Badenoch is absolutely right on a potential Tory and Reform alliance – politicalbetting.com

Carnyx said:

kle4 said:

noneoftheabove said:

kle4 said:

I demand justice! Someone contact the historical crimes unit, this is a nation of laws.

Scientists have uncovered the aftermath of an "exceptionally violent" attack about 4,000 years ago in Somerset when at least 37 people appear to have been butchered and likely eaten.

It is the largest case of violence between humans identified in early Bronze Age England, which had been considered a peaceful time.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crl3jn3elz3o

The error is perhaps in assuming it was a peaceful time. Maybe I'm wrong but I suspect the absence of evidence of violence in early Bronze Age doesn't outweigh humans having a violent nature when threatened.

That did seem like an odd sentence to include. I mean, there were comparitively few people around at the time, so instances of mass violence would likewise be fewer and harder for evidence to have survived, so I'd be curious of the nature of analysis and if it really was more peaceful compared to others.

Or if it was just an extension of the idea that hunter gatherer societies or isolated island communities etc did not really have violence, which I think has been largely debunked but has lived on through patronising perceptions of naiive innocent native societies.

I've just been reading the original paper which is happily open access - the Graun has a linky if the BBC doesn't. The issue is the cannibalism. Very thorough, right down to cracking open bones for the marrow. Which obviously surprises the researchers (who are in any case being very careful in their arguments).

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/dec/16/something-horrible-somerset-pit-reveals-bronze-age-cannibalism
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/darker-angels-of-our-nature-early-bronze-age-butchered-human-remains-from-charterhouse-warren-somerset-uk/93EBB135C857C7B7992FC80A4ED927AF

Edit: survival of evidence is discussed. Obvs dumping them down a pothole on Mendip helped preserve it!

MoonRabbit said:

What is very clear to me, Nigel Farage’s chances of becoming UK Prime Minister are now over.

If he had nothing to do with Reform in the 2024 election, explained he was voting Conservative, and was allowed back into the party, that was the last route open to him. But he chose a different path.

algarkirk said:

Cottrell. Quck guide to the smoking gun:

Cottrell becomes Bp Chelmsford in 2010.

By then Tudor is not only a Team Rector but also a Rural Dean, appointed by an earlier bishop, John Gladwin. (No idea how or why, but from a modern point of vierw it's crazy).

In 2012 he knows that Tudor has paid off a very serious allegation about a very young girl by paying £10K.

He also knows that previously Tudor has been imprisoned for similar offences, quashed on appeal, but earlier suspended from office under church law for 5 years for similar deeds.

Cottrell then does two things: He allows the Rural Dean job to continue. And in 2015 appoints Tudor an honorary canon. In context both these are inexplicable.

There may be 'res judicata' points about the wider charges, but these two actions look very like a smoking gun to me. This has got legs.

(The current Bp Chelmsford is an outside bet for Canterbury. She looks out of trouble as she took office in 2021, and Tudor was suspended from 2019).

Luckyguy1983 said:

eek said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

eek said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You need infrastructure to get people to where you want them to work otherwise the company will just go to London where there are enough qualified people in a sane commuting area to work there.

Luckyguy1983 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You mean, what we've had since the 1980s, when London got turbocharged and the north went backwards?

Not at all - London loves an overregulated economy with expensive power and high barriers to entry; it serves big corporations very well. I am talking about recreating the conditions (bar slavery) that made the provinces wealthy in the first place.

Not quite you are badly quoting what happened on the Industrial Revolution with little understanding of how things have changed.

Nowadays for companies to be successful they need a critical mass of qualified workers within the appropriate commuting area hence why London does so well because if I need another data analyst there are a lot of London and so always a few looking for a new job.

Up north there may be 100 rather than 5000 so recruitment is far harder

Firstly, no you don't - remote working appears to have passed you by, speaking of having little understanding about the way things have changed...

Secondly, you are talking about professional services companies. Clearly I am not. I am talking about Northampton shoemakers, Birmingham glass, Welsh clothiers. None of which need 'a lot' of data analysts in the vicinity - yes data analysis is still important, but companies of the sort I describe don't need big departments of them. They need people who are pretty good with their hands and want to make stuff.

All of that was offshored back in the 90s and until people are willing to pay £100 for a shirt it’s not coming back.

And even if it did come back it’s now been automated through productivity enhancements to the extent there are plastic box manufacturers who used to employ 80 people who now have 2 people operating forklifts at either end of the factory, pellets go in boxes get carried into a HGV

And that carefully picked example was chosen as its one of the few areas where local manufacturing is desirable because of shipping costs

There are plenty of people willing to pay £100 a shirt ducks. And the shirt making process isn't automated, there's a big human element. There is still a (niche, premium, superpremium) clothing and cloth industry in this country and there's absolutely no reason why it shouldn't be revived further - Spain and Portugal have hige clothing industries and they are a high wage economy.

So all in all you're spouting unfounded defeatist tripe, but do go on.

Luckyguy1983 said:

eek said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You need infrastructure to get people to where you want them to work otherwise the company will just go to London where there are enough qualified people in a sane commuting area to work there.

Luckyguy1983 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You mean, what we've had since the 1980s, when London got turbocharged and the north went backwards?

Not at all - London loves an overregulated economy with expensive power and high barriers to entry; it serves big corporations very well. I am talking about recreating the conditions (bar slavery) that made the provinces wealthy in the first place.

Not quite you are badly quoting what happened on the Industrial Revolution with little understanding of how things have changed.

Nowadays for companies to be successful they need a critical mass of qualified workers within the appropriate commuting area hence why London does so well because if I need another data analyst there are a lot of London and so always a few looking for a new job.

Up north there may be 100 rather than 5000 so recruitment is far harder

Firstly, no you don't - remote working appears to have passed you by, speaking of having little understanding about the way things have changed...

Secondly, you are talking about professional services companies. Clearly I am not. I am talking about Northampton shoemakers, Birmingham glass, Welsh clothiers. None of which need 'a lot' of data analysts in the vicinity - yes data analysis is still important, but companies of the sort I describe don't need big departments of them. They need people who are pretty good with their hands and want to make stuff.

Leon said:

bondegezou said:

Barnesian said:

numbertwelve said:

kinabalu said:

On topic: Nigel Farage is reliant on people being het up about immigration. He could struggle if that issue cools down. Anger about immigration is his Rodri.

Genuine question, how do you see that issue cooling down in the next 5 years? I simply cannot.

YouGov poll in November showed that 54% of Britons who voted leave, including 59% of voters in “red wall seats”, said, in exchange for single market access, they would now accept full free movement for EU and UK citizens to travel, live and work across borders.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/12/majority-of-brexit-voters-would-accept-free-movement-to-access-single-market-uk-eu

I think the issue for most people isn't immigration per se but uncontrolled immigration (eg small boats) and (for the racists) mass immigration from more colourful countries than the EU - which is all down to the Tories and Brexit.

YouGov have issues polling data on their website. Immigration being one of the most important issues has ranged from 71% (Sep 2015) to 14% (Apr 2020). If it can drop 56% in that 5-year period, I see no reason to presume that it will necessarily be an issue at the next general election.

