Next PM betting, Farage remains the favourite – politicalbetting.com

I refuse to accept that Farage could be a good lay even in this context.

FPT:
Hmmm

UK Govt denies increased charges for Chagos deal exist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czj3w9k7gxxo

MattW said:

FPT:
Hmmm

UK Govt denies increased charges for Chagos deal exist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czj3w9k7gxxo

Labour need to tighten up/speed up their comms rebuttal. Whilst not that consequential, this shouldn't have been a story.

Have people finally stopped backing David Miliband in this market?

rkrkrk said:

MattW said:

FPT:
Hmmm

UK Govt denies increased charges for Chagos deal exist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czj3w9k7gxxo

Labour need to tighten up/speed up their comms rebuttal. Whilst not that consequential, this shouldn't have been a story.

It remained a fairly minor story on broadcast media but was turbocharged on here. I can't work out why. It's not like an individual poster spent all afternoon ramping the story.

That said Government communications remain shockingly inept.

A FAFO reminder from November.

‘We warned you,’ Arab Americans in Michigan tell Kamala Harris
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/11/6/we-warned-you-arab-americans-in-michigan-tell-kamala-harris

I agree with the header. I think Starmer will go in 2028, so the next PM will be Labour.

I think Rayner is value at 19.

Mexicanpete said:

rkrkrk said:

MattW said:

FPT:
Hmmm

UK Govt denies increased charges for Chagos deal exist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czj3w9k7gxxo

Labour need to tighten up/speed up their comms rebuttal. Whilst not that consequential, this shouldn't have been a story.

It remained a fairly minor story on broadcast media but was turbocharged on here. I can't work out why. It's not like an individual poster spent all afternoon ramping the story.

That said Government communications remain shockingly inept.

It was a fairly minor story but most of these stories are - the Lord Ali donor story started small and was talked about a lot here before it became a mainstream media story.

Chagos has started ramping up - the Today programme got stuck in this morning with the political correspondent saying this has been quiet but will grow when people start hearing the cost.

Apart from the annoying use as usual of “give them back to Mauritius” (they were never Mauritian territory but simply administered from there by the French then
the Brits) our Amol was quite cutting about it, didn’t try and gotcha Priti who was on talking about it and effectively said it’s a story that’s going to grow.

So whilst Leon is the most influential person in all the media I think this story might have built without him talking about it here yesterday.

Nigelb said:

A FAFO reminder from November.

‘We warned you,’ Arab Americans in Michigan tell Kamala Harris
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/11/6/we-warned-you-arab-americans-in-michigan-tell-kamala-harris

They used their left hand to cut off their right.

bondegezou said:

Nigelb said:

MattW said:

FPT:
Hmmm

UK Govt denies increased charges for Chagos deal exist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czj3w9k7gxxo

They haven't denied the increased charges; they've merely said they haven't (yet) agreed to them.

Which is presumably why half the cabinet is furiously briefing against the deal.

“the UK Foreign Office said the figures being quoted were "inaccurate and misleading".”

That's a very nuanced denial.
It could mean they are even worse.

boulay said:

Mexicanpete said:

rkrkrk said:

MattW said:

FPT:
Hmmm

UK Govt denies increased charges for Chagos deal exist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czj3w9k7gxxo

Labour need to tighten up/speed up their comms rebuttal. Whilst not that consequential, this shouldn't have been a story.

It remained a fairly minor story on broadcast media but was turbocharged on here. I can't work out why. It's not like an individual poster spent all afternoon ramping the story.

That said Government communications remain shockingly inept.

It was a fairly minor story but most of these stories are - the Lord Ali donor story started small and was talked about a lot here before it became a mainstream media story.

Chagos has started ramping up - the Today programme got stuck in this morning with the political correspondent saying this has been quiet but will grow when people start hearing the cost.

Apart from the annoying use as usual of “give them back to Mauritius” (they were never Mauritian territory but simply administered from there by the French then
the Brits) our Amol was quite cutting about it, didn’t try and gotcha Priti who was on talking about it and effectively said it’s a story that’s going to grow.

So whilst Leon is the most influential person in all the media I think this story might have built without him talking about it here yesterday.

That's the reach of politicalbetting.com

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Nigelb said:

A FAFO reminder from November.

‘We warned you,’ Arab Americans in Michigan tell Kamala Harris
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/11/6/we-warned-you-arab-americans-in-michigan-tell-kamala-harris

Maybe now a case of we warned you, Kamala Harris tells Arab Americans in Michigan.

