🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
If anyone needed any evidence that Johnson is a man who contorts himself into whatever position he calculates is the most expedient for him, there you are.
I actually thought his support for Ukraine one of the very few genuine and heartfelt convictions he held, but it seems not.
That was in his cosplay Churchill phase. Now he's a very ex-PM, he's into grifting off the US right to make the child support pavements. Nice chap.
Demonstrates, yet again, what a charlatan he is. Mayor of London should have been the highest he could possibly go in British politics.
I’ve just been meeting the Mayor of London. But the Lord Mayor, at the Mansion House. Not Sadiq.
Nice room for the meeting:
Do residents of the City (all six of them?) get a vote Mayoral elections. I can't recall how the Lord Mayor gets chosen; got a feeling it's some sort of Buggins turn.
And despite EVERYTHING Labour STILL leads in some polls.
They go up a few points in an election cycle and they’ll be back up to the 33% they enjoyed in 2024.
I do believe the likelihood of their re-election is underpriced. Especially if Streeting takes over.
I think there’s opportunity for Labour to improve their position, particularly as the global situation continues to shift. But risk, also.
In the medium term I think the biggest domestic challenge facing Starmer is Rachel Reeves. I think it is becoming quite apparent that she is a drag on the party’s fortunes.
I thought they might benefit from replacing her with a more boosterish minister like Jonny Reynolds, but solicitor-gate makes that very unlikely now.
Streeting needs to be kept focused on health and either prove himself or not. Too early to shift him.
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
Where the fuck is that - with your head up his arse ?
https://snyder.substack.com/p/recoup-the-costs The premise of American foreign policy to Ukraine, today, is one of grievance. As the American president, vice-president, and national security advisor constantly repeat, Ukraine, the victim of a large-scale and criminal Russian invasion, must "recoup the costs" to the US taxpayer for aid received under the Biden administration.
It is worth patiently considering this proposition. It reveals little about Ukraine, but much about America in February 2025.
1. The American demand is of an extraordinary scale. In Kyiv and again in Munich, the Americans proposed that Ukraine concede half of the profits from its mineral rights in perpetuity and from other national resources and from its ports in perpetuity with a lien on everything important -- in exchange for essentially nothing. This is not really a monetary proposition, let alone a "deal," but rather the demand that Ukraine become a permanent American colony. It amounts to blackmail enabled by ongoing Russian invasion. In effect, the United States is telling Ukraine to concede its resources to the United States, under the threat that American aid will be otherwise withdrawn, and those resources will be taken by Russia...
...5. The price that the Americans use to characterize what is owed them -- $500 billion -- is both too low and too high. It is far less than the value of the perpetual claim to Ukrainian resources that they are making right now. And it is far more than the United States has given Ukraine. The US has committed, over three years, about $66 billion in humanitarian aid and about $119 billion in military aid. That second figure has to be examined a bit critically. Most of that money stayed in the United States, financing American factories in America and paying American workers. The rest of it was usually not money at all, but weapons, to which were assigned a dollar amount for accounting purposes. Most of the weapons that were actually sent to Ukraine were obsolescing and would never have been used by the United States in a conflict...
As a matter of realpolitik, the US is providing some resources that, currently at least, Europe cannot. That is what enables such attempted extortion.
Johnson might call that "reasonable", but it is not, except by the logic of the mafia. Evidently, this isn't going to be a one off problem; we should plan accordingly.
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
To which the follow up question is why then did you (Bozo the clown) send arms to Ukraine without demanding concessions 3 years ago
Because it was the right thing for us to do?
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
If anyone needed any evidence that Johnson is a man who contorts himself into whatever position he calculates is the most expedient for him, there you are.
I actually thought his support for Ukraine one of the very few genuine and heartfelt convictions he held, but it seems not.
That was in his cosplay Churchill phase. Now he's a very ex-PM, he's into grifting off the US right to make the child support pavements. Nice chap.
Demonstrates, yet again, what a charlatan he is. Mayor of London should have been the highest he could possibly go in British politics.
I’ve just been meeting the Mayor of London. But the Lord Mayor, at the Mansion House. Not Sadiq.
Nice room for the meeting:
Do residents of the City (all six of them?) get a vote Mayoral elections. I can't recall how the Lord Mayor gets chosen; got a feeling it's some sort of Buggins turn.
It’s certainly not a vote of all residents. Elected by the aldermen of the city. So more like a papal conclave.
Met with an American friend recently, who lives in UK, but has just returned from a trip home, who was really sounding off about Trump and his regime, and how their US friends were really horrified by what he and his ‘team’ were doing. Or at least the climate they were creating.
And despite EVERYTHING Labour STILL leads in some polls.
They go up a few points in an election cycle and they’ll be back up to the 33% they enjoyed in 2024.
I do believe the likelihood of their re-election is underpriced. Especially if Streeting takes over.
I think there’s opportunity for Labour to improve their position, particularly as the global situation continues to shift. But risk, also.
In the medium term I think the biggest domestic challenge facing Starmer is Rachel Reeves. I think it is becoming quite apparent that she is a drag on the party’s fortunes.
I agree with both of these. SKS is an almost perfect algorithmically derived anti-Trump and will probably profit thereby.
He needs somebody to counteract his weakness of a being a dull twat as CoE. Somebody with a bit of rizz, which RR clearly isn't. They don't have to know much about spreadsheet wanker economics stuff beyond being able to sell the strategy and policies. The Treasury must be rammed full of despicable little Rishi type nerds who can do all that boring chutney. I have no idea who could be which one of the Labour drones could be the Rylan they need.
Someone's surely going to remake the Paddington-QE2 tea party video, with Paddington gatecrashing the KCIII-Trump tea and, voiced by Zelensky, giving him the verbal equivalent of a hard stare. With Queen outside playing Death on Two Legs
Campaigners have threatened the government with legal action unless it reconsiders the decision to refuse compensation to millions of women affected by an increase in the state pension age.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is demanding payouts for 3.6 million women born in the 1950s who were not properly informed of changes first introduced in the 1990s.
I still maintain we were properly informed. If they didn't pay attention to any of the advertising about it that's a different issue. I was very close to being one of the people affected and I paid attention to the advertising, even when I found I was one year outside the affected age.
Good morning, everybody.
Where the government are giving out money (now or in the future) there are many memory lapses. If you are in receipt of benefits and where there is a Change of Circumstances (CoC), you'll find that beneficial changes are not reported to the DWP while adverse changes are. Then people complain when they have to pay it back.
It's no more than human nature to expect the best outcome and seek exemptions when the issue comes back and bites them. So best the government accepts the legal challenges and gets the matter sorted rather than let it fester - and providing ammunition for those on the left and right.
What do you mean get it sorted? I can't see the campaigners giving up no matter what legal judgements are made.
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
If anyone needed any evidence that Johnson is a man who contorts himself into whatever position he calculates is the most expedient for him, there you are.
I actually thought his support for Ukraine one of the very few genuine and heartfelt convictions he held, but it seems not.
That was in his cosplay Churchill phase. Now he's a very ex-PM, he's into grifting off the US right to make the child support pavements. Nice chap.
Demonstrates, yet again, what a charlatan he is. Mayor of London should have been the highest he could possibly go in British politics.
I’ve just been meeting the Mayor of London. But the Lord Mayor, at the Mansion House. Not Sadiq.
Nice room for the meeting:
Do residents of the City (all six of them?) get a vote Mayoral elections. I can't recall how the Lord Mayor gets chosen; got a feeling it's some sort of Buggins turn.
They get to vote for Aldermen to the Corporation of London, but, no, not the Mayor.
The Lord Mayor is elected by the liverymen of the guilds, although they have to be one of the Aldermen.
Today is the 500th anniversary of the death of the last valid Yorkist claimant to the throne. Descendant of Geoffrey Chaucer, and Richard Plantagenet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_de_la_Pole
Died fighting for the French, so probably deserved his fate.
The other question is how big will the Europeans' aid package be for Ukraine today? Will it be enough to see them through another 6 months? If so, Trump will have lost such control as he has and Russia will start to panic as their economic crisis intensifies.
Ideally, we are looking for something close to $20bn with roughly 10% of that from us.
The traitorous scum Orbán is going to block that . They refuse to approve any more arms sales .
Its interesting how effective Hungary, a small recipient country, is in causing disruption in the EU.
Compared to how ineffective the UK, a large contributor country, was in EU negotiations.
Perhaps if the UK leaders had done a little more vetoing and a little less posturing and surrendering then the UK would still be in the EU.
EU needs to get its act together and kick out Hungary. Time for countries to pick a side.
They can’t . There’s no actual mechanism to kick them out . You can suspend their voting rights in the EP and put in other measures but need unanimous agreement from the remaining members and Fico another Putin puppet will block those .
Europe needs to start replacing the carrots with sticks. If some countries want to cause difficulties that are contrary to the security of the whole group, then a way can be found to politely remind them that if they’d like to be outside the club at the mercy of Russia and without access to the benefits, the door is over there.
Europe really has to start remaking itself as a security-first collective. I think Merz, and perhaps increasingly Macron, are starting to get this.
It's also not impossible that such a security collective overlaps but is distinct from the EU. And indeed NATO. That would get around the vetos of the semi-detached (or worse) members, and allow the participation of non EU members (ie the UK and Norway).
QMV is possible in the Council of the EU on Common Foreign and Security Policy - Article 31 of Lisbon. So there is no veto on such matters (unless somebody important like France objects). Orban didn't vote in favour of EU association for Ukraine but it still passed.
You've misread it.
If a member of the Council says they will oppose a decision, a vote will not take place. A member can abstain and "check out" on a matter; that means it will not be bound by any decision made by the rest but it also agrees it will not obstruct the Union in pursuing it.
The Council can only decide to act by QMV on a matter if the European Council first unanimously agrees.
Campaigners have threatened the government with legal action unless it reconsiders the decision to refuse compensation to millions of women affected by an increase in the state pension age.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is demanding payouts for 3.6 million women born in the 1950s who were not properly informed of changes first introduced in the 1990s.
It appears to me that WASPI are very much for state pension inequality!
Surely it can't go through as it has an indirect discriminatory effect on gay men (No gay male couple will benefit) which is a protected characteristic ?
They have lost every legal challenge they have made. This is about the timelimit for a judicial review of the decision not to pay these freeloaders "compensation" for their ignorance.
A £75K crowdfunder has been launched.
One on the radio this morning didn't receive a letter and claimed to have been out of the country on the day it "led the news coverage" (i.e. the first announcement of the change). That's the extent of her case. What of due dilligence in planning your retirement? Check in with an advisor? Do some sums? If she had she would have seen a bit of a change.
The story they are trying to tell is that loads of women were about to retire (presumably the next day) when they suddenly discovered that the rules had changed quite a number of years ago, but no-one had told them. Its bullshit.
They can all eff off and when they get there they can do it again.
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
To which the follow up question is why then did you (Bozo the clown) send arms to Ukraine without demanding concessions 3 years ago
Because it was the right thing for us to do?