It dropped that far because of Brexit. We all presumed that the government had "taken back control" of our borders and was introducing a "strict, Australian-style points-based immigration system"

Whatever the rights and wrongs of Brexit, at least immigration would now go way down! Huzzah!

Except that didn't happen, and in time voters woke up, first they saw the lack of control over the boats, then they saw the huge upwards change in the migration numbers - and the real, visible change in our streets. You can SEE the Boriswave millions

Unless Starmer can do some kind of psychological Brexit on migration, then it won't go back down in salience as an issue. He needs to visibly stop most of the boats, and get immigration down to, rough guess, under 200,000 at a bare minimum. He might have to do even more than that

This seems unlikely

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

bondegezou said:

Barnesian said:

numbertwelve said:

kinabalu said:

On topic: Nigel Farage is reliant on people being het up about immigration. He could struggle if that issue cools down. Anger about immigration is his Rodri.

Genuine question, how do you see that issue cooling down in the next 5 years? I simply cannot.

YouGov poll in November showed that 54% of Britons who voted leave, including 59% of voters in “red wall seats”, said, in exchange for single market access, they would now accept full free movement for EU and UK citizens to travel, live and work across borders.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/12/majority-of-brexit-voters-would-accept-free-movement-to-access-single-market-uk-eu

I think the issue for most people isn't immigration per se but uncontrolled immigration (eg small boats) and (for the racists) mass immigration from more colourful countries than the EU - which is all down to the Tories and Brexit.

YouGov have issues polling data on their website. Immigration being one of the most important issues has ranged from 71% (Sep 2015) to 14% (Apr 2020). If it can drop 56% in that 5-year period, I see no reason to presume that it will necessarily be an issue at the next general election.

It dropped that far because of Brexit. We all presumed that the government had "taken back control" of our borders and was introducing a "strict, Australian-style points-based immigration system"

Whatever the rights and wrongs of Brexit, at least immigration would now go way down! Huzzah!

Except that didn't happen, and in time voters woke up, first they saw the lack of control over the boats, then they saw the huge upwards change in the migration numbers - and the real, visible change in our streets. You can SEE the Boriswave millions

Unless Starmer can do some kind of psychological Brexit on migration, then it won't go back down in salience as an issue. He needs to visibly stop most of the boats, and get immigration down to, rough guess, under 200,000 at a bare minimum. He might have to do even more than that

This seems unlikely

The most bizarre aspect of the Brexit betrayal on immigration is that while it was happening, people were acting as though Boris Johnson was some kind of authoritatian nativist.

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

bondegezou said:

Barnesian said:

numbertwelve said:

kinabalu said:

On topic: Nigel Farage is reliant on people being het up about immigration. He could struggle if that issue cools down. Anger about immigration is his Rodri.

Genuine question, how do you see that issue cooling down in the next 5 years? I simply cannot.

YouGov poll in November showed that 54% of Britons who voted leave, including 59% of voters in “red wall seats”, said, in exchange for single market access, they would now accept full free movement for EU and UK citizens to travel, live and work across borders.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/12/majority-of-brexit-voters-would-accept-free-movement-to-access-single-market-uk-eu

I think the issue for most people isn't immigration per se but uncontrolled immigration (eg small boats) and (for the racists) mass immigration from more colourful countries than the EU - which is all down to the Tories and Brexit.

YouGov have issues polling data on their website. Immigration being one of the most important issues has ranged from 71% (Sep 2015) to 14% (Apr 2020). If it can drop 56% in that 5-year period, I see no reason to presume that it will necessarily be an issue at the next general election.

It dropped that far because of Brexit. We all presumed that the government had "taken back control" of our borders and was introducing a "strict, Australian-style points-based immigration system"

Whatever the rights and wrongs of Brexit, at least immigration would now go way down! Huzzah!

Except that didn't happen, and in time voters woke up, first they saw the lack of control over the boats, then they saw the huge upwards change in the migration numbers - and the real, visible change in our streets. You can SEE the Boriswave millions

Unless Starmer can do some kind of psychological Brexit on migration, then it won't go back down in salience as an issue. He needs to visibly stop most of the boats, and get immigration down to, rough guess, under 200,000 at a bare minimum. He might have to do even more than that

This seems unlikely

The most bizarre aspect of the Brexit betrayal on immigration is that while it was happening, people were acting as though Boris Johnson was some kind of authoritatian nativist.

Yes. It's one reason he can be ruled out as a future Tory leader, let alone PM. Too many people feel bitterly betrayed, now they know the truth. His significant political career is finished

LDLF said:

Absolutely right that a formal Conservative/Reform electoral alliance will probably never work, as they would lose at least as many consequential votes as they would gain.

There are two important points that many more exciteable commentators on the right forget, or at least overlook:

1. The 2024 Labour vote is exceptionally efficiently spread, such that in the next election, even if Labour took third place in total votes, they could still get by far the most seats. The Conservatives need therefore to try to take voters from Labour most of all (and Reform are working on doing the same, though in a different set of seats).

2. Donald Trump will not be president when the next general election is likely to take place. At that point he may well be extremely unpopular and/or discredited, and have fallen out with influential allies like Elon Musk. So currying favour with the Orange One is not the priority for long-term success.

Badenoch's only option, because of the hand she has been dealt, is to play the long game. My current assumption is that the best she can probably hope for in the next election is a 2005-style result, and even that may be a tall order.
Currently there is an opening for the Conservatives to get a hearing from business leaders disillusioned by the budget and various new regulations, but with everyone else they still need to 'earn the right to be heard' as many in their own party have put it.

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

bondegezou said:

Barnesian said:

numbertwelve said:

kinabalu said:

On topic: Nigel Farage is reliant on people being het up about immigration. He could struggle if that issue cools down. Anger about immigration is his Rodri.

Genuine question, how do you see that issue cooling down in the next 5 years? I simply cannot.

YouGov poll in November showed that 54% of Britons who voted leave, including 59% of voters in “red wall seats”, said, in exchange for single market access, they would now accept full free movement for EU and UK citizens to travel, live and work across borders.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/12/majority-of-brexit-voters-would-accept-free-movement-to-access-single-market-uk-eu

I think the issue for most people isn't immigration per se but uncontrolled immigration (eg small boats) and (for the racists) mass immigration from more colourful countries than the EU - which is all down to the Tories and Brexit.

YouGov have issues polling data on their website. Immigration being one of the most important issues has ranged from 71% (Sep 2015) to 14% (Apr 2020). If it can drop 56% in that 5-year period, I see no reason to presume that it will necessarily be an issue at the next general election.

It dropped that far because of Brexit. We all presumed that the government had "taken back control" of our borders and was introducing a "strict, Australian-style points-based immigration system"

Whatever the rights and wrongs of Brexit, at least immigration would now go way down! Huzzah!

Except that didn't happen, and in time voters woke up, first they saw the lack of control over the boats, then they saw the huge upwards change in the migration numbers - and the real, visible change in our streets. You can SEE the Boriswave millions

Unless Starmer can do some kind of psychological Brexit on migration, then it won't go back down in salience as an issue. He needs to visibly stop most of the boats, and get immigration down to, rough guess, under 200,000 at a bare minimum. He might have to do even more than that

This seems unlikely

The most bizarre aspect of the Brexit betrayal on immigration is that while it was happening, people were acting as though Boris Johnson was some kind of authoritatian nativist.