I doubt she'd be quite that crass, true though it might be.

Sandpit said:

Dopermean said:

Sandpit said:

Lay the favourite!!!

Who on earth has put £500 on Andrew Tate on Betfair?
Based on erformance so far Darren Jones looks value, though that isn't how it'll be decided. Cooper has bottled her opportunities so far so seems unlikely.

Didn’t Tate say he was starting a British political party? He’s most likely to be in prison in Romania at the next election, but one of his friends putting £500 on him doesn’t sound particularly outrageous.

Indeedy-doody. Vote BRUV.

https://www.indy100.com/politics/andrew-tate-bruv-party-politics-2670792411

He's a kind of righty-narcissist to Brand's lefty-narcissist.

He's probably due Taki's slot in the Speccie, at least until any conviction comes through.

JosiasJessop said:

bondegezou said:

Nigelb said:

MattW said:

FPT:
Hmmm

UK Govt denies increased charges for Chagos deal exist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czj3w9k7gxxo

They haven't denied the increased charges; they've merely said they haven't (yet) agreed to them.

Which is presumably why half the cabinet is furiously briefing against the deal.

“the UK Foreign Office said the figures being quoted were "inaccurate and misleading".”

The figures are so vast, and put so much debt onto future generations, that total transparency is required on the deal.

I'm surprised we're not getting that transparency.

I'm not.

rkrkrk said:

Foxy said:

I agree with the header. I think Starmer will go in 2028, so the next PM will be Labour.

I think Rayner is value at 19.

Pretty rare for someone to voluntarily go after one term. A lot of things you want to achieve are just getting underway I'd guess. His children are teenagers now I believe, by 2028 they may be at uni/about to go and so he has more time on his hands!

It will very much depend on how things look in 2028.

Let's see how "Trash the State" populism looks by then.

Trump wants to ‘clean out’ 2.5m Palestinians from Gaza while it’s being rebuilt; Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt won’t take them.

I can think of a country of which Trump has some oversight that could take them.

Theuniondivvie said:

Trump wants to ‘clean out’ 2.5m Palestinians from Gaza while it’s being rebuilt; Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt won’t take them.

I can think of a country of which Trump has some oversight that could take them.

Airstrip One?

Theuniondivvie said:

Trump wants to ‘clean out’ 2.5m Palestinians from Gaza while it’s being rebuilt; Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt won’t take them.

I can think of a country of which Trump has some oversight that could take them.

Canada, Mexico, Panama or Greenland.

williamglenn said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Trump wants to ‘clean out’ 2.5m Palestinians from Gaza while it’s being rebuilt; Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt won’t take them.

I can think of a country of which Trump has some oversight that could take them.

Airstrip One?

I’d say there are limits to Starmer’s Trump rimming but I’ve been wrong before.
PM Farage otoh…

Theuniondivvie said:

Trump wants to ‘clean out’ 2.5m Palestinians from Gaza while it’s being rebuilt; Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt won’t take them.

I can think of a country of which Trump has some oversight that could take them.

The US is being overrun by immigrants, some of them terrible criminals, they need to go back to their homeland.

Jordan and Egypt need to take millions of immigrants, some of them terrible criminals so we can build a Gaza Riviera.

He said he didn’t want to be a wise guy and he’s managed it.

If the UK was about to receive, from some mad self harming foreign power the dosh we are going to give the Mauritians, then the UK would be, per capita, happily expectant of

£1,080,000,000,000

TheScreamingEagles said:

MattW said:

FPT:
Hmmm

UK Govt denies increased charges for Chagos deal exist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czj3w9k7gxxo

It was a great deal, it forced Leon to log off PB.

Spoke too soon...

squareroot2 said:

Foxy said:

I agree with the header. I think Starmer will go in 2028, so the next PM will be Labour.

I think Rayner is value at 19.

There is no way on earth that Rayner could be described as "value"

Rayner is the middle class centrist ideal of a person whom the working class should see as aspirational and inspirational.

The bullshit, sorry, virtuous reason given by the Donald & Bibi show for moving out the Gazans is the risk caused by all that unexploded ordnance. Strangely no one gave much of a toss about the danger of the stuff that actually exploded.
I may be wrong but I don’t think historically there was any evacuation of the civilian population when rebuilding area-bombed cities. In fact they were directly involved in reconstruction (Trümmerfrau etc).

Sandpit said:

Have people finally stopped backing David Miliband in this market?