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
Yes.
The WWII was extremely generous, in many ways - use it or chuck the stuff in the sea*. If you want to keep it, 10% of face value and here’s a loan at below market interest rates to buy it.
*The reason for the scrap request was that after WWI, war surplus collapsed industries that were already downsizing from the war. There was a reasonable fear that might happen again.
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
If anyone needed any evidence that Johnson is a man who contorts himself into whatever position he calculates is the most expedient for him, there you are.
I actually thought his support for Ukraine one of the very few genuine and heartfelt convictions he held, but it seems not.
That was in his cosplay Churchill phase. Now he's a very ex-PM, he's into grifting off the US right to make the child support pavements. Nice chap.
Demonstrates, yet again, what a charlatan he is. Mayor of London should have been the highest he could possibly go in British politics.
I’ve just been meeting the Mayor of London. But the Lord Mayor, at the Mansion House. Not Sadiq.
Nice room for the meeting:
Do residents of the City (all six of them?) get a vote Mayoral elections. I can't recall how the Lord Mayor gets chosen; got a feeling it's some sort of Buggins turn.
They get to vote for Aldermen to the Corporation of London, but, no, not the Mayor.
The Lord Mayor is elected by the liverymen of the guilds, although they have to be one of the Aldermen.
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
To which the follow up question is why then did you (Bozo the clown) send arms to Ukraine without demanding concessions 3 years ago
Because it was the right thing for us to do?
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
We did, yes, pay off those debts IIRC, but also the US wrote off a huge amount of war debt. The Marshall Plan money was mostly never re-paid.
The other question is how big will the Europeans' aid package be for Ukraine today? Will it be enough to see them through another 6 months? If so, Trump will have lost such control as he has and Russia will start to panic as their economic crisis intensifies.
Ideally, we are looking for something close to $20bn with roughly 10% of that from us.
The traitorous scum Orbán is going to block that . They refuse to approve any more arms sales .
Its interesting how effective Hungary, a small recipient country, is in causing disruption in the EU.
Compared to how ineffective the UK, a large contributor country, was in EU negotiations.
Perhaps if the UK leaders had done a little more vetoing and a little less posturing and surrendering then the UK would still be in the EU.
EU needs to get its act together and kick out Hungary. Time for countries to pick a side.
They can’t . There’s no actual mechanism to kick them out . You can suspend their voting rights in the EP and put in other measures but need unanimous agreement from the remaining members and Fico another Putin puppet will block those .
Europe needs to start replacing the carrots with sticks. If some countries want to cause difficulties that are contrary to the security of the whole group, then a way can be found to politely remind them that if they’d like to be outside the club at the mercy of Russia and without access to the benefits, the door is over there.
Europe really has to start remaking itself as a security-first collective. I think Merz, and perhaps increasingly Macron, are starting to get this.
It's also not impossible that such a security collective overlaps but is distinct from the EU. And indeed NATO. That would get around the vetos of the semi-detached (or worse) members, and allow the participation of non EU members (ie the UK and Norway).
QMV is possible in the Council of the EU on Common Foreign and Security Policy - Article 31 of Lisbon. So there is no veto on such matters (unless somebody important like France objects). Orban didn't vote in favour of EU association for Ukraine but it still passed.
You've misread it.
If a member of the Council says they will oppose a decision, a vote will not take place. A member can abstain and "check out" on a matter; that means it will not be bound by any decision made by the rest but it also agrees it will not obstruct the Union in pursuing it.
The Council can only decide to act by QMV on a matter if the European Council first unanimously agrees.
In any event, EU structures are hardly conducive to rapid decision making, which is probably what's required here, if it's to make any contribution to resolving our current difficulties.
And despite EVERYTHING Labour STILL leads in some polls.
They go up a few points in an election cycle and they’ll be back up to the 33% they enjoyed in 2024.
I do believe the likelihood of their re-election is underpriced. Especially if Streeting takes over.
I think there’s opportunity for Labour to improve their position, particularly as the global situation continues to shift. But risk, also.
In the medium term I think the biggest domestic challenge facing Starmer is Rachel Reeves. I think it is becoming quite apparent that she is a drag on the party’s fortunes.
Good morning
Nobody has any way of knowing how all this pans out other than wish casting
It is an opportunity for Starmer but could equally turn out a poisoned chalice and the big question which Starmer has to answer is where and when all the billions is coming for for defence ?
I personally don't think Ukraine, Trump, Putin (and foreign affairs in general) will make much difference to the next election.
People will vote on the usual issues like NHS and education, And the major issue, as always, will be the economy.
If this has indeed been made part of the sys instructions, we’re gonna need to know why. manipulating search results seems like a funny way to combat misinformation, no?
Campaigners have threatened the government with legal action unless it reconsiders the decision to refuse compensation to millions of women affected by an increase in the state pension age.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is demanding payouts for 3.6 million women born in the 1950s who were not properly informed of changes first introduced in the 1990s.
I still maintain we were properly informed. If they didn't pay attention to any of the advertising about it that's a different issue. I was very close to being one of the people affected and I paid attention to the advertising, even when I found I was one year outside the affected age.
Good morning, everybody.
Where the government are giving out money (now or in the future) there are many memory lapses. If you are in receipt of benefits and where there is a Change of Circumstances (CoC), you'll find that beneficial changes are not reported to the DWP while adverse changes are. Then people complain when they have to pay it back.
It's no more than human nature to expect the best outcome and seek exemptions when the issue comes back and bites them. So best the government accepts the legal challenges and gets the matter sorted rather than let it fester - and providing ammunition for those on the left and right.
Sorry but no - everyone has looked at the issue and said sorry the fact you didn't pay attention is your problem not ours.
If the Government gives the Waspi chancers a penny they won't be getting my vote down the line...
They won't give them a penny. This is about a judicial review of the latest decision. They are after the money There is a separate CEDAWinLAW claim as well going on, which has yet to reach fruition.
The only politicians supporting these women are the Lib Dems and the SNP for cynical, opportunistic reasons.
The Lib Dems, you would think, would learn their lesson from Tuition fees. They haven't.
And despite EVERYTHING Labour STILL leads in some polls.
They go up a few points in an election cycle and they’ll be back up to the 33% they enjoyed in 2024.
I do believe the likelihood of their re-election is underpriced. Especially if Streeting takes over.
I think there’s opportunity for Labour to improve their position, particularly as the global situation continues to shift. But risk, also.
In the medium term I think the biggest domestic challenge facing Starmer is Rachel Reeves. I think it is becoming quite apparent that she is a drag on the party’s fortunes.
Good morning
Nobody has any way of knowing how all this pans out other than wish casting
It is an opportunity for Starmer but could equally turn out a poisoned chalice and the big question which Starmer has to answer is where and when all the billions is coming for for defence ?
I personally don't think Ukraine, Trump, Putin (and foreign affairs in general) will make much difference to the next election.
People will vote on the usual issues like NHS and education, And the major issue, as always, will be the economy.
I agree and disagree. People vote on the economy, but Ukraine, Trump, Putin and foreign affairs can all have a huge impact on the economy. Putin's invasion of Ukraine was a big part of the inflation spike that saw numerous parties lose office in elections across 2024.
Wagenknecht is talking about challenging the result. Overseas voters were reporting problems getting ballots on time, so maybe there's a case.
Also, the SPD general secretary has said that any coalition agreement will be put to SPD members to vote on. The last time the members got a vote was in 2018 on another grand coalition with the CDU/CSU. Yes won 66% to 34%
I'm not sure what Wagenknecht is trying to achieve at this point. I can't imagine there's much chance that an surplus 14000 BSW votes could be found among Germans living abroad when apparently only 230 000 were registered to vote. Even if 10% of them couldn't get ballots on time, a majority of those would have to be frustrated BSW voters for it to make a difference which seems implausible. So probably just wants to play a bit of "the election was stolen".
Same with the allegations, repeated today, that pollsters were understating BSW support to discourage people from voting for them.
And despite EVERYTHING Labour STILL leads in some polls.
They go up a few points in an election cycle and they’ll be back up to the 33% they enjoyed in 2024.
I do believe the likelihood of their re-election is underpriced. Especially if Streeting takes over.
I think there’s opportunity for Labour to improve their position, particularly as the global situation continues to shift. But risk, also.
In the medium term I think the biggest domestic challenge facing Starmer is Rachel Reeves. I think it is becoming quite apparent that she is a drag on the party’s fortunes.
Good morning
Nobody has any way of knowing how all this pans out other than wish casting
It is an opportunity for Starmer but could equally turn out a poisoned chalice and the big question which Starmer has to answer is where and when all the billions is coming for for defence ?
I personally don't think Ukraine, Trump, Putin (and foreign affairs in general) will make much difference to the next election.
People will vote on the usual issues like NHS and education, And the major issue, as always, will be the economy.
I agree and disagree. People vote on the economy, but Ukraine, Trump, Putin and foreign affairs can all have a huge impact on the economy. Putin's invasion of Ukraine was a big part of the inflation spike that saw numerous parties lose office in elections across 2024.
The other question is how big will the Europeans' aid package be for Ukraine today? Will it be enough to see them through another 6 months? If so, Trump will have lost such control as he has and Russia will start to panic as their economic crisis intensifies.
Ideally, we are looking for something close to $20bn with roughly 10% of that from us.
The traitorous scum Orbán is going to block that . They refuse to approve any more arms sales .
Its interesting how effective Hungary, a small recipient country, is in causing disruption in the EU.
Compared to how ineffective the UK, a large contributor country, was in EU negotiations.
Perhaps if the UK leaders had done a little more vetoing and a little less posturing and surrendering then the UK would still be in the EU.
EU needs to get its act together and kick out Hungary. Time for countries to pick a side.
They can’t . There’s no actual mechanism to kick them out . You can suspend their voting rights in the EP and put in other measures but need unanimous agreement from the remaining members and Fico another Putin puppet will block those .
Europe needs to start replacing the carrots with sticks. If some countries want to cause difficulties that are contrary to the security of the whole group, then a way can be found to politely remind them that if they’d like to be outside the club at the mercy of Russia and without access to the benefits, the door is over there.
Europe really has to start remaking itself as a security-first collective. I think Merz, and perhaps increasingly Macron, are starting to get this.
It's also not impossible that such a security collective overlaps but is distinct from the EU. And indeed NATO. That would get around the vetos of the semi-detached (or worse) members, and allow the participation of non EU members (ie the UK and Norway).
QMV is possible in the Council of the EU on Common Foreign and Security Policy - Article 31 of Lisbon. So there is no veto on such matters (unless somebody important like France objects). Orban didn't vote in favour of EU association for Ukraine but it still passed.
You've misread it.
If a member of the Council says they will oppose a decision, a vote will not take place. A member can abstain and "check out" on a matter; that means it will not be bound by any decision made by the rest but it also agrees it will not obstruct the Union in pursuing it.
The Council can only decide to act by QMV on a matter if the European Council first unanimously agrees.