Yes. It's one reason he can be ruled out as a future Tory leader, let alone PM. Too many people feel bitterly betrayed, now they know the truth. His significant political career is finished

The 'Boriswave' of immigration now has its own Wikipedia page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boriswave

FrancisUrquhart said:

Awks.....

Man filmed by CNN ‘being rescued’ from Assad jail was ‘regime torturer’
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/12/15/syria-jail-man-rescued-filmed-false-identity-cnn-fact-check/

biggles said:

Gallowgate said:

biggles said:

bondegezou said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Breaking
Victoria Thomas Bowen avoids jail after throwing milkshake at Nigel Farage in Clacton during election campaign
https://news.sky.com/story/victoria-thomas-bowen-avoid-jail-for-throwing-milkshake-at-nigel-farage-in-clacton-during-election-campaign-13274797

Two-tier Keir. It could have been acid.

If it had been acid, she would have got a very different sentence. But it wasn’t. So she didn’t.

No. That kind of thinking creates the circumstances for it to be acid next time.

Anyone attacking any politician needs to receive a nasty sentence pour encourager les autres.

No they should get the same sentence an attack on anyone else should get. Otherwise it truly is two tier.

That’s not how the law has ever worked. If it was, we wouldn’t have a different offence for “assaulting a police officer”. If you have a profile, and perform a public function, deterrence is important.

Though I am sympathetic to your basis point and have questioned the “assaulting a police officer” offence before.

Leon said:

GIN1138 said:

Has @Leon got a theory yet, on the attack of the drones?

DOOOOOOOD we went over this for HOURS yesterday

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

bondegezou said:

Barnesian said:

numbertwelve said:

kinabalu said:

On topic: Nigel Farage is reliant on people being het up about immigration. He could struggle if that issue cools down. Anger about immigration is his Rodri.

Genuine question, how do you see that issue cooling down in the next 5 years? I simply cannot.

YouGov poll in November showed that 54% of Britons who voted leave, including 59% of voters in “red wall seats”, said, in exchange for single market access, they would now accept full free movement for EU and UK citizens to travel, live and work across borders.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/12/majority-of-brexit-voters-would-accept-free-movement-to-access-single-market-uk-eu

I think the issue for most people isn't immigration per se but uncontrolled immigration (eg small boats) and (for the racists) mass immigration from more colourful countries than the EU - which is all down to the Tories and Brexit.

YouGov have issues polling data on their website. Immigration being one of the most important issues has ranged from 71% (Sep 2015) to 14% (Apr 2020). If it can drop 56% in that 5-year period, I see no reason to presume that it will necessarily be an issue at the next general election.

It dropped that far because of Brexit. We all presumed that the government had "taken back control" of our borders and was introducing a "strict, Australian-style points-based immigration system"

Whatever the rights and wrongs of Brexit, at least immigration would now go way down! Huzzah!

Except that didn't happen, and in time voters woke up, first they saw the lack of control over the boats, then they saw the huge upwards change in the migration numbers - and the real, visible change in our streets. You can SEE the Boriswave millions

Unless Starmer can do some kind of psychological Brexit on migration, then it won't go back down in salience as an issue. He needs to visibly stop most of the boats, and get immigration down to, rough guess, under 200,000 at a bare minimum. He might have to do even more than that

This seems unlikely

The most bizarre aspect of the Brexit betrayal on immigration is that while it was happening, people were acting as though Boris Johnson was some kind of authoritatian nativist.

Yes. It's one reason he can be ruled out as a future Tory leader, let alone PM. Too many people feel bitterly betrayed, now they know the truth. His significant political career is finished

williamglenn said:

Starmer in a hi-viz jacket klaxon:

https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1868612720578396531

Our new Green Industrial Partnership with Norway will harness the UK’s unique potential to become a world-leader in carbon capture.

My government will deliver our Plan for Change, reigniting industrial heartlands and putting more money in working people’s pockets.

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

bondegezou said:

Barnesian said:

numbertwelve said:

kinabalu said:

On topic: Nigel Farage is reliant on people being het up about immigration. He could struggle if that issue cools down. Anger about immigration is his Rodri.

Genuine question, how do you see that issue cooling down in the next 5 years? I simply cannot.

YouGov poll in November showed that 54% of Britons who voted leave, including 59% of voters in “red wall seats”, said, in exchange for single market access, they would now accept full free movement for EU and UK citizens to travel, live and work across borders.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/12/majority-of-brexit-voters-would-accept-free-movement-to-access-single-market-uk-eu

I think the issue for most people isn't immigration per se but uncontrolled immigration (eg small boats) and (for the racists) mass immigration from more colourful countries than the EU - which is all down to the Tories and Brexit.

YouGov have issues polling data on their website. Immigration being one of the most important issues has ranged from 71% (Sep 2015) to 14% (Apr 2020). If it can drop 56% in that 5-year period, I see no reason to presume that it will necessarily be an issue at the next general election.

It dropped that far because of Brexit. We all presumed that the government had "taken back control" of our borders and was introducing a "strict, Australian-style points-based immigration system"

Whatever the rights and wrongs of Brexit, at least immigration would now go way down! Huzzah!

Except that didn't happen, and in time voters woke up, first they saw the lack of control over the boats, then they saw the huge upwards change in the migration numbers - and the real, visible change in our streets. You can SEE the Boriswave millions

Unless Starmer can do some kind of psychological Brexit on migration, then it won't go back down in salience as an issue. He needs to visibly stop most of the boats, and get immigration down to, rough guess, under 200,000 at a bare minimum. He might have to do even more than that

This seems unlikely

The most bizarre aspect of the Brexit betrayal on immigration is that while it was happening, people were acting as though Boris Johnson was some kind of authoritatian nativist.

Yes. It's one reason he can be ruled out as a future Tory leader, let alone PM. Too many people feel bitterly betrayed, now they know the truth. His significant political career is finished

Shows two things. The contempt he had for the people who voted Boris/Brexit in 2019 and gave him his finest hour. The gullibility of those voters.

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Awks.....

Man filmed by CNN ‘being rescued’ from Assad jail was ‘regime torturer’
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/12/15/syria-jail-man-rescued-filmed-false-identity-cnn-fact-check/

OMG is that the guy whose "amazing release" on CNN had @Nigelb weeping with tender joy?

HHAHAHAHAHAH

Luckyguy1983 said:

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Awks.....

Man filmed by CNN ‘being rescued’ from Assad jail was ‘regime torturer’
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/12/15/syria-jail-man-rescued-filmed-false-identity-cnn-fact-check/

OMG is that the guy whose "amazing release" on CNN had @Nigelb weeping with tender joy?

HHAHAHAHAHAH

Yet he still holds forth on Syria as if he's some form of credible commentor.

Luckyguy1983 said:

kenObi said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

eek said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You need infrastructure to get people to where you want them to work otherwise the company will just go to London where there are enough qualified people in a sane commuting area to work there.

Luckyguy1983 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You mean, what we've had since the 1980s, when London got turbocharged and the north went backwards?