I've decided not to invest further for now. Waiting for a bookie to offer a King Over the Water double header: Milliband (D) for next PM and Sussex (H) for next king

JosiasJessop said:

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:

If the UK was about to receive, from some mad self harming foreign power the dosh we are going to give the Mauritians, then the UK would be, per capita, happily expectant of

£1,080,000,000,000

Oh no, not another bloody Chagos thread.

It's one of the most important issues going on in UK politics today. It shouldn't be, but it is. And unlike many of the challenges facing this government, it is pretty much totally under their own control.

Feels like an open goal for Kemi at PMQs. Retorts of "the Tories started this process" won't wash at this point.

WRT Gaza, I don't suppose anyone is really surprised that Trump has said something like what he has.

All politics is relative, even this one. So points:

1) Clearly Trump intends to start a new middle east negotiation start point and position, and will have achieved this.

2) Has anyone got a better one?

3) I and most of us (I imagine) have long supported a two state solution. But SFAICS none of the parties do, most supporting a one state solution. So two state stuff isn't happening, not since the October massacre and Gaza'a becoming rubble.

4) What is the best one state solution which can be regarded as possible within the obvious constraints. Is it not most likely to be a radical but reluctantly agreed modification of Trump's appaarently absurd starting point?

…

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:

If the UK was about to receive, from some mad self harming foreign power the dosh we are going to give the Mauritians, then the UK would be, per capita, happily expectant of

£1,080,000,000,000

Oh no, not another bloody Chagos thread.

Out of interest, when the Tories were making fuck ups and being hammered on here, did you protest about another thread where everyone is talking about it?

Was Partygate criticism on here deserving of just the one thread? The Trussterfuck?

Could it be, just by chance, that you don’t want Labour fuck ups talked about because it’s easier than putting your hand up and admitting “your team” has messed up?

It’s ok to be wrong. It’s cathartic to admit it is wrong. It’s better than continuing down a wrong path.

Theuniondivvie said:

The bullshit, sorry, virtuous reason given by the Donald & Bibi show for moving out the Gazans is the risk caused by all that unexploded ordnance. Strangely no one gave much of a toss about the danger of the stuff that actually exploded.
I may be wrong but I don’t think historically there was any evacuation of the civilian population when rebuilding area-bombed cities. In fact they were directly involved in reconstruction (Trümmerfrau etc).

The remarkable thing was the sane washing treatment the BBC gave the proposals this morning.

For once, the Al Jazeera headline is a more sober assessment.

‘Insane’: Rights advocates denounce Trump’s call for US to ‘own’ Gaza
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2025/2/5/insane-rights-advocates-denounce-trumps-call-for-us-to-own-gaza

Mexicanpete said:

boulay said:

Mexicanpete said:

rkrkrk said:

MattW said:

FPT:
Hmmm

UK Govt denies increased charges for Chagos deal exist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czj3w9k7gxxo

Labour need to tighten up/speed up their comms rebuttal. Whilst not that consequential, this shouldn't have been a story.

It remained a fairly minor story on broadcast media but was turbocharged on here. I can't work out why. It's not like an individual poster spent all afternoon ramping the story.

That said Government communications remain shockingly inept.

It was a fairly minor story but most of these stories are - the Lord Ali donor story started small and was talked about a lot here before it became a mainstream media story.

Chagos has started ramping up - the Today programme got stuck in this morning with the political correspondent saying this has been quiet but will grow when people start hearing the cost.

Apart from the annoying use as usual of “give them back to Mauritius” (they were never Mauritian territory but simply administered from there by the French then
the Brits) our Amol was quite cutting about it, didn’t try and gotcha Priti who was on talking about it and effectively said it’s a story that’s going to grow.

So whilst Leon is the most influential person in all the media I think this story might have built without him talking about it here yesterday.

That's the reach of politicalbetting.com

I think it’s definitely broken out of the right-wing circles the story was circulating in: The obvious attack from the left & inside government is: “we’re so hard up that benefits are being cut & our departments are being told to find cost savings 'or else' but the FO can’t magic up £18billion from the Treasury with a wave of their wand for this deal that nobody wants”

tlg86 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:

If the UK was about to receive, from some mad self harming foreign power the dosh we are going to give the Mauritians, then the UK would be, per capita, happily expectant of

£1,080,000,000,000

Oh no, not another bloody Chagos thread.

It's one of the most important issues going on in UK politics today. It shouldn't be, but it is. And unlike many of the challenges facing this government, it is pretty much totally under their own control.

Feels like an open goal for Kemi at PMQs. Retorts of "the Tories started this process" won't wash at this point.