In any event, EU structures are hardly conducive to rapid decision making, which is probably what's required here, if it's to make any contribution to resolving our current difficulties.
Any European defence alliance will have to be taken outside of EU structures.
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
To which the follow up question is why then did you (Bozo the clown) send arms to Ukraine without demanding concessions 3 years ago
Because it was the right thing for us to do?
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
We did, yes, pay off those debts IIRC, but also the US wrote off a huge amount of war debt. The Marshall Plan money was mostly never re-paid.
The US support in the early years of WW2 was only ever transactional. Churchill had to beg for stuff from FDR up to 41. Even planes we'd bought from them. It was only pearl harbour that brought them into the war, and only because they'd been attacked. The US are not better than Ferengi to be honest. The supplies they sent us was in return for ideas,secrets and products from our industries. They even reneged on nuclear secrets after the war. Fuck em I say.
If this has indeed been made part of the sys instructions, we’re gonna need to know why. manipulating search results seems like a funny way to combat misinformation, no?
And despite EVERYTHING Labour STILL leads in some polls.
They go up a few points in an election cycle and they’ll be back up to the 33% they enjoyed in 2024.
I do believe the likelihood of their re-election is underpriced. Especially if Streeting takes over.
I think there’s opportunity for Labour to improve their position, particularly as the global situation continues to shift. But risk, also.
In the medium term I think the biggest domestic challenge facing Starmer is Rachel Reeves. I think it is becoming quite apparent that she is a drag on the party’s fortunes.
Good morning
Nobody has any way of knowing how all this pans out other than wish casting
It is an opportunity for Starmer but could equally turn out a poisoned chalice and the big question which Starmer has to answer is where and when all the billions is coming for for defence ?
I personally don't think Ukraine, Trump, Putin (and foreign affairs in general) will make much difference to the next election.
People will vote on the usual issues like NHS and education, And the major issue, as always, will be the economy.
I agree and disagree. People vote on the economy, but Ukraine, Trump, Putin and foreign affairs can all have a huge impact on the economy. Putin's invasion of Ukraine was a big part of the inflation spike that saw numerous parties lose office in elections across 2024.
Yes, I think it is more the impact that will be felt rather than people voting on the geopolitics behind it.
But it will have an outsized impact because the government will have to sell tax rises/spending cuts to meet increased defence spending/procurement and security infrastructure in the coming years. Those choices are going to be critical for the government’s fortunes and another reason why I think they really need to be put in the hands of a very strong communicator. Starmer can do the sober, serious stuff. He needs someone who can sell the end goal and the journey.
"“I’ve never represented a person of such exemplary character as I have today, who has provided so much of his life to public service and the service of others," he said."
Campaigners have threatened the government with legal action unless it reconsiders the decision to refuse compensation to millions of women affected by an increase in the state pension age.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is demanding payouts for 3.6 million women born in the 1950s who were not properly informed of changes first introduced in the 1990s.
It appears to me that WASPI are very much for state pension inequality!
Surely it can't go through as it has an indirect discriminatory effect on gay men (No gay male couple will benefit) which is a protected characteristic ?
They have lost every legal challenge they have made. This is about the timelimit for a judicial review of the decision not to pay these freeloaders "compensation" for their ignorance.
A £75K crowdfunder has been launched.
One on the radio this morning didn't receive a letter and claimed to have been out of the country on the day it "led the news coverage" (i.e. the first announcement of the change). That's the extent of her case. What of due dilligence in planning your retirement? Check in with an advisor? Do some sums? If she had she would have seen a bit of a change.
The story they are trying to tell is that loads of women were about to retire (presumably the next day) when they suddenly discovered that the rules had changed quite a number of years ago, but no-one had told them. Its bullshit.
They can all eff off and when they get there they can do it again.
The thing is the maladministration took place several years after it became law. So it is not even the initial change in pension age PHSO found against. Just a letter should have gone to them around 2 years earlier.
PHSO Simply caved in to a well funded, well connected, middle class lobby who have extremely good publicists as we can see today with the story still gaining prominence.
It remains to be seen whether or not they can get the £75K to crowdfund the judicial review.
The Lib Dems would just give them every penny they demand without saying where it comes from,
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
To which the follow up question is why then did you (Bozo the clown) send arms to Ukraine without demanding concessions 3 years ago
Because it was the right thing for us to do?
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
We did, yes, pay off those debts IIRC, but also the US wrote off a huge amount of war debt. The Marshall Plan money was mostly never re-paid.
The US support in the early years of WW2 was only ever transactional. Churchill had to beg for stuff from FDR up to 41. Even planes we'd bought from them. It was only pearl harbour that brought them into the war, and only because they'd been attacked. The US are not better than Ferengi to be honest. The supplies they sent us was in return for ideas,secrets and products from our industries. They even reneged on nuclear secrets after the war. Fuck em I say.
That might be true in the early years of the war, but the Marshall Plan after the war was hugely important and mostly aid, not loans.
Campaigners have threatened the government with legal action unless it reconsiders the decision to refuse compensation to millions of women affected by an increase in the state pension age.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is demanding payouts for 3.6 million women born in the 1950s who were not properly informed of changes first introduced in the 1990s.
It appears to me that WASPI are very much for state pension inequality!
Surely it can't go through as it has an indirect discriminatory effect on gay men (No gay male couple will benefit) which is a protected characteristic ?
They have lost every legal challenge they have made. This is about the timelimit for a judicial review of the decision not to pay these freeloaders "compensation" for their ignorance.
A £75K crowdfunder has been launched.
One on the radio this morning didn't receive a letter and claimed to have been out of the country on the day it "led the news coverage" (i.e. the first announcement of the change). That's the extent of her case. What of due dilligence in planning your retirement? Check in with an advisor? Do some sums? If she had she would have seen a bit of a change.
The story they are trying to tell is that loads of women were about to retire (presumably the next day) when they suddenly discovered that the rules had changed quite a number of years ago, but no-one had told them. Its bullshit.
They can all eff off and when they get there they can do it again.
The thing is the maladministration took place several years after it became law. So it is not even the initial change in pension age PHSO found against. Just a letter should have gone to them around 2 years earlier.
PHSO Simply caved in to a well funded, well connected, middle class lobby who have extremely good publicists as we can see today with the story still gaining prominence.
It remains to be seen whether or not they can get the £75K to crowdfund the judicial review.
The Lib Dems would just give them every penny they demand without saying where it comes from,
Until they were in power, as was the case with Starmer and Reeves, I believe. Fastest u-turn since the last one.
If this has indeed been made part of the sys instructions, we’re gonna need to know why. manipulating search results seems like a funny way to combat misinformation, no?
The other question is how big will the Europeans' aid package be for Ukraine today? Will it be enough to see them through another 6 months? If so, Trump will have lost such control as he has and Russia will start to panic as their economic crisis intensifies.
Ideally, we are looking for something close to $20bn with roughly 10% of that from us.
The traitorous scum Orbán is going to block that . They refuse to approve any more arms sales .
Its interesting how effective Hungary, a small recipient country, is in causing disruption in the EU.
Compared to how ineffective the UK, a large contributor country, was in EU negotiations.
Perhaps if the UK leaders had done a little more vetoing and a little less posturing and surrendering then the UK would still be in the EU.
EU needs to get its act together and kick out Hungary. Time for countries to pick a side.
They can’t . There’s no actual mechanism to kick them out . You can suspend their voting rights in the EP and put in other measures but need unanimous agreement from the remaining members and Fico another Putin puppet will block those .
Europe needs to start replacing the carrots with sticks. If some countries want to cause difficulties that are contrary to the security of the whole group, then a way can be found to politely remind them that if they’d like to be outside the club at the mercy of Russia and without access to the benefits, the door is over there.
Europe really has to start remaking itself as a security-first collective. I think Merz, and perhaps increasingly Macron, are starting to get this.
It's also not impossible that such a security collective overlaps but is distinct from the EU. And indeed NATO. That would get around the vetos of the semi-detached (or worse) members, and allow the participation of non EU members (ie the UK and Norway).
QMV is possible in the Council of the EU on Common Foreign and Security Policy - Article 31 of Lisbon. So there is no veto on such matters (unless somebody important like France objects). Orban didn't vote in favour of EU association for Ukraine but it still passed.
You've misread it.
If a member of the Council says they will oppose a decision, a vote will not take place. A member can abstain and "check out" on a matter; that means it will not be bound by any decision made by the rest but it also agrees it will not obstruct the Union in pursuing it.
The Council can only decide to act by QMV on a matter if the European Council first unanimously agrees.
In any event, EU structures are hardly conducive to rapid decision making, which is probably what's required here, if it's to make any contribution to resolving our current difficulties.
Any European defence alliance will have to be taken outside of EU structures.
Tissues and hugs for the federalists.
The likely outcome to all this is More Europe, not less.
The other question is how big will the Europeans' aid package be for Ukraine today? Will it be enough to see them through another 6 months? If so, Trump will have lost such control as he has and Russia will start to panic as their economic crisis intensifies.
Ideally, we are looking for something close to $20bn with roughly 10% of that from us.
The traitorous scum Orbán is going to block that . They refuse to approve any more arms sales .
Its interesting how effective Hungary, a small recipient country, is in causing disruption in the EU.
Compared to how ineffective the UK, a large contributor country, was in EU negotiations.
Perhaps if the UK leaders had done a little more vetoing and a little less posturing and surrendering then the UK would still be in the EU.
EU needs to get its act together and kick out Hungary. Time for countries to pick a side.
They can’t . There’s no actual mechanism to kick them out . You can suspend their voting rights in the EP and put in other measures but need unanimous agreement from the remaining members and Fico another Putin puppet will block those .
Thanks. You're quite right. Rather a poor design. I suppose one option is all member states leave the EU and then sent up EU2 which is the same but without Hungary and has a mechanism for kicking countries out.
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
To which the follow up question is why then did you (Bozo the clown) send arms to Ukraine without demanding concessions 3 years ago
Because it was the right thing for us to do?
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
We did, yes, pay off those debts IIRC, but also the US wrote off a huge amount of war debt. The Marshall Plan money was mostly never re-paid.
The US support in the early years of WW2 was only ever transactional. Churchill had to beg for stuff from FDR up to 41. Even planes we'd bought from them. It was only pearl harbour that brought them into the war, and only because they'd been attacked. The US are not better than Ferengi to be honest. The supplies they sent us was in return for ideas,secrets and products from our industries. They even reneged on nuclear secrets after the war. Fuck em I say.
That might be true in the early years of the war, but the Marshall Plan after the war was hugely important and mostly aid, not loans.
There's always been a struggle in the US between isolationists and those would engage overseas. This lot are somewhat different.
"“I’ve never represented a person of such exemplary character as I have today, who has provided so much of his life to public service and the service of others," he said."
The guy's a violent thug.
Who twatted someone who had his hands in his pockets then claimed he felt threatened. What a bellend.
From the Beeb
Deputy Chief Magistrate Tan Ikram said a pre-sentencing report shows the MP is at low risk of re-offending, but if he does re-offend he poses a medium risk to the public.