Not at all - London loves an overregulated economy with expensive power and high barriers to entry; it serves big corporations very well. I am talking about recreating the conditions (bar slavery) that made the provinces wealthy in the first place.

Not quite you are badly quoting what happened on the Industrial Revolution with little understanding of how things have changed.

Nowadays for companies to be successful they need a critical mass of qualified workers within the appropriate commuting area hence why London does so well because if I need another data analyst there are a lot of London and so always a few looking for a new job.

Up north there may be 100 rather than 5000 so recruitment is far harder

Firstly, no you don't - remote working appears to have passed you by, speaking of having little understanding about the way things have changed...

Secondly, you are talking about professional services companies. Clearly I am not. I am talking about Northampton shoemakers, Birmingham glass, Welsh clothiers. None of which need 'a lot' of data analysts in the vicinity - yes data analysis is still important, but companies of the sort I describe don't need big departments of them. They need people who are pretty good with their hands and want to make stuff.

This is utterly delusional, but depressing that that anyone can actually believe this stuff.

I'd love a pair of bespoke shoes but the market is mostly local (your feet are measured to make a last) and limited by the price. You are literally paying for a person to hand make them slowly, their productivity won't have changed significantly in 100 years.
It would probably be more profitable to dig coal by hand in Wales than attempt to compete in textiles in any meaningful scale

Its fetishising things made by toil and sweat and skill - always by someone with their arse welded to an office chair and would be horrified if one of their kids wanted to be a hairdresser or mechanic.

What's depressing is that you and like-minded idiots liking this post dismiss the idea of high quality manufacturing playing a role in our economy when it plays a significant role in the economies of Germany, France, Italy, and the other countries that I've mentioned. Probably because you like the fact that it means we're 'releasing less carbon', despite every possibility that more net carbon will be released worldwide as a result.

Wales has a good track record in garment manufacture afaicr, it made all M&S clothes until the 90s, along with Laura Ashley. The reasons against it doing so again that you seem to think are so very insurmountable are simply the costs we as a state have chosen to heap on businesses that make things. They are choices. So your opposition to what I'm putting forward is entirely circular and based on nothing.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Awks.....

Man filmed by CNN ‘being rescued’ from Assad jail was ‘regime torturer’
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/12/15/syria-jail-man-rescued-filmed-false-identity-cnn-fact-check/

OMG is that the guy whose "amazing release" on CNN had @Nigelb weeping with tender joy?

HHAHAHAHAHAH

Yet he still holds forth on Syria as if he's some form of credible commentor.

TheValiant said:

LDLF said:

Absolutely right that a formal Conservative/Reform electoral alliance will probably never work, as they would lose at least as many consequential votes as they would gain.

There are two important points that many more exciteable commentators on the right forget, or at least overlook:

1. The 2024 Labour vote is exceptionally efficiently spread, such that in the next election, even if Labour took third place in total votes, they could still get by far the most seats. The Conservatives need therefore to try to take voters from Labour most of all (and Reform are working on doing the same, though in a different set of seats).

2. Donald Trump will not be president when the next general election is likely to take place. At that point he may well be extremely unpopular and/or discredited, and have fallen out with influential allies like Elon Musk. So currying favour with the Orange One is not the priority for long-term success.

Badenoch's only option, because of the hand she has been dealt, is to play the long game. My current assumption is that the best she can probably hope for in the next election is a 2005-style result, and even that may be a tall order.
Currently there is an opening for the Conservatives to get a hearing from business leaders disillusioned by the budget and various new regulations, but with everyone else they still need to 'earn the right to be heard' as many in their own party have put it.

I'm not sure you can say much about the 2029 election this far out. Until the 2024 election only in 1970 had one party had gone into an election with a majority, lost it and gave the opposition a majority instead.

The last three or four general elections have been rollercoasters. We've seen a party in government gain seats to gain a majority from a minority. We've seen (for the first time in a long time) a campaign actually matter and the opposition go from 24% to 40% over six weeks to force a hung parliament when all the polls pre calling the election suggested a Conservative landslide. We've seen a government in power nine years turn it all around, convince the electorate they were the party of 'change' and go forward in terms of votes and seats. And then we've seen the opposition put on no votes at all really, and gain double their seats and gain a majority nearly as good as Blair's.

Labour could lose not a single vote in 2029 and lose 150 seats if the Conservatives can simply take 15% off Reform. The Conservatives could lose 3% to Reform, and another 50 seats to Labour.

Honestly, we just don't know, and whilst Labour aren't doing well at the moment, anyone in early 2020 (pre Covid) who was saying 'Labour landslide in 2024) would've been laughed at. Fact of the matter now is the electorate is fickle, support for all parties is a mile wide and an inch deep, and huge seats swings is perfectly possible without any vote totals changing at all.

eek said:

Eabhal said:

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You mean, what we've had since the 1980s, when fLondon got turbocharged and the north went backwards?

It's weird because, on the whole, people in the northeast pay much less tax because they are either not in work or on low salaries. Average GVA per capita (2017):

NE £20,100
London £48,900

The question is why, given this difference, don't more firms take advantage of the cheap labour, land and buildings up north? Education, infrastructure, perhaps? I also note that high-tax Scotland has the highest GVA per head anywhere outside the SE of England.

Critical mass of skill set - so your options are

London pay market rate and you can recruit
Elsewhere - find a trainee and train them up.

Worse elsewhere the number of possible recruits will be lower because London has a 15 million within a 1 hour commute of London, Newcastle 1/2 million or so

Leon said:

Carnyx said:

kle4 said:

noneoftheabove said:

kle4 said:

I demand justice! Someone contact the historical crimes unit, this is a nation of laws.

Scientists have uncovered the aftermath of an "exceptionally violent" attack about 4,000 years ago in Somerset when at least 37 people appear to have been butchered and likely eaten.

It is the largest case of violence between humans identified in early Bronze Age England, which had been considered a peaceful time.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crl3jn3elz3o

The error is perhaps in assuming it was a peaceful time. Maybe I'm wrong but I suspect the absence of evidence of violence in early Bronze Age doesn't outweigh humans having a violent nature when threatened.

That did seem like an odd sentence to include. I mean, there were comparitively few people around at the time, so instances of mass violence would likewise be fewer and harder for evidence to have survived, so I'd be curious of the nature of analysis and if it really was more peaceful compared to others.

Or if it was just an extension of the idea that hunter gatherer societies or isolated island communities etc did not really have violence, which I think has been largely debunked but has lived on through patronising perceptions of naiive innocent native societies.

I've just been reading the original paper which is happily open access - the Graun has a linky if the BBC doesn't. The issue is the cannibalism. Very thorough, right down to cracking open bones for the marrow. Which obviously surprises the researchers (who are in any case being very careful in their arguments).

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/dec/16/something-horrible-somerset-pit-reveals-bronze-age-cannibalism
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/darker-angels-of-our-nature-early-bronze-age-butchered-human-remains-from-charterhouse-warren-somerset-uk/93EBB135C857C7B7992FC80A4ED927AF

Edit: survival of evidence is discussed. Obvs dumping them down a pothole on Mendip helped preserve it!