I feel like we can cut numbers in another way. So, we know in some manner the 9 / 18bn is 100 years worth of lease of a military base / island including indexation / compounding.

By scaling up the (if unremedied) in year hidden running costs of the fiscal black hole, multiplying by 100 and indexing, I reckon the fiscal black hole the Tories bequeathed this government is around 10 trillion pounds.

We don't know exactly the Chagos deal, it will come before parliament first, but we know it is along these lines.

....

boulay said:

…

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:

If the UK was about to receive, from some mad self harming foreign power the dosh we are going to give the Mauritians, then the UK would be, per capita, happily expectant of

£1,080,000,000,000

Oh no, not another bloody Chagos thread.

Out of interest, when the Tories were making fuck ups and being hammered on here, did you protest about another thread where everyone is talking about it?

Was Partygate criticism on here deserving of just the one thread? The Trussterfuck?

Could it be, just by chance, that you don’t want Labour fuck ups talked about because it’s easier than putting your hand up and admitting “your team” has messed up?

It’s ok to be wrong. It’s cathartic to admit it is wrong. It’s better than continuing down a wrong path.

My point wasn't so much the folly or otherwise of the policy. I don't know enough about it to comment apart from IF the figures are correct it does seem both expensive and peculiar.

And you are correct I laughed loudest when Johnson's tomfoolery was being called into question, although not so much with Truss and Sunak.

My observation was focused on the poster who can quite impressively make himself centre of attention by hijacking a thread. Normally it is his holidays, the club he is a member of or an expensive lunch in Mayfair. Yesterday was very much on a political topic. No two ways about it he owned the thread. I was just hoping he won't own this one.

On current polls Labour would still win most seats on average even if they would lose their majority. So Starmer could stay PM with LD support.

The chances of Farage becoming PM are therefore overestimated by the bookies. Even to get most seats Reform would need to rise further to 28% and even then Farage would have to do a deal with Kemi

JosiasJessop said:

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:

If the UK was about to receive, from some mad self harming foreign power the dosh we are going to give the Mauritians, then the UK would be, per capita, happily expectant of

£1,080,000,000,000

Oh no, not another bloody Chagos thread.

It's one of the most important issues going on in UK politics today. It shouldn't be, but it is. And unlike many of the challenges facing this government, it is pretty much totally under their own control.

The apparently sincere outrage about Chagos is baffling. There are a hundred other things I would get exercised about before that.

It isn't moral outrage. If it was we would close the base down and give the Chagossians their island back. The UK and US have no more moral right to the island than Mauritius, but legally it's theirs, as determined by clear and well established international law. So it's entirely transactional. The British, but in reality the Americans, get their base and the Mauritians get the money from a lease, which seems to be at the going rate for such bases. Everyone is happy, except the Chagossians, but nobody cares about them.

So Jenrick, a shadow bench member and likely next leader of the opposition calls Starmer a Quisling, and looks completely demented.

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

Foxy said:

I agree with the header. I think Starmer will go in 2028, so the next PM will be Labour.

I think Rayner is value at 19.

There is no way on earth that Rayner could be described as "value"

My logic is that:

1) leaders are rarely replaced by someone like themselves, they are replaced with a person who corrects or over corrects the deficiencies of the outgoing leader.

2) leaders are replaced by senior frontbenchers, or recent front benches, particularly when in government.

3) There will be a desire to have a female leader.

Reeves is out because of 1.

So I am backing Rayner, Cooper and Phillipson as next PM, and of these Rayner or Cooper seems most likely.

You may not like Rayner, but you are not the electorate for this contest, the Labour Party MPs, members and Trade Unions are. As she was previous shop steward the Unions will back Rayner.

Haigh would likely have been in this discussion but for her mobile phone.

Thoughts and prayers for those No Way Biden voters of Dearborn.

Nigelb said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The bullshit, sorry, virtuous reason given by the Donald & Bibi show for moving out the Gazans is the risk caused by all that unexploded ordnance. Strangely no one gave much of a toss about the danger of the stuff that actually exploded.
I may be wrong but I don’t think historically there was any evacuation of the civilian population when rebuilding area-bombed cities. In fact they were directly involved in reconstruction (Trümmerfrau etc).

The remarkable thing was the sane washing treatment the BBC gave the proposals this morning.

For once, the Al Jazeera headline is a more sober assessment.

‘Insane’: Rights advocates denounce Trump’s call for US to ‘own’ Gaza
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2025/2/5/insane-rights-advocates-denounce-trumps-call-for-us-to-own-gaza

Indeed even in Biblical times Gaza was Philistine then Egyptian land not part of ancient Israel

another_richard said:

Projected population of 9m.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Line,_Saudi_Arabia

How convenient.