That means the starting point for the MP's sentence is a prison sentence, he said.
The prosecution said Amesbury did not admit his guilty at the time, while Amesbury's defence lawyer Richadr Derby has asked the magistrate to consider that the MP acted "hugely out of character".
The magistrate has now retired to consider his sentence.
So probably a suspended sentence, given the mitigation.
If this has indeed been made part of the sys instructions, we’re gonna need to know why. manipulating search results seems like a funny way to combat misinformation, no?
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
To which the follow up question is why then did you (Bozo the clown) send arms to Ukraine without demanding concessions 3 years ago
Because it was the right thing for us to do?
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
We did, yes, pay off those debts IIRC, but also the US wrote off a huge amount of war debt. The Marshall Plan money was mostly never re-paid.
The US support in the early years of WW2 was only ever transactional. Churchill had to beg for stuff from FDR up to 41. Even planes we'd bought from them. It was only pearl harbour that brought them into the war, and only because they'd been attacked. The US are not better than Ferengi to be honest. The supplies they sent us was in return for ideas,secrets and products from our industries. They even reneged on nuclear secrets after the war. Fuck em I say.
That might be true in the early years of the war, but the Marshall Plan after the war was hugely important and mostly aid, not loans.
There's always been a struggle in the US between isolationists and those would engage overseas. This lot are somewhat different.
"“I’ve never represented a person of such exemplary character as I have today, who has provided so much of his life to public service and the service of others," he said."
The guy's a violent thug.
Who twatted someone who had his hands in his pockets then claimed he felt threatened. What a bellend.
From the Beeb
Deputy Chief Magistrate Tan Ikram said a pre-sentencing report shows the MP is at low risk of re-offending, but if he does re-offend he poses a medium risk to the public.
That means the starting point for the MP's sentence is a prison sentence, he said.
The prosecution said Amesbury did not admit his guilty at the time, while Amesbury's defence lawyer Richadr Derby has asked the magistrate to consider that the MP acted "hugely out of character".
The magistrate has now retired to consider his sentence.
So probably a suspended sentence, given the mitigation.
He also kept going and had be dragged away by other members of the public, and then even came back for some more verbals.
Campaigners have threatened the government with legal action unless it reconsiders the decision to refuse compensation to millions of women affected by an increase in the state pension age.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is demanding payouts for 3.6 million women born in the 1950s who were not properly informed of changes first introduced in the 1990s.
It appears to me that WASPI are very much for state pension inequality!
Surely it can't go through as it has an indirect discriminatory effect on gay men (No gay male couple will benefit) which is a protected characteristic ?
They have lost every legal challenge they have made. This is about the timelimit for a judicial review of the decision not to pay these freeloaders "compensation" for their ignorance.
A £75K crowdfunder has been launched.
One on the radio this morning didn't receive a letter and claimed to have been out of the country on the day it "led the news coverage" (i.e. the first announcement of the change). That's the extent of her case. What of due dilligence in planning your retirement? Check in with an advisor? Do some sums? If she had she would have seen a bit of a change.
The story they are trying to tell is that loads of women were about to retire (presumably the next day) when they suddenly discovered that the rules had changed quite a number of years ago, but no-one had told them. Its bullshit.
They can all eff off and when they get there they can do it again.
The thing is the maladministration took place several years after it became law. So it is not even the initial change in pension age PHSO found against. Just a letter should have gone to them around 2 years earlier.
PHSO Simply caved in to a well funded, well connected, middle class lobby who have extremely good publicists as we can see today with the story still gaining prominence.
It remains to be seen whether or not they can get the £75K to crowdfund the judicial review.
The Lib Dems would just give them every penny they demand without saying where it comes from,
Until they were in power, as was the case with Starmer and Reeves, I believe. Fastest u-turn since the last one.
Then Ed Davey can do a Youtube video telling everyone how sorry he is just like Call me Nick did.
Labour deserve the discomfort they got from this given their rapid reverse ferret.
Campaigners have threatened the government with legal action unless it reconsiders the decision to refuse compensation to millions of women affected by an increase in the state pension age.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is demanding payouts for 3.6 million women born in the 1950s who were not properly informed of changes first introduced in the 1990s.
I still maintain we were properly informed. If they didn't pay attention to any of the advertising about it that's a different issue. I was very close to being one of the people affected and I paid attention to the advertising, even when I found I was one year outside the affected age.
Good morning, everybody.
Where the government are giving out money (now or in the future) there are many memory lapses. If you are in receipt of benefits and where there is a Change of Circumstances (CoC), you'll find that beneficial changes are not reported to the DWP while adverse changes are. Then people complain when they have to pay it back.
It's no more than human nature to expect the best outcome and seek exemptions when the issue comes back and bites them. So best the government accepts the legal challenges and gets the matter sorted rather than let it fester - and providing ammunition for those on the left and right.
What do you mean get it sorted? I can't see the campaigners giving up no matter what legal judgements are made.
Kemi has already taken aim at Starmer over this so he can kick it into the long grass of the HC/SC for them to pronounce. IMHO there is likely some sort of fudge available where a small group will have been penalised but the overwhelming majority have not. So there is an opportunity for cost limitation / damage limitation while having the awkward squads having to sit on their hands. The cost of going to the HC/SC is also expensive so call their bluff.
Segueing into other benefits, if you want to reduce the benefits bill you need a wholesale change in legislation as pensions and other payments are hard-wired into government spending aka statutory payments. There are though a number of discretionary payments made at different levels of government where the legal cover is minimal or non-existent. HMG needs to have a go at these - and show they are as serious about 'waste' as the US.
"“I’ve never represented a person of such exemplary character as I have today, who has provided so much of his life to public service and the service of others," he said."
The guy's a violent thug.
"Deputy Chief Magistrate Tan Ikram said this assault is in a higher-culpability category that gives a range of up to 16 weeks in prison."
If this has indeed been made part of the sys instructions, we’re gonna need to know why. manipulating search results seems like a funny way to combat misinformation, no?
"“I’ve never represented a person of such exemplary character as I have today, who has provided so much of his life to public service and the service of others," he said."
The guy's a violent thug.
Who twatted someone who had his hands in his pockets then claimed he felt threatened. What a bellend.
From the Beeb
Deputy Chief Magistrate Tan Ikram said a pre-sentencing report shows the MP is at low risk of re-offending, but if he does re-offend he poses a medium risk to the public.
That means the starting point for the MP's sentence is a prison sentence, he said.
The prosecution said Amesbury did not admit his guilty at the time, while Amesbury's defence lawyer Richadr Derby has asked the magistrate to consider that the MP acted "hugely out of character".
The magistrate has now retired to consider his sentence.
So probably a suspended sentence, given the mitigation.
Any custodial sentence, including if it's suspended, triggers a recall petition. (A prison sentence longer than a year would seem him immediately expelled from being an MP, but that seems unlikely.)
Today is the 500th anniversary of the death of the last valid Yorkist claimant to the throne. Descendant of Geoffrey Chaucer, and Richard Plantagenet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_de_la_Pole
Died fighting for the French, so probably deserved his fate.
The Chaucer link is interesting. Our current king is a direct descendent of Chaucer's sister in law.
"“I’ve never represented a person of such exemplary character as I have today, who has provided so much of his life to public service and the service of others," he said."
The guy's a violent thug.
Who twatted someone who had his hands in his pockets then claimed he felt threatened. What a bellend.
From the Beeb
Deputy Chief Magistrate Tan Ikram said a pre-sentencing report shows the MP is at low risk of re-offending, but if he does re-offend he poses a medium risk to the public.
That means the starting point for the MP's sentence is a prison sentence, he said.
The prosecution said Amesbury did not admit his guilty at the time, while Amesbury's defence lawyer Richadr Derby has asked the magistrate to consider that the MP acted "hugely out of character".
The magistrate has now retired to consider his sentence.
So probably a suspended sentence, given the mitigation.
That's enough to kick off the recall process though, so likely to be a Runcorn by-election at some point this year
Campaigners have threatened the government with legal action unless it reconsiders the decision to refuse compensation to millions of women affected by an increase in the state pension age.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is demanding payouts for 3.6 million women born in the 1950s who were not properly informed of changes first introduced in the 1990s.
It appears to me that WASPI are very much for state pension inequality!
Surely it can't go through as it has an indirect discriminatory effect on gay men (No gay male couple will benefit) which is a protected characteristic ?
They have lost every legal challenge they have made. This is about the timelimit for a judicial review of the decision not to pay these freeloaders "compensation" for their ignorance.
A £75K crowdfunder has been launched.
One on the radio this morning didn't receive a letter and claimed to have been out of the country on the day it "led the news coverage" (i.e. the first announcement of the change). That's the extent of her case. What of due dilligence in planning your retirement? Check in with an advisor? Do some sums? If she had she would have seen a bit of a change.
The story they are trying to tell is that loads of women were about to retire (presumably the next day) when they suddenly discovered that the rules had changed quite a number of years ago, but no-one had told them. Its bullshit.
They can all eff off and when they get there they can do it again.
The thing is the maladministration took place several years after it became law. So it is not even the initial change in pension age PHSO found against. Just a letter should have gone to them around 2 years earlier.
PHSO Simply caved in to a well funded, well connected, middle class lobby who have extremely good publicists as we can see today with the story still gaining prominence.
It remains to be seen whether or not they can get the £75K to crowdfund the judicial review.
The Lib Dems would just give them every penny they demand without saying where it comes from,
Unfunded entitlements and other such policies are the worse form of populism.
On a completely different note. A lady at my rowing club is going back to Japan. To start a family. Because the cost of nursery in London is £1600 per child. In Tokyo, the government is paying for it. The cost of housing there is less as well.
The reason that nursery costs £1600 per child is that the Blair government created regulations to make nursery’s the highest specc’d in terms of staff, of anywhere in the developed world. So childcare divides into
1) people who can afford private schools fees for their toddlers to get looked after. 2) people who have the space to afford an au pair. 3) people who are well off enough, that one person can afford not to work 4) people who use illegal “nurseries” - someone looks after x kids… 5) people who don’t work.
Campaigners have threatened the government with legal action unless it reconsiders the decision to refuse compensation to millions of women affected by an increase in the state pension age.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is demanding payouts for 3.6 million women born in the 1950s who were not properly informed of changes first introduced in the 1990s.
It appears to me that WASPI are very much for state pension inequality!
Surely it can't go through as it has an indirect discriminatory effect on gay men (No gay male couple will benefit) which is a protected characteristic ?
They have lost every legal challenge they have made. This is about the timelimit for a judicial review of the decision not to pay these freeloaders "compensation" for their ignorance.
A £75K crowdfunder has been launched.
One on the radio this morning didn't receive a letter and claimed to have been out of the country on the day it "led the news coverage" (i.e. the first announcement of the change). That's the extent of her case. What of due dilligence in planning your retirement? Check in with an advisor? Do some sums? If she had she would have seen a bit of a change.