Part of the problem is the Woke academic world-view that Cannibalism Never Happened, and where it is mentioned by older or dead researchers it is always racist/Orientalist/whateverist worldviews imposed on non-white or ancient peoples

This is a real thing, and it reaches quite mad levels. I found a serious paper, written recently, that claims the Aztecs never practised human sacrifice or torture, it was all made up by the racist Spaniards. Utterly insane

So modern academics grow up with this "all peaceful", "noble savage" perspective on any ancient or non-white society and then get very surprised when they find utterly incontrovertible proof of the opposite

Luckyguy1983 said:

eek said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

kenObi said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

eek said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You need infrastructure to get people to where you want them to work otherwise the company will just go to London where there are enough qualified people in a sane commuting area to work there.

Luckyguy1983 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You mean, what we've had since the 1980s, when London got turbocharged and the north went backwards?

Not at all - London loves an overregulated economy with expensive power and high barriers to entry; it serves big corporations very well. I am talking about recreating the conditions (bar slavery) that made the provinces wealthy in the first place.

Not quite you are badly quoting what happened on the Industrial Revolution with little understanding of how things have changed.

Nowadays for companies to be successful they need a critical mass of qualified workers within the appropriate commuting area hence why London does so well because if I need another data analyst there are a lot of London and so always a few looking for a new job.

Up north there may be 100 rather than 5000 so recruitment is far harder

Firstly, no you don't - remote working appears to have passed you by, speaking of having little understanding about the way things have changed...

Secondly, you are talking about professional services companies. Clearly I am not. I am talking about Northampton shoemakers, Birmingham glass, Welsh clothiers. None of which need 'a lot' of data analysts in the vicinity - yes data analysis is still important, but companies of the sort I describe don't need big departments of them. They need people who are pretty good with their hands and want to make stuff.

This is utterly delusional, but depressing that that anyone can actually believe this stuff.

I'd love a pair of bespoke shoes but the market is mostly local (your feet are measured to make a last) and limited by the price. You are literally paying for a person to hand make them slowly, their productivity won't have changed significantly in 100 years.
It would probably be more profitable to dig coal by hand in Wales than attempt to compete in textiles in any meaningful scale

Its fetishising things made by toil and sweat and skill - always by someone with their arse welded to an office chair and would be horrified if one of their kids wanted to be a hairdresser or mechanic.

What's depressing is that you and like-minded idiots liking this post dismiss the idea of high quality manufacturing playing a role in our economy when it plays a significant role in the economies of Germany, France, Italy, and the other countries that I've mentioned. Probably because you like the fact that it means we're 'releasing less carbon', despite every possibility that more net carbon will be released worldwide as a result.

Wales has a good track record in garment manufacture afaicr, it made all M&S clothes until the 90s, along with Laura Ashley. The reasons against it doing so again that you seem to think are so very insurmountable are simply the costs we as a state have chosen to heap on businesses that make things. They are choices. So your opposition to what I'm putting forward is entirely circular and based on nothing.

You seem to have this idea that manufacturing still looks like it did in the 1990s and it simply doesn’t.

Then a factory was a lot of workers and a few machines, now it’s 99% machines with far fewer very highly skilled people keeping the machines in order.

And factories then have a habit of moving to whichever country offers the best tax breaks - which is why you see factories close down and move to Eastern Europe or similar because that country is currently providing incentives for the next x years. When those x years are up the company looks at where to go next.

Now there are exceptions to that Nissan being the obvious one but even then every x years it goes to the government and asks for more money to remain open

Btw Nissan pays well but your £40,000 role to keep the machines going is a very skilled role with years of experience required to know the ins and outs of all the machines you need to maintain

This is a garment factory in China:

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/workers-work-at-a-garment-manufacturing-company-in-binzhou-news-photo/1749180337

It is the same worldwide - very much a human process assisted by machine, and not a huge amount different to the factories we have mothballed.

It isn't the same as making a plastic box. So I rather think it is you who needs to broaden your knowledge not me.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Court has allowed the naming of the alleged spy as Yang Tengbo

rcs1000 said:

eek said:

Eabhal said:

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You mean, what we've had since the 1980s, when fLondon got turbocharged and the north went backwards?

It's weird because, on the whole, people in the northeast pay much less tax because they are either not in work or on low salaries. Average GVA per capita (2017):

NE £20,100
London £48,900

The question is why, given this difference, don't more firms take advantage of the cheap labour, land and buildings up north? Education, infrastructure, perhaps? I also note that high-tax Scotland has the highest GVA per head anywhere outside the SE of England.

Critical mass of skill set - so your options are

London pay market rate and you can recruit
Elsewhere - find a trainee and train them up.

Worse elsewhere the number of possible recruits will be lower because London has a 15 million within a 1 hour commute of London, Newcastle 1/2 million or so

It also works both ways: young people with skills are drawn to places where there are jobs for their skillset.

rcs1000 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Court has allowed the naming of the alleged spy as Yang Tengbo

Wikipedia write up here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H6_(Chinese_businessman)

rcs1000 said:

eek said:

Eabhal said:

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You mean, what we've had since the 1980s, when fLondon got turbocharged and the north went backwards?

It's weird because, on the whole, people in the northeast pay much less tax because they are either not in work or on low salaries. Average GVA per capita (2017):

NE £20,100
London £48,900

The question is why, given this difference, don't more firms take advantage of the cheap labour, land and buildings up north? Education, infrastructure, perhaps? I also note that high-tax Scotland has the highest GVA per head anywhere outside the SE of England.

Critical mass of skill set - so your options are

London pay market rate and you can recruit
Elsewhere - find a trainee and train them up.

Worse elsewhere the number of possible recruits will be lower because London has a 15 million within a 1 hour commute of London, Newcastle 1/2 million or so

It also works both ways: young people with skills are drawn to places where there are jobs for their skillset.

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

bondegezou said:

Barnesian said:

numbertwelve said:

kinabalu said:

On topic: Nigel Farage is reliant on people being het up about immigration. He could struggle if that issue cools down. Anger about immigration is his Rodri.

Genuine question, how do you see that issue cooling down in the next 5 years? I simply cannot.

YouGov poll in November showed that 54% of Britons who voted leave, including 59% of voters in “red wall seats”, said, in exchange for single market access, they would now accept full free movement for EU and UK citizens to travel, live and work across borders.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/12/majority-of-brexit-voters-would-accept-free-movement-to-access-single-market-uk-eu

I think the issue for most people isn't immigration per se but uncontrolled immigration (eg small boats) and (for the racists) mass immigration from more colourful countries than the EU - which is all down to the Tories and Brexit.

YouGov have issues polling data on their website. Immigration being one of the most important issues has ranged from 71% (Sep 2015) to 14% (Apr 2020). If it can drop 56% in that 5-year period, I see no reason to presume that it will necessarily be an issue at the next general election.

It dropped that far because of Brexit. We all presumed that the government had "taken back control" of our borders and was introducing a "strict, Australian-style points-based immigration system"

Whatever the rights and wrongs of Brexit, at least immigration would now go way down! Huzzah!