What, just rename it The Strip?

boulay said:

algarkirk said:

WRT Gaza, I don't suppose anyone is really surprised that Trump has said something like what he has.

All politics is relative, even this one. So points:

1) Clearly Trump intends to start a new middle east negotiation start point and position, and will have achieved this.

2) Has anyone got a better one?

3) I and most of us (I imagine) have long supported a two state solution. But SFAICS none of the parties do, most supporting a one state solution. So two state stuff isn't happening, not since the October massacre and Gaza'a becoming rubble.

4) What is the best one state solution which can be regarded as possible within the obvious constraints. Is it not most likely to be a radical but reluctantly agreed modification of Trump's appaarently absurd starting point?

Crazy idea, instead of handing Gaza over to the US and Trump friendly donors to develop and send the Palestinians away why not make Gaza such a great place to live, good infrastructure, jobs, lifestyle.

So good that if you are a Palestinian you actively don’t want to spend the day throwing rocks at Israeli border posts or joining death cults because, you know, you get to take your girlfriend to a nice beachfront cafe and look at the coastline that Trump covets and then you can go for a nice spot of dinner in a restaurant that’s not going to be bonbed then sleep and get up for a day at work in the job created by rebuilding and redevelopment rather than being one of the “lucky ones” who get to stay to hand out towels on the beach to fat Americans.

I think that's a great idea and I hope it works.

Nah. Not Chagos - pop theology and culture.

This FPT is quite interesting, and illustrates several things:

rcs1000 said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Do any of the Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, or Jedi holy texts advocate the sexual enslavement of non-believing females?

Deuteronomy 21:10-14

1 - That's an AI yank-from-the-internet, missing context or history. That's the Twatter-culture problem right there, as seen in Musk yanking untrue snippets from all over and blasting them at his 135m followers who, often being unthinking twits, just swallow it all.

(Hint: for anyone still wading in the Twitter swamp, you can block Musk.)

2 - It's missing that (at least for a Christian view) that OT Law is viewed through the lens of the NT (or for Roman Catholics, the tradition of the Church), and the Mosaic law needs to be compared with mores of the time.

3 - That imo is why Dawkins never got anywhere; he was a reductionist who thought everyone shared his nuance-free cultural spectacles - they don't.

4 - The problem for the Trumpvangelicals is that (being a rootless post-Enlightenment movement) they treat their holy text approximately the same way as Dawkins, with tradition and nuance excised.

And they can be left doing analysis-paralysis trying to divide a whole field of dots and tittles from underlying principles, which are a different ball game, when their Lord and Saviour basically declared the dots and tittles obsolete in one fell swoop.

5 - I find interesting that both Trump and Vance (who does Beano level theology) seem scared of debate. When Bishop Budde, or Rory Stewart, pointed out a couple of the bits they lost when they put their Bibles through the shredding machine, their response was to demonise, not debate or defend their position.

I think this will be one vector of critique for the Trump administration. They can try and buy all the rest, or intimidate people into silence. That won't deliver with religious professionals.

HYUFD said:

On current polls Labour would still win most seats on average even if they would lose their majority. So Starmer could stay PM with LD support.

The chances of Farage becoming PM are therefore overestimated by the bookies. Even to get most seats Reform would need to rise further to 28% and even then Farage would have to do a deal with Kemi

Stop relying on UNS. It simply won't work on these numbers.

Nigelb said:

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:

If the UK was about to receive, from some mad self harming foreign power the dosh we are going to give the Mauritians, then the UK would be, per capita, happily expectant of

£1,080,000,000,000

Oh no, not another bloody Chagos thread.

£1,080,000,000,000 "per capita" seems... implausible.
I think he might have meant pro rata, but since no one actually knows what the figures are, it might just be the usual hyperbole ?

Then let’s do it on a flat GDP basis. If someone was giving us what we are giving Mauritius, compared to our basic GDP, we would be eagerly awaiting a payment of

£3,042,000,000,000

bondegezou said:

MattW said:

Sandpit said:

Dopermean said:

Sandpit said:

Lay the favourite!!!

Who on earth has put £500 on Andrew Tate on Betfair?
Based on erformance so far Darren Jones looks value, though that isn't how it'll be decided. Cooper has bottled her opportunities so far so seems unlikely.