The story they are trying to tell is that loads of women were about to retire (presumably the next day) when they suddenly discovered that the rules had changed quite a number of years ago, but no-one had told them. Its bullshit.
They can all eff off and when they get there they can do it again.
The thing is the maladministration took place several years after it became law. So it is not even the initial change in pension age PHSO found against. Just a letter should have gone to them around 2 years earlier.
PHSO Simply caved in to a well funded, well connected, middle class lobby who have extremely good publicists as we can see today with the story still gaining prominence.
It remains to be seen whether or not they can get the £75K to crowdfund the judicial review.
The Lib Dems would just give them every penny they demand without saying where it comes from,
Unfunded entitlements and other such policies are the worse form of populism.
On a completely different note. A lady at my rowing club is going back to Japan. To start a family. Because the cost of nursery in London is £1600 per child. In Tokyo, the government is paying for it. The cost of housing there is less as well.
The reason that nursery costs £1600 per child is that the Blair government created regulations to make nursery’s the highest specc’d in terms of staff, of anywhere in the developed world. So childcare divides into
1) people who can afford private schools fees for their toddlers to get looked after. 2) people who have the space to afford an au pair. 3) people who are well off enough, that one person can afford not to work 4) people who use illegal “nurseries” - someone looks after x kids… 5) people who don’t work.
1-3 covers all the Real People, so why care?
There is no doubt that the current staff:kids ratios are too tight. And yet there will always be some who complain if you try to relax it.
"“I’ve never represented a person of such exemplary character as I have today, who has provided so much of his life to public service and the service of others," he said."
The guy's a violent thug.
Who twatted someone who had his hands in his pockets then claimed he felt threatened. What a bellend.
From the Beeb
Deputy Chief Magistrate Tan Ikram said a pre-sentencing report shows the MP is at low risk of re-offending, but if he does re-offend he poses a medium risk to the public.
That means the starting point for the MP's sentence is a prison sentence, he said.
The prosecution said Amesbury did not admit his guilty at the time, while Amesbury's defence lawyer Richadr Derby has asked the magistrate to consider that the MP acted "hugely out of character".
The magistrate has now retired to consider his sentence.
So probably a suspended sentence, given the mitigation.
That's enough to kick off the recall process though, so likely to be a Runcorn by-election at some point this year
There have been four successful election petitions that thus led to by-elections. Three saw the seat change hands, one didn't. The only one that didn't was the only one where the petition was triggered because the former MP received a custodial sentence. Not that I think this precedent means anything whatsoever!
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
To which the follow up question is why then did you (Bozo the clown) send arms to Ukraine without demanding concessions 3 years ago
Because it was the right thing for us to do?
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
We did, yes, pay off those debts IIRC, but also the US wrote off a huge amount of war debt. The Marshall Plan money was mostly never re-paid.
The US support in the early years of WW2 was only ever transactional. Churchill had to beg for stuff from FDR up to 41. Even planes we'd bought from them. It was only pearl harbour that brought them into the war, and only because they'd been attacked. The US are not better than Ferengi to be honest. The supplies they sent us was in return for ideas,secrets and products from our industries. They even reneged on nuclear secrets after the war. Fuck em I say.
That might be true in the early years of the war, but the Marshall Plan after the war was hugely important and mostly aid, not loans.
A genuine case of enlightened self-interest. With the benefit of hindsight perhaps something similar (funded by the Cold War peace dividend) should have been done with Russia after the collapse of the USSR.
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
Today is the 500th anniversary of the death of the last valid Yorkist claimant to the throne. Descendant of Geoffrey Chaucer, and Richard Plantagenet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_de_la_Pole
Died fighting for the French, so probably deserved his fate.
The Chaucer link is interesting. Our current king is a direct descendent of Chaucer's sister in law.
And Grigor Gysi, leader of the Left in 2013 when the SPD and the Greens spurned the chance to form a red-red-green coalition, is the nephew of Doris Lessing.
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check. A job helping ex offenders with his careers guidance background would be useful
"“I’ve never represented a person of such exemplary character as I have today, who has provided so much of his life to public service and the service of others," he said."
The guy's a violent thug.
Who twatted someone who had his hands in his pockets then claimed he felt threatened. What a bellend.
From the Beeb
Deputy Chief Magistrate Tan Ikram said a pre-sentencing report shows the MP is at low risk of re-offending, but if he does re-offend he poses a medium risk to the public.
That means the starting point for the MP's sentence is a prison sentence, he said.
The prosecution said Amesbury did not admit his guilty at the time, while Amesbury's defence lawyer Richadr Derby has asked the magistrate to consider that the MP acted "hugely out of character".
The magistrate has now retired to consider his sentence.
So probably a suspended sentence, given the mitigation.
That's enough to kick off the recall process though, so likely to be a Runcorn by-election at some point this year
There have been four successful election petitions that thus led to by-elections. Three saw the seat change hands, one didn't. The only one that didn't was the only one where the petition was triggered because the former MP received a custodial sentence. Not that I think this precedent means anything whatsoever!
I think the Peterborough one was because it was a Lab seat and they were in opposition. Brexit Party got close though
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
To which the follow up question is why then did you (Bozo the clown) send arms to Ukraine without demanding concessions 3 years ago
Because it was the right thing for us to do?
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
We did, yes, pay off those debts IIRC, but also the US wrote off a huge amount of war debt. The Marshall Plan money was mostly never re-paid.
The US support in the early years of WW2 was only ever transactional. Churchill had to beg for stuff from FDR up to 41. Even planes we'd bought from them. It was only pearl harbour that brought them into the war, and only because they'd been attacked. The US are not better than Ferengi to be honest. The supplies they sent us was in return for ideas,secrets and products from our industries. They even reneged on nuclear secrets after the war. Fuck em I say.
That might be true in the early years of the war, but the Marshall Plan after the war was hugely important and mostly aid, not loans.
A genuine case of enlightened self-interest. With the benefit of hindsight perhaps something similar (funded by the Cold War peace dividend) should have been done with Russia after the collapse of the USSR.
We spent a fortune helping not just Russia, but all the ex-Soviet states, if they accepted that help.
The myth that we did nothing or little is just that - a myth.
Russia had a massive opportunity from the mid-nineties onwards. It chose to squander that opportunity. That was Putin's choice.
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
To which the follow up question is why then did you (Bozo the clown) send arms to Ukraine without demanding concessions 3 years ago
Because it was the right thing for us to do?
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
We did, yes, pay off those debts IIRC, but also the US wrote off a huge amount of war debt. The Marshall Plan money was mostly never re-paid.
The US support in the early years of WW2 was only ever transactional. Churchill had to beg for stuff from FDR up to 41. Even planes we'd bought from them. It was only pearl harbour that brought them into the war, and only because they'd been attacked. The US are not better than Ferengi to be honest. The supplies they sent us was in return for ideas,secrets and products from our industries. They even reneged on nuclear secrets after the war. Fuck em I say.
That might be true in the early years of the war, but the Marshall Plan after the war was hugely important and mostly aid, not loans.
A genuine case of enlightened self-interest. With the benefit of hindsight perhaps something similar (funded by the Cold War peace dividend) should have been done with Russia after the collapse of the USSR.
We spent a fortune helping not just Russia, but all the ex-Soviet states, if they accepted that help.
The myth that we did nothing or little is just that - a myth.
Russia had a massive opportunity from the mid-nineties onwards. It chose to squander that opportunity. That was Putin's choice.
In fairness help also came with a crack team of economists, Jeff Sachs, Larry Summers etc, whose shock therapy completely messed up Russia and handed it to the oligarchs.
Just come up in my in-box, from the Independent. 'Kyiv and the White House are in the final stages of negotiations in a deal for Ukraine’s rare earth minerals, the Ukrainian deputy prime minister Olha Stefanishyna said.
Nearly all the key details have been finalised and Kyiv is committed to completing the deal “as swiftly as possible”, she said in a post on X - which was deleted several minutes after it went up. Ukraine has offered to sign the deal in Washington, D.C in a meeting between the two presidents, the post added.'
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
To which the follow up question is why then did you (Bozo the clown) send arms to Ukraine without demanding concessions 3 years ago
Because it was the right thing for us to do?
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
We did, yes, pay off those debts IIRC, but also the US wrote off a huge amount of war debt. The Marshall Plan money was mostly never re-paid.
The US support in the early years of WW2 was only ever transactional. Churchill had to beg for stuff from FDR up to 41. Even planes we'd bought from them. It was only pearl harbour that brought them into the war, and only because they'd been attacked. The US are not better than Ferengi to be honest. The supplies they sent us was in return for ideas,secrets and products from our industries. They even reneged on nuclear secrets after the war. Fuck em I say.
That might be true in the early years of the war, but the Marshall Plan after the war was hugely important and mostly aid, not loans.
A genuine case of enlightened self-interest. With the benefit of hindsight perhaps something similar (funded by the Cold War peace dividend) should have been done with Russia after the collapse of the USSR.
We spent a fortune helping not just Russia, but all the ex-Soviet states, if they accepted that help.
The myth that we did nothing or little is just that - a myth.
Russia had a massive opportunity from the mid-nineties onwards. It chose to squander that opportunity. That was Putin's choice.
In fairness help also came with a crack team of economists, Jeff Sachs, Larry Summers etc, whose shock therapy completely messed up Russia and handed it to the oligarchs.
Sachs has been a carbuncle on public life ever since.
Wagenknecht is talking about challenging the result. Overseas voters were reporting problems getting ballots on time, so maybe there's a case.
Also, the SPD general secretary has said that any coalition agreement will be put to SPD members to vote on. The last time the members got a vote was in 2018 on another grand coalition with the CDU/CSU. Yes won 66% to 34%
I'm not sure what Wagenknecht is trying to achieve at this point. I can't imagine there's much chance that an surplus 14000 BSW votes could be found among Germans living abroad when apparently only 230 000 were registered to vote. Even if 10% of them couldn't get ballots on time, a majority of those would have to be frustrated BSW voters for it to make a difference which seems implausible. So probably just wants to play a bit of "the election was stolen".
Same with the allegations, repeated today, that pollsters were understating BSW support to discourage people from voting for them.
Point 2: Yeah a total nuts idea that overseas voters have a high proportion of BSW voters.
Point 3: This is a classic type of conspiracy theory of populist parties. The pollsters are part of "the Establishment" and so they falsify their results in favour of the establishment parties. Four or five private polling companies all managed to gradually and consistently move the BSW from 9% to 4% and Die Linke from 3% to 8%.
Sara Wagenknecht tried to get die Linke to take a pro Russian stance. When she couldn't get her way she split up die Linke and set up a new party, which she modestly named after herself. The party then became a left version of the AfD. Merz managed to rally the left voters at the same time that most of them started to realise just how Putin friendly BSW is and so their popularity halved over 3 or 4 months.
As far as I'm concerned I#ll be happy if we never see BSW and SW in federal German politics again.
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
"He did not get up, and the MP followed him into the road, and punched him again at least five times."
Forgot about this bit. Defo an aggravating factor. Could well be a short custodial sentence...