Except that didn't happen, and in time voters woke up, first they saw the lack of control over the boats, then they saw the huge upwards change in the migration numbers - and the real, visible change in our streets. You can SEE the Boriswave millions

Unless Starmer can do some kind of psychological Brexit on migration, then it won't go back down in salience as an issue. He needs to visibly stop most of the boats, and get immigration down to, rough guess, under 200,000 at a bare minimum. He might have to do even more than that

This seems unlikely

The most bizarre aspect of the Brexit betrayal on immigration is that while it was happening, people were acting as though Boris Johnson was some kind of authoritatian nativist.

Yes. It's one reason he can be ruled out as a future Tory leader, let alone PM. Too many people feel bitterly betrayed, now they know the truth. His significant political career is finished

Shows two things. The contempt he had for the people who voted Boris/Brexit in 2019 and gave him his finest hour. The gullibility of those voters.

The choice was him or Corbyn, also it was "delivering Brexit" or "the end of UK democracy via a 2nd vote"

Thank Fuck he won, and I speak as someone who hopes he never ever gets a political job again. The migration betrayal is unforgivable

Stuartinromford said:

rcs1000 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

eek said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

kenObi said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

eek said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You need infrastructure to get people to where you want them to work otherwise the company will just go to London where there are enough qualified people in a sane commuting area to work there.

Luckyguy1983 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

“Levelling up” didn’t happen because like everything Johnson did, it was a slogan not a policy.

Probably just as well, because it's not a very good policy. Economic wealth will not return to the North becauase they have gleaming trams and no potholes. We need a wider economic revival based on low taxes, easy regulation, a flexible labour market and low energy costs, then build the infrastructure we need when things take off, not build the infrastructure first and hope a backward process takes place. The idea is more absurd the more one thinks about it.

You mean, what we've had since the 1980s, when London got turbocharged and the north went backwards?

Not at all - London loves an overregulated economy with expensive power and high barriers to entry; it serves big corporations very well. I am talking about recreating the conditions (bar slavery) that made the provinces wealthy in the first place.

Not quite you are badly quoting what happened on the Industrial Revolution with little understanding of how things have changed.

Nowadays for companies to be successful they need a critical mass of qualified workers within the appropriate commuting area hence why London does so well because if I need another data analyst there are a lot of London and so always a few looking for a new job.

Up north there may be 100 rather than 5000 so recruitment is far harder

Firstly, no you don't - remote working appears to have passed you by, speaking of having little understanding about the way things have changed...

Secondly, you are talking about professional services companies. Clearly I am not. I am talking about Northampton shoemakers, Birmingham glass, Welsh clothiers. None of which need 'a lot' of data analysts in the vicinity - yes data analysis is still important, but companies of the sort I describe don't need big departments of them. They need people who are pretty good with their hands and want to make stuff.

This is utterly delusional, but depressing that that anyone can actually believe this stuff.

I'd love a pair of bespoke shoes but the market is mostly local (your feet are measured to make a last) and limited by the price. You are literally paying for a person to hand make them slowly, their productivity won't have changed significantly in 100 years.
It would probably be more profitable to dig coal by hand in Wales than attempt to compete in textiles in any meaningful scale

Its fetishising things made by toil and sweat and skill - always by someone with their arse welded to an office chair and would be horrified if one of their kids wanted to be a hairdresser or mechanic.

What's depressing is that you and like-minded idiots liking this post dismiss the idea of high quality manufacturing playing a role in our economy when it plays a significant role in the economies of Germany, France, Italy, and the other countries that I've mentioned. Probably because you like the fact that it means we're 'releasing less carbon', despite every possibility that more net carbon will be released worldwide as a result.

Wales has a good track record in garment manufacture afaicr, it made all M&S clothes until the 90s, along with Laura Ashley. The reasons against it doing so again that you seem to think are so very insurmountable are simply the costs we as a state have chosen to heap on businesses that make things. They are choices. So your opposition to what I'm putting forward is entirely circular and based on nothing.

You seem to have this idea that manufacturing still looks like it did in the 1990s and it simply doesn’t.

Then a factory was a lot of workers and a few machines, now it’s 99% machines with far fewer very highly skilled people keeping the machines in order.

And factories then have a habit of moving to whichever country offers the best tax breaks - which is why you see factories close down and move to Eastern Europe or similar because that country is currently providing incentives for the next x years. When those x years are up the company looks at where to go next.

Now there are exceptions to that Nissan being the obvious one but even then every x years it goes to the government and asks for more money to remain open

Btw Nissan pays well but your £40,000 role to keep the machines going is a very skilled role with years of experience required to know the ins and outs of all the machines you need to maintain

This is a garment factory in China:

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/workers-work-at-a-garment-manufacturing-company-in-binzhou-news-photo/1749180337

It is the same worldwide - very much a human process assisted by machine, and not a huge amount different to the factories we have mothballed.

It isn't the same as making a plastic box. So I rather think it is you who needs to broaden your knowledge not me.

Depends on the sector, surely.

A T-Shirt plant (and clothing is usually the first stage in a country's industrial development) has changed remarkably little in the last 100 years. Sure, everything is now electric and moves that little bit quicker. But there's still a ton of manual labour involved.

On the other hand, a modern car factory is completely unrecognizable.

Isn't the question then... is it really in the UK's interests to be doing those jobs in the UK? We already have an economy with too many low value-adding jobs so we need a shedload of immigration to stop the system falling over.

If we do what the rest of the world does, we end up with their living standards, don't we? And in general, that would be trading down.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Court has allowed the naming of the alleged spy as Yang Tengbo

Casino_Royale said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pulpstar said:

williamglenn said:

Starmer in a hi-viz jacket klaxon:

https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1868612720578396531

Our new Green Industrial Partnership with Norway will harness the UK’s unique potential to become a world-leader in carbon capture.

My government will deliver our Plan for Change, reigniting industrial heartlands and putting more money in working people’s pockets.

According to the GOV'Ts OWN NUMBERS we emit 486 million tonnes of Co2e per year.

£21.7 Bn is going to reduce that by 8.5 million tonnes (Whether it does or not for that price is debatable but let's go with it).

UK Gov't spend is £1189 Bn according to Google

£21.7/£1189 Bn = 1.8%

8.5 m tonnes / 486 m = 1.75%

So the Gov't would spend the entirety of it's overall spend pro rata to achieve net zero if CC was scaled up (It is pro rata almost 1:1 for the overall emissions reduction).

It's absolutely bonkers & bear in mind these are gov't figures so the cash spend is probably an underestimate and CO2 reduced an under.

Yep. Millipede strikes again.

This is why we privatised industries away from nationalisation, because the State proved such a poor predictor of investible propositions for the future.

Reminds me a bit British Railways massively investing in massive marshalling yards in the early 1950s just years before containerisation and lorries rendered most wagons redundant, except bulk heavy cargo.

DavidL said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Court has allowed the naming of the alleged spy as Yang Tengbo

If Mr Yang Tenbo thinks that hanging around Prince Andrew is going to get him access to anything meaningful he's not a particularly well informed spy.

Casino_Royale said:

Pulpstar said:

williamglenn said:

Starmer in a hi-viz jacket klaxon:

https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1868612720578396531

Our new Green Industrial Partnership with Norway will harness the UK’s unique potential to become a world-leader in carbon capture.

My government will deliver our Plan for Change, reigniting industrial heartlands and putting more money in working people’s pockets.

