to invest in infrastructure for 15 years, with arguably years of under-investment before that: The Treasury even wanted to cancel Crossrail!
Hard to say which is worse tbh.
Exhibit 1: Road pricing. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/07/08/labour-must-consider-pay-per-mile-road-tax/
We’ll probably have ID cards tomorrow.
He failed to send off Ronald Koeman for a blatant red card offence and Koeman a few minutes later scored the winning goal.
Koeman is the Netherlands manager.
Whilst I'm against, they would solve a whole list of problems - including, partially, immigration.
Although we would have to work out whether to regularize or deport the million or so illegal immigrants - does anyone have the stomach to deport fifty thousand indian grandmas who've overstayed their visa by ten years?
Perhaps she found a jokey little note to that effect from Jeremy Hunt that Labour can keep referring to in every election for the next 20 years.
Also I am forced to have 50% private and 50% public insurance as I have a permanent public sector job.
There are many other frustrating aspects with the fundingg side of German health care, in short, it is a beauracratic jungle.
A general policy of reducing the fixed costs of motoring while increasing the marginal costs can only be a good thing though.
But no - only neoliberalism allowed. Red puppet or blue puppet - just don't question the man who operates them both...
NIMBYism is telling people they can't build what they want to build. It is deeply illiberal.
People not wanting to build anything on their own land is their own free choice. It is completely liberal.
No landowner should be allowed to stymie the progress of the country, if any landowner wants their own land to stagnate in value then that's their own choice, let others make a profit instead.
However as I've said many times before, I would tax all land based on its undeveloped value, since land is a finite resource for this country and all landowners should pay their fair share of the upkeep of the country.
So someone who develops their land should be paying no more taxation than someone who does not - conversely not developing land still gets the same tax as if you do.
The Tories would respond only the CCHQ geniuses have deleted their Twitter.
Reform will be finding themselves the real opposition a bit quicker than expected if this carries on.
Pierluigi Collina did a great deal to stamp out this kind of thing at international level, but it's practically impossible to stop completely. He was certainly very successful at the Qatar World Cup, although the Brazilian in charge of the charge of the England/France game was an exception, and was plainly dishonest. In his case, I suspect it was straight bribery rather than a desire to ingratiate himself with the right people, You can never be sure though. He was roundly condemned in his own country, but Brazilians see far worse daily in their own domestic competitons so at home he would have shrugged it off easily enough.
Issac Levido just oversaw the worst Tory result I think ever.
Man is an over-promoted prat. This is the second election he has "been involved with" where the incumbent has lost.