The Daily Mail seems to have taken it upon themselves to cheer us all up by having a huge in depth article about how we’ll all die in a nuclear attack.
🚨 NEW: Donald Trump’s demand for Ukraine minerals is ‘reasonable’, says Boris Johnson
“America has a history of demanding a price for its support, and from where I stand today, I think that price is reasonable”, the former PM told ITV
To which the follow up question is why then did you (Bozo the clown) send arms to Ukraine without demanding concessions 3 years ago
Because it was the right thing for us to do?
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
We did, yes, pay off those debts IIRC, but also the US wrote off a huge amount of war debt. The Marshall Plan money was mostly never re-paid.
The US support in the early years of WW2 was only ever transactional. Churchill had to beg for stuff from FDR up to 41. Even planes we'd bought from them. It was only pearl harbour that brought them into the war, and only because they'd been attacked. The US are not better than Ferengi to be honest. The supplies they sent us was in return for ideas,secrets and products from our industries. They even reneged on nuclear secrets after the war. Fuck em I say.
That might be true in the early years of the war, but the Marshall Plan after the war was hugely important and mostly aid, not loans.
A genuine case of enlightened self-interest. With the benefit of hindsight perhaps something similar (funded by the Cold War peace dividend) should have been done with Russia after the collapse of the USSR.
We spent a fortune helping not just Russia, but all the ex-Soviet states, if they accepted that help.
The myth that we did nothing or little is just that - a myth.
Russia had a massive opportunity from the mid-nineties onwards. It chose to squander that opportunity. That was Putin's choice.
In fairness help also came with a crack team of economists, Jeff Sachs, Larry Summers etc, whose shock therapy completely messed up Russia and handed it to the oligarchs.
Campaigners have threatened the government with legal action unless it reconsiders the decision to refuse compensation to millions of women affected by an increase in the state pension age.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is demanding payouts for 3.6 million women born in the 1950s who were not properly informed of changes first introduced in the 1990s.
I still maintain we were properly informed. If they didn't pay attention to any of the advertising about it that's a different issue. I was very close to being one of the people affected and I paid attention to the advertising, even when I found I was one year outside the affected age.
Good morning, everybody.
Where the government are giving out money (now or in the future) there are many memory lapses. If you are in receipt of benefits and where there is a Change of Circumstances (CoC), you'll find that beneficial changes are not reported to the DWP while adverse changes are. Then people complain when they have to pay it back.
It's no more than human nature to expect the best outcome and seek exemptions when the issue comes back and bites them. So best the government accepts the legal challenges and gets the matter sorted rather than let it fester - and providing ammunition for those on the left and right.
What do you mean get it sorted? I can't see the campaigners giving up no matter what legal judgements are made.
Kemi has already taken aim at Starmer over this so he can kick it into the long grass of the HC/SC for them to pronounce. IMHO there is likely some sort of fudge available where a small group will have been penalised but the overwhelming majority have not. So there is an opportunity for cost limitation / damage limitation while having the awkward squads having to sit on their hands. The cost of going to the HC/SC is also expensive so call their bluff.
Segueing into other benefits, if you want to reduce the benefits bill you need a wholesale change in legislation as pensions and other payments are hard-wired into government spending aka statutory payments. There are though a number of discretionary payments made at different levels of government where the legal cover is minimal or non-existent. HMG needs to have a go at these - and show they are as serious about 'waste' as the US.
I think WASPI have a reasonable claim for the second major state pensions change in 2011 with an accelerated equalisation at 67, which was badly botched frankly, but not the original 1995 one for equalisation at 65. WASPI cast their complaint way too wide but could win on the narrower point I think. Not sure if it's too late now.
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
He will also be able to get Google to clear up his history once his conviction is spent.
He was only a career adviser and ex Labour worker anyway before his election, hardly a high flying lawyer or doctor so it is not as if he will have been aiming for top professional jobs anyway.
If you look at the facts of the case is it much different to what the late Lord Prescott did when he equally thumped someone who he had a disagreement with?
Campaigners have threatened the government with legal action unless it reconsiders the decision to refuse compensation to millions of women affected by an increase in the state pension age.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is demanding payouts for 3.6 million women born in the 1950s who were not properly informed of changes first introduced in the 1990s.
It appears to me that WASPI are very much for state pension inequality!
Surely it can't go through as it has an indirect discriminatory effect on gay men (No gay male couple will benefit) which is a protected characteristic ?
They have lost every legal challenge they have made. This is about the timelimit for a judicial review of the decision not to pay these freeloaders "compensation" for their ignorance.
A £75K crowdfunder has been launched.
One on the radio this morning didn't receive a letter and claimed to have been out of the country on the day it "led the news coverage" (i.e. the first announcement of the change). That's the extent of her case. What of due dilligence in planning your retirement? Check in with an advisor? Do some sums? If she had she would have seen a bit of a change.
The story they are trying to tell is that loads of women were about to retire (presumably the next day) when they suddenly discovered that the rules had changed quite a number of years ago, but no-one had told them. Its bullshit.
They can all eff off and when they get there they can do it again.
The thing is the maladministration took place several years after it became law. So it is not even the initial change in pension age PHSO found against. Just a letter should have gone to them around 2 years earlier.
PHSO Simply caved in to a well funded, well connected, middle class lobby who have extremely good publicists as we can see today with the story still gaining prominence.
It remains to be seen whether or not they can get the £75K to crowdfund the judicial review.
The Lib Dems would just give them every penny they demand without saying where it comes from,
Unfunded entitlements and other such policies are the worse form of populism.
On a completely different note. A lady at my rowing club is going back to Japan. To start a family. Because the cost of nursery in London is £1600 per child. In Tokyo, the government is paying for it. The cost of housing there is less as well.
The reason that nursery costs £1600 per child is that the Blair government created regulations to make nursery’s the highest specc’d in terms of staff, of anywhere in the developed world. So childcare divides into
1) people who can afford private schools fees for their toddlers to get looked after. 2) people who have the space to afford an au pair. 3) people who are well off enough, that one person can afford not to work 4) people who use illegal “nurseries” - someone looks after x kids… 5) people who don’t work.
1-3 covers all the Real People, so why care?
I think the state should just offer childcare in its own nurseries. Buy up buildings or add extensions to school property that can be used to care for <4 year olds. There would be a one-off cost but thereafter the "building rental" cost would be removed from nursery fees (which will be very significant).
It would also remove the private equity profit margin from the fees.
Finally you align child:carer ratios with other nations.
... Some people will still choose to use options 1-3 because they value the relative benefits, but it means the majority of people have a "default" option that is affordable (or free).
The Daily Mail seems to have taken it upon themselves to cheer us all up by having a huge in depth article about how we’ll all die in a nuclear attack.
I'm writing a header on which country to be bet on for going nuclear, first.
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
He will also be able to get Google to clear up his history once his conviction is spent.
He was only a career adviser and ex Labour worker anyway before his election, hardly a high flying lawyer or doctor so it is not as if he will have been aiming for top professional jobs anyway.
If you look at the facts of the case is it much different to what the late Lord Prescott did when he equally thumped someone who insulted him?
Prescott was attacked first, so that was clearly self defence. He didn't go and thump the bloke 5 times on the floor either.
The Daily Mail seems to have taken it upon themselves to cheer us all up by having a huge in depth article about how we’ll all die in a nuclear attack.
I'm writing a header on which country to be bet on for going nuclear, first.
Ukraine must bitterly bitterly regret being persuaded to give up their soviet ones.
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
He will also be able to get Google to clear up his history once his conviction is spent.
He was only a career adviser and ex Labour worker anyway before his election, hardly a high flying lawyer or doctor so it is not as if he will have been aiming for top professional jobs anyway.
If you look at the facts of the case is it much different to what the late Lord Prescott did when he equally thumped someone who insulted him?
Prescott was attacked first, so that was clearly self defence. He didn't go and thump the bloke 5 times on the floor either.
Perhaps Amesbury should retrain as a boxer? Lord Prescott used to be an amateur boxer too of course
The other question is how big will the Europeans' aid package be for Ukraine today? Will it be enough to see them through another 6 months? If so, Trump will have lost such control as he has and Russia will start to panic as their economic crisis intensifies.
Ideally, we are looking for something close to $20bn with roughly 10% of that from us.
The traitorous scum Orbán is going to block that . They refuse to approve any more arms sales .
Its interesting how effective Hungary, a small recipient country, is in causing disruption in the EU.
Compared to how ineffective the UK, a large contributor country, was in EU negotiations.
Perhaps if the UK leaders had done a little more vetoing and a little less posturing and surrendering then the UK would still be in the EU.
EU needs to get its act together and kick out Hungary. Time for countries to pick a side.
They can’t . There’s no actual mechanism to kick them out . You can suspend their voting rights in the EP and put in other measures but need unanimous agreement from the remaining members and Fico another Putin puppet will block those .
Europe needs to start replacing the carrots with sticks. If some countries want to cause difficulties that are contrary to the security of the whole group, then a way can be found to politely remind them that if they’d like to be outside the club at the mercy of Russia and without access to the benefits, the door is over there.
Europe really has to start remaking itself as a security-first collective. I think Merz, and perhaps increasingly Macron, are starting to get this.
It's also not impossible that such a security collective overlaps but is distinct from the EU. And indeed NATO. That would get around the vetos of the semi-detached (or worse) members, and allow the participation of non EU members (ie the UK and Norway).
QMV is possible in the Council of the EU on Common Foreign and Security Policy - Article 31 of Lisbon. So there is no veto on such matters (unless somebody important like France objects). Orban didn't vote in favour of EU association for Ukraine but it still passed.
You've misread it.
If a member of the Council says they will oppose a decision, a vote will not take place. A member can abstain and "check out" on a matter; that means it will not be bound by any decision made by the rest but it also agrees it will not obstruct the Union in pursuing it.
The Council can only decide to act by QMV on a matter if the European Council first unanimously agrees.
In any event, EU structures are hardly conducive to rapid decision making, which is probably what's required here, if it's to make any contribution to resolving our current difficulties.
Any European defence alliance will have to be taken outside of EU structures.
Tissues and hugs for the federalists.
The likely outcome to all this is More Europe, not less.
It's more European defence cooperation. Not for your sordid dream.
The Daily Mail seems to have taken it upon themselves to cheer us all up by having a huge in depth article about how we’ll all die in a nuclear attack.
The Daily Mail seems to have taken it upon themselves to cheer us all up by having a huge in depth article about how we’ll all die in a nuclear attack.
I'm writing a header on which country to be bet on for going nuclear, first.
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
He will also be able to get Google to clear up his history once his conviction is spent.
He was only a career adviser and ex Labour worker anyway before his election, hardly a high flying lawyer or doctor so it is not as if he will have been aiming for top professional jobs anyway.
If you look at the facts of the case is it much different to what the late Lord Prescott did when he equally thumped someone who he had a disagreement with?
IIRC, John Prescott only (had to) hit the chap once.
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
Which in a way is sad. He deserves a punishment but not lifelong unemployment.