According to the GOV'Ts OWN NUMBERS we emit 486 million tonnes of Co2e per year.

£21.7 Bn is going to reduce that by 8.5 million tonnes (Whether it does or not for that price is debatable but let's go with it).

UK Gov't spend is £1189 Bn according to Google

£21.7/£1189 Bn = 1.8%

8.5 m tonnes / 486 m = 1.75%

So the Gov't would spend the entirety of it's overall spend pro rata to achieve net zero if CC was scaled up (It is pro rata almost 1:1 for the overall emissions reduction).

It's absolutely bonkers & bear in mind these are gov't figures so the cash spend is probably an underestimate and CO2 reduced an under.

Yep. Millipede strikes again.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pulpstar said:

williamglenn said:

Starmer in a hi-viz jacket klaxon:

https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1868612720578396531

Our new Green Industrial Partnership with Norway will harness the UK’s unique potential to become a world-leader in carbon capture.

My government will deliver our Plan for Change, reigniting industrial heartlands and putting more money in working people’s pockets.

According to the GOV'Ts OWN NUMBERS we emit 486 million tonnes of Co2e per year.

£21.7 Bn is going to reduce that by 8.5 million tonnes (Whether it does or not for that price is debatable but let's go with it).

UK Gov't spend is £1189 Bn according to Google

£21.7/£1189 Bn = 1.8%

8.5 m tonnes / 486 m = 1.75%

So the Gov't would spend the entirety of it's overall spend pro rata to achieve net zero if CC was scaled up (It is pro rata almost 1:1 for the overall emissions reduction).

It's absolutely bonkers & bear in mind these are gov't figures so the cash spend is probably an underestimate and CO2 reduced an under.

Yep. Millipede strikes again.

I mentioned a few weeks ago that some in the sector said Ed Miliband has the competence of Chris Grayling and the ideological entrenchment of Jeremy Corbyn.

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Court has allowed the naming of the alleged spy as Yang Tengbo

Wikipedia write up here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H6_(Chinese_businessman)

I've met him, he was known as Christopher Yang then.

H6 was stopped at a port in November 2021 when the letter from Hampshire was found on his personal electronic devices that listed "main talking points" for a telephone call with Prince Andrew, Duke of York. The letter stated "IMPORTANT: Manage expectations. Really important to not set 'too high' expectations - he is in a desperate situation and will grab onto anything....

Also found on this device...."met with man involved with influential political blog today, terrible shoes, terrible....think he might have been on to me, kept asking strange questions about if I like certain types of pizza and something called a Radiohead."

Northern_Al said:

tlg86 said:

https://x.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1868632376638882127

@Nigel_Farage
We now live in a country where you can assault a Member of Parliament and not go to prison.

The latest example of two-tier justice.

Of course, Farage wasn't an MP at the time, but I think the point stands.

It was a fucking milk shake, Nige. She didn't try to burn you to death.
Get over it.

bondegezou said:

biggles said:

bondegezou said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Breaking
Victoria Thomas Bowen avoids jail after throwing milkshake at Nigel Farage in Clacton during election campaign
https://news.sky.com/story/victoria-thomas-bowen-avoid-jail-for-throwing-milkshake-at-nigel-farage-in-clacton-during-election-campaign-13274797

Two-tier Keir. It could have been acid.

If it had been acid, she would have got a very different sentence. But it wasn’t. So she didn’t.

No. That kind of thinking creates the circumstances for it to be acid next time.

Anyone attacking any politician needs to receive a nasty sentence pour encourager les autres.

When I was at school, another boy once tipped a bowl of ice cream over my head. The police were not involved. Should they have been?

Or does the victim being a politician make all the difference? That sounds like two tiers to me.

DavidL said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Court has allowed the naming of the alleged spy as Yang Tengbo

If Mr Yang Tenbo thinks that hanging around Prince Andrew is going to get him access to anything meaningful he's not a particularly well informed spy.

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

rcs1000 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Court has allowed the naming of the alleged spy as Yang Tengbo

Wikipedia write up here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H6_(Chinese_businessman)

I've met him, he was known as Christopher Yang then.

H6 was stopped at a port in November 2021 when the letter from Hampshire was found on his personal electronic devices that listed "main talking points" for a telephone call with Prince Andrew, Duke of York. The letter stated "IMPORTANT: Manage expectations. Really important to not set 'too high' expectations - he is in a desperate situation and will grab onto anything....

Also found on this device...."met with man involved with influential political blog today, terrible shoes, terrible....think he might have been on to me, kept asking strange questions about if I like certain types of pizza and something called a Radiohead."

I also asked him this question which is well known for catching out foreign spies.

https://youtu.be/OKuHYO9TM5A?si=-KXlv5SLjQJtg7VM

dixiedean said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Yang Tengbo, the alleged Chinese spy banned from the UK and linked to the Duke of York, said he has “done nothing wrong or unlawful”.

He said in a statement: “I have done nothing wrong or unlawful and the concerns raised by the Home Office against me are ill-founded. The widespread description of me as a ‘spy’ is entirely untrue.

“This is why I applied for a review of the Home Office decision in the first place, and why I am seeking permission to appeal the SIAC decision. It is also why an order extending my anonymity up to the point of determination of the appeal process was granted.”

Suspiciously good English.

FrancisUrquhart said:

dixiedean said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Yang Tengbo, the alleged Chinese spy banned from the UK and linked to the Duke of York, said he has “done nothing wrong or unlawful”.

He said in a statement: “I have done nothing wrong or unlawful and the concerns raised by the Home Office against me are ill-founded. The widespread description of me as a ‘spy’ is entirely untrue.

“This is why I applied for a review of the Home Office decision in the first place, and why I am seeking permission to appeal the SIAC decision. It is also why an order extending my anonymity up to the point of determination of the appeal process was granted.”

Suspiciously good English.

He has been here for over 20 years.

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

bondegezou said:

Barnesian said:

numbertwelve said:

kinabalu said:

On topic: Nigel Farage is reliant on people being het up about immigration. He could struggle if that issue cools down. Anger about immigration is his Rodri.

Genuine question, how do you see that issue cooling down in the next 5 years? I simply cannot.

YouGov poll in November showed that 54% of Britons who voted leave, including 59% of voters in “red wall seats”, said, in exchange for single market access, they would now accept full free movement for EU and UK citizens to travel, live and work across borders.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/12/majority-of-brexit-voters-would-accept-free-movement-to-access-single-market-uk-eu

I think the issue for most people isn't immigration per se but uncontrolled immigration (eg small boats) and (for the racists) mass immigration from more colourful countries than the EU - which is all down to the Tories and Brexit.

YouGov have issues polling data on their website. Immigration being one of the most important issues has ranged from 71% (Sep 2015) to 14% (Apr 2020). If it can drop 56% in that 5-year period, I see no reason to presume that it will necessarily be an issue at the next general election.

It dropped that far because of Brexit. We all presumed that the government had "taken back control" of our borders and was introducing a "strict, Australian-style points-based immigration system"

Whatever the rights and wrongs of Brexit, at least immigration would now go way down! Huzzah!