Didn’t Tate say he was starting a British political party? He’s most likely to be in prison in Romania at the next election, but one of his friends putting £500 on him doesn’t sound particularly outrageous.

Indeedy-doody. Vote BRUV.

https://www.indy100.com/politics/andrew-tate-bruv-party-politics-2670792411

He's a kind of righty-narcissist to Brand's lefty-narcissist.

He's probably due Taki's slot in the Speccie, at least until any conviction comes through.

Brand has dropped lefty-narcissism for right-narcissism.

There’s not that much difference between the two, and one very frequently evolves into the other. See Galloway.

rottenborough said:

It was quite clear from his wild and all over the place rants at rallies and from the one debate he had with Kamala that Trump's state of mind would mean an insane and out of control presidency and so here we all are.

Thank you America.

What happens if there's a shark over there, and it's about to eat American democracy?

viewcode said:

kamski said:

boulay said:

Mexicanpete said:

rkrkrk said:

MattW said:

FPT:
Hmmm

UK Govt denies increased charges for Chagos deal exist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czj3w9k7gxxo

Labour need to tighten up/speed up their comms rebuttal. Whilst not that consequential, this shouldn't have been a story.

It remained a fairly minor story on broadcast media but was turbocharged on here. I can't work out why. It's not like an individual poster spent all afternoon ramping the story.

That said Government communications remain shockingly inept.

It was a fairly minor story but most of these stories are - the Lord Ali donor story started small and was talked about a lot here before it became a mainstream media story.

Chagos has started ramping up - the Today programme got stuck in this morning with the political correspondent saying this has been quiet but will grow when people start hearing the cost.

Apart from the annoying use as usual of “give them back to Mauritius” (they were never Mauritian territory but simply administered from there by the French then
the Brits) our Amol was quite cutting about it, didn’t try and gotcha Priti who was on talking about it and effectively said it’s a story that’s going to grow.

So whilst Leon is the most influential person in all the media I think this story might have built without him talking about it here yesterday.

"(they were never Mauritian territory but simply administered from there by the French then
the Brits)"

I don't think you can dismiss the claims of Mauritius quite so easily.
Here is the summary of the 2019 ICJ advisory opinion on the matter:

https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/169/169-20190225-SUM-01-00-EN.pdf

when it decided 13-1 that

having regard to international law, the process of decolonization of Mauritius was not lawfully completed when that country acceded to independence in 1968, following the separation of the Chagos Archipelago.

the United Kingdom is under an obligation to bring to an end its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible.

all Member States are under an obligation to co-operate with the United Nations in order to complete the decolonization of Mauritius.

The reasons are given in the document.

In which case all the UK has to do is leave. No monetary offer need be offered.

The money is to lease the base. Now, it’s perfectly possible that we have no strategic need for it and can just tell the Americans it’s for them to deal with Mauritius in future, but the official line at least is that the MoD still wants it.

algarkirk said:

WRT Gaza, I don't suppose anyone is really surprised that Trump has said something like what he has.

All politics is relative, even this one. So points:

1) Clearly Trump intends to start a new middle east negotiation start point and position, and will have achieved this.

2) Has anyone got a better one?

3) I and most of us (I imagine) have long supported a two state solution. But SFAICS none of the parties do, most supporting a one state solution. So two state stuff isn't happening, not since the October massacre and Gaza'a becoming rubble.

4) What is the best one state solution which can be regarded as possible within the obvious constraints. Is it not most likely to be a radical but reluctantly agreed modification of Trump's appaarently absurd starting point?

On (3), the Palestinian Authority, some Israeli parties in opposition, Arab states, and most UN member states support a 2-state solution.

On (4), if one is to have a 1-state solution, it doesn't have to involve ethnic cleansing. So, no.

Ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity. It is not the solution to anything. It is not a starting point to anything.

2 fast food meals in a row. After yesterday evening’s delicious Maccie Ds on Oxford Street it’s breakfast at Euston. In…Leon.

Always disappointing. One tiny sliver of bacon, an OK sausage, some fancy (ie tinned tomato flavoured) baked beans, and 2 flabby fried eggs for £7.29.

I did consider the spoons, which would have been much better value for money, but I feared missing the train.

TimS said:

2 fast food meals in a row. After yesterday evening’s delicious Maccie Ds on Oxford Street it’s breakfast at Euston. In…Leon.

Always disappointing. One tiny sliver of bacon, an OK sausage, some fancy (ie tinned tomato flavoured) baked beans, and 2 flabby fried eggs for £7.29.

Why would you want to be in @Leon for breakfast? Or at any other time?