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
He will also be able to get Google to clear up his history once his conviction is spent.
He was only a career adviser and ex Labour worker anyway before his election, hardly a high flying lawyer or doctor so it is not as if he will have been aiming for top professional jobs anyway.
If you look at the facts of the case is it much different to what the late Lord Prescott did when he equally thumped someone who insulted him?
Prescott was attacked first, so that was clearly self defence. He didn't go and thump the bloke 5 times on the floor either.
He was attacked first and without warning. No way of knowing what was going on, so frankly I don't think Prescott did much wrong. Good punch too.
Campaigners have threatened the government with legal action unless it reconsiders the decision to refuse compensation to millions of women affected by an increase in the state pension age.
The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is demanding payouts for 3.6 million women born in the 1950s who were not properly informed of changes first introduced in the 1990s.
It appears to me that WASPI are very much for state pension inequality!
Surely it can't go through as it has an indirect discriminatory effect on gay men (No gay male couple will benefit) which is a protected characteristic ?
They have lost every legal challenge they have made. This is about the timelimit for a judicial review of the decision not to pay these freeloaders "compensation" for their ignorance.
A £75K crowdfunder has been launched.
One on the radio this morning didn't receive a letter and claimed to have been out of the country on the day it "led the news coverage" (i.e. the first announcement of the change). That's the extent of her case. What of due dilligence in planning your retirement? Check in with an advisor? Do some sums? If she had she would have seen a bit of a change.
The story they are trying to tell is that loads of women were about to retire (presumably the next day) when they suddenly discovered that the rules had changed quite a number of years ago, but no-one had told them. Its bullshit.
They can all eff off and when they get there they can do it again.
The thing is the maladministration took place several years after it became law. So it is not even the initial change in pension age PHSO found against. Just a letter should have gone to them around 2 years earlier.
PHSO Simply caved in to a well funded, well connected, middle class lobby who have extremely good publicists as we can see today with the story still gaining prominence.
It remains to be seen whether or not they can get the £75K to crowdfund the judicial review.
The Lib Dems would just give them every penny they demand without saying where it comes from,
Unfunded entitlements and other such policies are the worse form of populism.
On a completely different note. A lady at my rowing club is going back to Japan. To start a family. Because the cost of nursery in London is £1600 per child. In Tokyo, the government is paying for it. The cost of housing there is less as well.
The reason that nursery costs £1600 per child is that the Blair government created regulations to make nursery’s the highest specc’d in terms of staff, of anywhere in the developed world. So childcare divides into
1) people who can afford private schools fees for their toddlers to get looked after. 2) people who have the space to afford an au pair. 3) people who are well off enough, that one person can afford not to work 4) people who use illegal “nurseries” - someone looks after x kids… 5) people who don’t work.
1-3 covers all the Real People, so why care?
I think the state should just offer childcare in its own nurseries. Buy up buildings or add extensions to school property that can be used to care for ~4 year olds. There would be a one-off cost but thereafter the "building rental" cost would be removed from nursery fees (which will be very significant).
It would also remove the private equity profit margin from the fees.
Finally you align child:carer ratios with other nations.
... Some people will still choose to use options 1-3 because they value the relative benefits, but it means the majority of people have a "default" option that is affordable (or free).
Under current law, state nurseries (which exist, to a certain degree) have to follow exactly the same rules on staffing.
The idea that this will be substantially cheaper is simply incorrect. Acquiring/building facilities will create borrowing which will take decades to pay off.
The Daily Mail seems to have taken it upon themselves to cheer us all up by having a huge in depth article about how we’ll all die in a nuclear attack.
Which would equally met by British and French nukes on Moscow, Putin isn't that stupid
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
Which in a way is sad. He deserves a punishment but not lifelong unemployment.
He also sounds like the type of MP who would connect more with many of the alienated white working class than the current lot.
Reform seems to welcome ex offenders as candidates and MPs after all
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
Which in a way is sad. He deserves a punishment but not lifelong unemployment.
He won't have that but the next few years will be rough whether he gets a short custodial sentence or suspended. Most criminals don't worry about suspended sentences but if you're a "normal person" they have horrendous consequences. Insurances, remortgaging - anything that involves a potential line of credit becomes far more difficult..
The Daily Mail seems to have taken it upon themselves to cheer us all up by having a huge in depth article about how we’ll all die in a nuclear attack.
I'm writing a header on which country to be bet on for going nuclear, first.
I hope you don't mean launching them at an adversary ?
The other question is how big will the Europeans' aid package be for Ukraine today? Will it be enough to see them through another 6 months? If so, Trump will have lost such control as he has and Russia will start to panic as their economic crisis intensifies.
Ideally, we are looking for something close to $20bn with roughly 10% of that from us.
The traitorous scum Orbán is going to block that . They refuse to approve any more arms sales .
Its interesting how effective Hungary, a small recipient country, is in causing disruption in the EU.
Compared to how ineffective the UK, a large contributor country, was in EU negotiations.
Perhaps if the UK leaders had done a little more vetoing and a little less posturing and surrendering then the UK would still be in the EU.
EU needs to get its act together and kick out Hungary. Time for countries to pick a side.
They can’t . There’s no actual mechanism to kick them out . You can suspend their voting rights in the EP and put in other measures but need unanimous agreement from the remaining members and Fico another Putin puppet will block those .
Europe needs to start replacing the carrots with sticks. If some countries want to cause difficulties that are contrary to the security of the whole group, then a way can be found to politely remind them that if they’d like to be outside the club at the mercy of Russia and without access to the benefits, the door is over there.
Europe really has to start remaking itself as a security-first collective. I think Merz, and perhaps increasingly Macron, are starting to get this.
It's also not impossible that such a security collective overlaps but is distinct from the EU. And indeed NATO. That would get around the vetos of the semi-detached (or worse) members, and allow the participation of non EU members (ie the UK and Norway).
QMV is possible in the Council of the EU on Common Foreign and Security Policy - Article 31 of Lisbon. So there is no veto on such matters (unless somebody important like France objects). Orban didn't vote in favour of EU association for Ukraine but it still passed.
You've misread it.
If a member of the Council says they will oppose a decision, a vote will not take place. A member can abstain and "check out" on a matter; that means it will not be bound by any decision made by the rest but it also agrees it will not obstruct the Union in pursuing it.
The Council can only decide to act by QMV on a matter if the European Council first unanimously agrees.
In any event, EU structures are hardly conducive to rapid decision making, which is probably what's required here, if it's to make any contribution to resolving our current difficulties.
Any European defence alliance will have to be taken outside of EU structures.
Tissues and hugs for the federalists.
The likely outcome to all this is More Europe, not less.
It's more European defence cooperation. Not for your sordid dream.
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
Which in a way is sad. He deserves a punishment but not lifelong unemployment.
He won't have that but the next few years will be rough whether he gets a short custodial sentence or suspended. Most criminals don't worry about suspended sentences but if you're a "normal person" they have horrendous consequences. Insurances, remortgaging - anything that involves a potential line of credit becomes far more difficult..
Today is the 500th anniversary of the death of the last valid Yorkist claimant to the throne. Descendant of Geoffrey Chaucer, and Richard Plantagenet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_de_la_Pole
Died fighting for the French, so probably deserved his fate.
The Chaucer link is interesting. Our current king is a direct descendent of Chaucer's sister in law.
And Grigor Gysi, leader of the Left in 2013 when the SPD and the Greens spurned the chance to form a red-red-green coalition, is the nephew of Doris Lessing.
The other question is how big will the Europeans' aid package be for Ukraine today? Will it be enough to see them through another 6 months? If so, Trump will have lost such control as he has and Russia will start to panic as their economic crisis intensifies.
Ideally, we are looking for something close to $20bn with roughly 10% of that from us.
The traitorous scum Orbán is going to block that . They refuse to approve any more arms sales .
Its interesting how effective Hungary, a small recipient country, is in causing disruption in the EU.
Compared to how ineffective the UK, a large contributor country, was in EU negotiations.
Perhaps if the UK leaders had done a little more vetoing and a little less posturing and surrendering then the UK would still be in the EU.
EU needs to get its act together and kick out Hungary. Time for countries to pick a side.
They can’t . There’s no actual mechanism to kick them out . You can suspend their voting rights in the EP and put in other measures but need unanimous agreement from the remaining members and Fico another Putin puppet will block those .
Europe needs to start replacing the carrots with sticks. If some countries want to cause difficulties that are contrary to the security of the whole group, then a way can be found to politely remind them that if they’d like to be outside the club at the mercy of Russia and without access to the benefits, the door is over there.
Europe really has to start remaking itself as a security-first collective. I think Merz, and perhaps increasingly Macron, are starting to get this.
It's also not impossible that such a security collective overlaps but is distinct from the EU. And indeed NATO. That would get around the vetos of the semi-detached (or worse) members, and allow the participation of non EU members (ie the UK and Norway).
QMV is possible in the Council of the EU on Common Foreign and Security Policy - Article 31 of Lisbon. So there is no veto on such matters (unless somebody important like France objects). Orban didn't vote in favour of EU association for Ukraine but it still passed.
You've misread it.
If a member of the Council says they will oppose a decision, a vote will not take place. A member can abstain and "check out" on a matter; that means it will not be bound by any decision made by the rest but it also agrees it will not obstruct the Union in pursuing it.
The Council can only decide to act by QMV on a matter if the European Council first unanimously agrees.
In any event, EU structures are hardly conducive to rapid decision making, which is probably what's required here, if it's to make any contribution to resolving our current difficulties.
Any European defence alliance will have to be taken outside of EU structures.
Tissues and hugs for the federalists.
The likely outcome to all this is More Europe, not less.
It's more European defence cooperation. Not for your sordid dream.
No sordid dream here, just the reality. The increased security co-operation will inevitably create incentives to tie European nations closer together. At the same time, I think there is likely to be a significant shift in how Europe deals with border policy and external threats. So we will get a different Europe, perhaps a multi-speed Europe, perhaps not the federalist dream but not the dream of eurosceptics either. But certainly more Europe than we had before.
The Daily Mail seems to have taken it upon themselves to cheer us all up by having a huge in depth article about how we’ll all die in a nuclear attack.
I'm writing a header on which country to be bet on for going nuclear, first.
I hope you don't mean launching them at an adversary ?
I’m always an advocate of Global Thermonuclear War.
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
Which in a way is sad. He deserves a punishment but not lifelong unemployment.
He won't have that but the next few years will be rough whether he gets a short custodial sentence or suspended. Most criminals don't worry about suspended sentences but if you're a "normal person" they have horrendous consequences. Insurances, remortgaging - anything that involves a potential line of credit becomes far more difficult..