Except that didn't happen, and in time voters woke up, first they saw the lack of control over the boats, then they saw the huge upwards change in the migration numbers - and the real, visible change in our streets. You can SEE the Boriswave millions

Unless Starmer can do some kind of psychological Brexit on migration, then it won't go back down in salience as an issue. He needs to visibly stop most of the boats, and get immigration down to, rough guess, under 200,000 at a bare minimum. He might have to do even more than that

This seems unlikely

The most bizarre aspect of the Brexit betrayal on immigration is that while it was happening, people were acting as though Boris Johnson was some kind of authoritatian nativist.

Yes. It's one reason he can be ruled out as a future Tory leader, let alone PM. Too many people feel bitterly betrayed, now they know the truth. His significant political career is finished

Shows two things. The contempt he had for the people who voted Boris/Brexit in 2019 and gave him his finest hour. The gullibility of those voters.

Malmesbury said:

TimS said:

rcs1000 said:

Casino_Royale said:

Casino_Royale said:

Pulpstar said:

williamglenn said:

Starmer in a hi-viz jacket klaxon:

https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1868612720578396531

Our new Green Industrial Partnership with Norway will harness the UK’s unique potential to become a world-leader in carbon capture.

My government will deliver our Plan for Change, reigniting industrial heartlands and putting more money in working people’s pockets.

According to the GOV'Ts OWN NUMBERS we emit 486 million tonnes of Co2e per year.

£21.7 Bn is going to reduce that by 8.5 million tonnes (Whether it does or not for that price is debatable but let's go with it).

UK Gov't spend is £1189 Bn according to Google

£21.7/£1189 Bn = 1.8%

8.5 m tonnes / 486 m = 1.75%

So the Gov't would spend the entirety of it's overall spend pro rata to achieve net zero if CC was scaled up (It is pro rata almost 1:1 for the overall emissions reduction).

It's absolutely bonkers & bear in mind these are gov't figures so the cash spend is probably an underestimate and CO2 reduced an under.

Yep. Millipede strikes again.

This is why we privatised industries away from nationalisation, because the State proved such a poor predictor of investible propositions for the future.

Reminds me a bit British Railways massively investing in massive marshalling yards in the early 1950s just years before containerisation and lorries rendered most wagons redundant, except bulk heavy cargo.

Indeed: the record of the State (and the British State in particular) picking winners is pretty atrocious.

We’ve not really tried in recent decades mind. Except in pharma where government has had a vital role in a lot of cases.

When I was younger and naive, I tried to talk to politicians about tech investment, DARPA style.

They all thought it was a good idea. Just that it needed to be adjusted for massive investment in a single method/tech. The idea of running a half dozen projects/experiments in parallel and picking two which worked horrified them.

NickPalmer said:

bondegezou said:

biggles said:

bondegezou said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Breaking
Victoria Thomas Bowen avoids jail after throwing milkshake at Nigel Farage in Clacton during election campaign
https://news.sky.com/story/victoria-thomas-bowen-avoid-jail-for-throwing-milkshake-at-nigel-farage-in-clacton-during-election-campaign-13274797

Two-tier Keir. It could have been acid.

If it had been acid, she would have got a very different sentence. But it wasn’t. So she didn’t.

No. That kind of thinking creates the circumstances for it to be acid next time.

Anyone attacking any politician needs to receive a nasty sentence pour encourager les autres.

When I was at school, another boy once tipped a bowl of ice cream over my head. The police were not involved. Should they have been?

Or does the victim being a politician make all the difference? That sounds like two tiers to me.

For family reasons, I went to schools abroad with a British basis and a US basis. Bullying was rife at the former and unknown at the latter. I've sometimes wondered why - the mix of families involved was similar (diplomats, business people, etc.), so there was apparently something in the British culture which encouraged bullying.

I'd favour fairly mild penalties for the ice cream assault, not necessarily involving the overstretched police but not excused as being only kids. Suspension for a week, something like that. If it happened to a politician, I'd expect the assailant to lose their job or at least get a last-chance warning. A suspended prison sentence sounds about right.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

NickPalmer said:

bondegezou said:

biggles said:

bondegezou said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Breaking
Victoria Thomas Bowen avoids jail after throwing milkshake at Nigel Farage in Clacton during election campaign
https://news.sky.com/story/victoria-thomas-bowen-avoid-jail-for-throwing-milkshake-at-nigel-farage-in-clacton-during-election-campaign-13274797

Two-tier Keir. It could have been acid.

If it had been acid, she would have got a very different sentence. But it wasn’t. So she didn’t.

No. That kind of thinking creates the circumstances for it to be acid next time.

Anyone attacking any politician needs to receive a nasty sentence pour encourager les autres.

When I was at school, another boy once tipped a bowl of ice cream over my head. The police were not involved. Should they have been?

Or does the victim being a politician make all the difference? That sounds like two tiers to me.

For family reasons, I went to schools abroad with a British basis and a US basis. Bullying was rife at the former and unknown at the latter. I've sometimes wondered why - the mix of families involved was similar (diplomats, business people, etc.), so there was apparently something in the British culture which encouraged bullying.

I'd favour fairly mild penalties for the ice cream assault, not necessarily involving the overstretched police but not excused as being only kids. Suspension for a week, something like that. If it happened to a politician, I'd expect the assailant to lose their job or at least get a last-chance warning. A suspended prison sentence sounds about right.

That's interesting, from watching US movies you'd think that bullying was extremely widespread in US schools! I think that bullying is more common in some types of school than in others. Our children's comprehensive school seems to do a good job anyway, our kids don't report any problems.

Nigel_Foremain said:

NickPalmer said:

bondegezou said:

biggles said:

bondegezou said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Breaking
Victoria Thomas Bowen avoids jail after throwing milkshake at Nigel Farage in Clacton during election campaign
https://news.sky.com/story/victoria-thomas-bowen-avoid-jail-for-throwing-milkshake-at-nigel-farage-in-clacton-during-election-campaign-13274797

Two-tier Keir. It could have been acid.

If it had been acid, she would have got a very different sentence. But it wasn’t. So she didn’t.

No. That kind of thinking creates the circumstances for it to be acid next time.

Anyone attacking any politician needs to receive a nasty sentence pour encourager les autres.

When I was at school, another boy once tipped a bowl of ice cream over my head. The police were not involved. Should they have been?

Or does the victim being a politician make all the difference? That sounds like two tiers to me.

For family reasons, I went to schools abroad with a British basis and a US basis. Bullying was rife at the former and unknown at the latter. I've sometimes wondered why - the mix of families involved was similar (diplomats, business people, etc.), so there was apparently something in the British culture which encouraged bullying.

I'd favour fairly mild penalties for the ice cream assault, not necessarily involving the overstretched police but not excused as being only kids. Suspension for a week, something like that. If it happened to a politician, I'd expect the assailant to lose their job or at least get a last-chance warning. A suspended prison sentence sounds about right.

There has been a long history of people throwing harmless things at politicians in this country. Normally eggs. I don't approve of it, but I also think that saying "ooooo, it could have been acid" is absurd. It wasn't. It was a milkshake. An egg does not equate to a Molotov cocktail, and a milkshake does not equate to acid. Goodness me, Faragists are now becoming as snowflakey as lefties!