You don't have to disclose a conviction even for insurance or remortgaging once spent
I think a suspended sentence is OK here. A recall petition will swiftly pass, and unlike most offenders his professional life is completely ruined (At least for the next five years or so) by such a sentence. He'll never be able to pass an enhanced DBS check again. His personal life will no doubt have suffered. He's not going to have made the connections a cabinet minister would have, and though almost 8 yrs of accrued MPs pension isn't that bad a deal for time served in the house he might be struggling to pay the mortgage given his inevitable record. His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
His conviction will likely be spent in a year or 2 and unless he wants to work with children or vulnerable adults is unlikely ever to need an enhanced DBS check
It's a very public conviction though, any potential employer will be able to work out exactly who he and what he's done in their due diligence for future employment. Careers guidance (His previous line of work) also trends toward younger people where DBS checks may well be needed. He's going to find it tough.
He will also be able to get Google to clear up his history once his conviction is spent.
He was only a career adviser and ex Labour worker anyway before his election, hardly a high flying lawyer or doctor so it is not as if he will have been aiming for top professional jobs anyway.
If you look at the facts of the case is it much different to what the late Lord Prescott did when he equally thumped someone who he had a disagreement with?
The Daily Mail seems to have taken it upon themselves to cheer us all up by having a huge in depth article about how we’ll all die in a nuclear attack.
Amesbury gets 10 week jail sentence, so as it is less than a year he can still technically remain an MP for now but a recall petition is likely as he received a custodial sentence
Comments
Streeting needs to be kept focused on health and either prove himself or not. Too early to shift him.
https://snyder.substack.com/p/recoup-the-costs
The premise of American foreign policy to Ukraine, today, is one of grievance. As the American president, vice-president, and national security advisor constantly repeat, Ukraine, the victim of a large-scale and criminal Russian invasion, must "recoup the costs" to the US taxpayer for aid received under the Biden administration.
It is worth patiently considering this proposition. It reveals little about Ukraine, but much about America in February 2025.
1. The American demand is of an extraordinary scale. In Kyiv and again in Munich, the Americans proposed that Ukraine concede half of the profits from its mineral rights in perpetuity and from other national resources and from its ports in perpetuity with a lien on everything important -- in exchange for essentially nothing. This is not really a monetary proposition, let alone a "deal," but rather the demand that Ukraine become a permanent American colony. It amounts to blackmail enabled by ongoing Russian invasion. In effect, the United States is telling Ukraine to concede its resources to the United States, under the threat that American aid will be otherwise withdrawn, and those resources will be taken by Russia...
...5. The price that the Americans use to characterize what is owed them -- $500 billion -- is both too low and too high. It is far less than the value of the perpetual claim to Ukrainian resources that they are making right now. And it is far more than the United States has given Ukraine. The US has committed, over three years, about $66 billion in humanitarian aid and about $119 billion in military aid. That second figure has to be examined a bit critically. Most of that money stayed in the United States, financing American factories in America and paying American workers. The rest of it was usually not money at all, but weapons, to which were assigned a dollar amount for accounting purposes. Most of the weapons that were actually sent to Ukraine were obsolescing and would never have been used by the United States in a conflict...
As a matter of realpolitik, the US is providing some resources that, currently at least, Europe cannot. That is what enables such attempted extortion.
Johnson might call that "reasonable", but it is not, except by the logic of the mafia.
Evidently, this isn't going to be a one off problem; we should plan accordingly.
But he is correct that historically US "support" has always come with strings attached. Did we ever actually fully pay off the debts we owed them from WW1 and WW2?
He needs somebody to counteract his weakness of a being a dull twat as CoE. Somebody with a bit of rizz, which RR clearly isn't. They don't have to know much about spreadsheet wanker economics stuff beyond being able to sell the strategy and policies. The Treasury must be rammed full of despicable little Rishi type nerds who can do all that boring chutney. I have no idea who could be which one of the Labour drones could be the Rylan they need.
And Trump would love the fact he is seen Charlie at home
Boris Johnson: “We are very close to getting this minerals agreement signed between the United States and Ukraine."
Volodymyr Zelenskyy: “I’m not signing something that 10 generations of Ukrainians are going to pay later.”
Who to believe? 🤷♂️
https://x.com/KevinASchofield/status/1893983356146135167
I can't see the campaigners giving up no matter what legal judgements are made.
The Lord Mayor is elected by the liverymen of the guilds, although they have to be one of the Aldermen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_de_la_Pole
Died fighting for the French, so probably deserved his fate.
If a member of the Council says they will oppose a decision, a vote will not take place. A member can abstain and "check out" on a matter; that means it will not be bound by any decision made by the rest but it also agrees it will not obstruct the Union in pursuing it.
The Council can only decide to act by QMV on a matter if the European Council first unanimously agrees.
The story they are trying to tell is that loads of women were about to retire (presumably the next day) when they suddenly discovered that the rules had changed quite a number of years ago, but no-one had told them. Its bullshit.
They can all eff off and when they get there they can do it again.
The WWII was extremely generous, in many ways - use it or chuck the stuff in the sea*. If you want to keep it, 10% of face value and here’s a loan at below market interest rates to buy it.
*The reason for the scrap request was that after WWI, war surplus collapsed industries that were already downsizing from the war. There was a reasonable fear that might happen again.
People will vote on the usual issues like NHS and education, And the major issue, as always, will be the economy.
Can any PB users confirm this ?
results replicated 😬
any comment, @grok ?
If this has indeed been made part of the sys instructions, we’re gonna need to know why. manipulating search results seems like a funny way to combat misinformation, no?
Community could use some clarity on this.
https://x.com/elder_plinius/status/1893737449718681797
The only politicians supporting these women are the Lib Dems and the SNP for cynical, opportunistic reasons.
The Lib Dems, you would think, would learn their lesson from Tuition fees. They haven't.
I'm not sure what Wagenknecht is trying to achieve at this point. I can't imagine there's much chance that an surplus 14000 BSW votes could be found among Germans living abroad when apparently only 230 000 were registered to vote. Even if 10% of them couldn't get ballots on time, a majority of those would have to be frustrated BSW voters for it to make a difference which seems implausible. So probably just wants to play a bit of "the election was stolen".
Same with the allegations, repeated today, that pollsters were understating BSW support to discourage people from voting for them.
Tissues and hugs for the federalists.
The supplies they sent us was in return for ideas,secrets and products from our industries. They even reneged on nuclear secrets after the war. Fuck em I say.
https://www.theverge.com/news/618109/grok-blocked-elon-musk-trump-misinformation
But it will have an outsized impact because the government will have to sell tax rises/spending cuts to meet increased defence spending/procurement and security infrastructure in the coming years. Those choices are going to be critical for the government’s fortunes and another reason why I think they really need to be put in the hands of a very strong communicator. Starmer can do the sober, serious stuff. He needs someone who can sell the end goal and the journey.
The guy's a violent thug.
PHSO Simply caved in to a well funded, well connected, middle class lobby who have extremely good publicists as we can see today with the story still gaining prominence.
It remains to be seen whether or not they can get the £75K to crowdfund the judicial review.
The Lib Dems would just give them every penny they demand without saying where it comes from,
Jack Posobiec told CPAC that Trump is not violating the Constitution because "Trump is the living embodiment of the American Constitution."
https://x.com/RightWingWatch/status/1893035098540241059
From the Beeb
Deputy Chief Magistrate Tan Ikram said a pre-sentencing report shows the MP is at low risk of re-offending, but if he does re-offend he poses a medium risk to the public.
That means the starting point for the MP's sentence is a prison sentence, he said.
The prosecution said Amesbury did not admit his guilty at the time, while Amesbury's defence lawyer Richadr Derby has asked the magistrate to consider that the MP acted "hugely out of character".
The magistrate has now retired to consider his sentence.
So probably a suspended sentence, given the mitigation.
Labour deserve the discomfort they got from this given their rapid reverse ferret.
Segueing into other benefits, if you want to reduce the benefits bill you need a wholesale change in legislation as pensions and other payments are hard-wired into government spending aka statutory payments. There are though a number of discretionary payments made at different levels of government where the legal cover is minimal or non-existent. HMG needs to have a go at these - and show they are as serious about 'waste' as the US.
On a completely different note. A lady at my rowing club is going back to Japan. To start a family. Because the cost of nursery in London is £1600 per child. In Tokyo, the government is paying for it. The cost of housing there is less as well.
The reason that nursery costs £1600 per child is that the Blair government created regulations to make nursery’s the highest specc’d in terms of staff, of anywhere in the developed world. So childcare divides into
1) people who can afford private schools fees for their toddlers to get looked after.
2) people who have the space to afford an au pair.
3) people who are well off enough, that one person can afford not to work
4) people who use illegal “nurseries” - someone looks after x kids…
5) people who don’t work.
1-3 covers all the Real People, so why care?
His previous job of careers guidance might well come in handy with advice for his future self.
(On the Isle on Man, rather than in the UK.)
The myth that we did nothing or little is just that - a myth.
Russia had a massive opportunity from the mid-nineties onwards. It chose to squander that opportunity. That was Putin's choice.
'Kyiv and the White House are in the final stages of negotiations in a deal for Ukraine’s rare earth minerals, the Ukrainian deputy prime minister Olha Stefanishyna said.
Nearly all the key details have been finalised and Kyiv is committed to completing the deal “as swiftly as possible”, she said in a post on X - which was deleted several minutes after it went up. Ukraine has offered to sign the deal in Washington, D.C in a meeting between the two presidents, the post added.'
Point 3: This is a classic type of conspiracy theory of populist parties. The pollsters are part of "the Establishment" and so they falsify their results in favour of the establishment parties. Four or five private polling companies all managed to gradually and consistently move the BSW from 9% to 4% and Die Linke from 3% to 8%.
Sara Wagenknecht tried to get die Linke to take a pro Russian stance. When she couldn't get her way she split up die Linke and set up a new party, which she modestly named after herself. The party then became a left version of the AfD. Merz managed to rally the left voters at the same time that most of them started to realise just how Putin friendly BSW is and so their popularity halved over 3 or 4 months.
As far as I'm concerned I#ll be happy if we never see BSW and SW in federal German politics again.
Forgot about this bit. Defo an aggravating factor. Could well be a short custodial sentence...
Anyway we will see in a couple of minutes.
He was only a career adviser and ex Labour worker anyway before his election, hardly a high flying lawyer or doctor so it is not as if he will have been aiming for top professional jobs anyway.
If you look at the facts of the case is it much different to what the late Lord Prescott did when he equally thumped someone who he had a disagreement with?
It would also remove the private equity profit margin from the fees.
Finally you align child:carer ratios with other nations.
... Some people will still choose to use options 1-3 because they value the relative benefits, but it means the majority of people have a "default" option that is affordable (or free).
We love thinking we're doomed.
The idea that this will be substantially cheaper is simply incorrect. Acquiring/building facilities will create borrowing which will take decades to pay off.
The issues are
1) Child/carer ratios.
2) The state pays or not.
Reform seems to welcome ex offenders as candidates and MPs after all
One has popped up in my town in recent weeks and I've never seen a single person in it.
If they're not legit, then why don't the authorities do something about it?
https://unlock.org.uk/advice/insurance-convictions-simple-guide/
https://unlock.org.uk/advice/owning-home/#:~:text=If your conviction is spent,to offer you a mortgage.