I wouldn't like to be one of the shipyard engineers.
North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un has condemned a "serious accident" during the launch of a new warship on Thursday, calling it a "criminal act" that could not be tolerated. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c39xzn970pyo
What horrible way will Kim dream up to terminate them I wonder? Pour encourages les autres a great naval tradition of course.
I'm just curious about the meaning of "unscientific empiricism",
..After watching the whole course of the accident, Kim said, "It was a serious accident and criminal act caused by absolute carelessness, irresponsibility and unscientific empiricism which is out of the bounds of possibility and could not be tolerated," according to the KCNA...,/I>
Very strong vibe of the sort of pseudo intellectual bollocks Stalin & co came up with to justify their depradations.
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive, that needs continuation of the same trend. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
Reading through the Angela Rayner suggestion that are supposed to represent a shattering of the Government into pieces, I'm surprised at how modest they are - mainly closing a few loopholes and a few minor changes, to raise ~£4bn per annum.
If this is significant, rather than just a normal process of debate within Cabinet Governmemt, then they do have a problem.
Yes, Raynergate is a damp squib. Largely technical adjustments that the Chancellor was probably considering anyway.
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Starmer is done, he's just being kept in place until Ange gets her hair did ready for the coronation
Forget about her hair, what she needs is a better seat or she'll spend the next four years fighting a rearguard action to keep her existing one.
Unless one of the Liverpool or Central Manchester seats is going or she moves into the arse end of London there are no safer seats for Labour, they are all under threat
Given she's on manuvers, if Starmer had friends we'd get constituency polling showing just how weak her position it.
Was the leak from Rayner though? Is she close to the Telegraph?
Oh, and while we aren't on the subject, how at PMQs did Kemi contrive to allude to the tax memo but not ask Starmer directly? We seem to have a whole generation of politicians, on all sides of the House, who know damn all about politics.
On the subject of PMQs, it was the same old story. Oral slips from Starmer. Kemi asking the wrong questions badly. Starmer not answering by batting away some peripheral matter Kemi raised in her meandering build-up. Kemi not noticing Starmer's WFA concession until halfway through, when presumably someone whispered in her ear.
Kemi probably found out about it via twitter which seems to be her main window on the world.
Both services and composite PMI came in ahead of expectations.
Services in particular which is crucial to GDP came in at 50.2 up from 48.5.
Manufacturing though still struggling .
The service sector does feel fairly buoyant at the moment, certainly from inside. Somewhat at odds with manufacturing, the Eurozone, the USA and most of Asia.
How long this can last who knows. But as I keep saying, there is enough private money to sustain a UK-only period of growth if only our companies and consumers can start spending their Covid savings.
We should all take a moment to reflect and laugh at Manchester United.
As a bitter Arsenal fan I’m still traumatised from last night ! Typical Utd couldn’t fluke another win !
For the Europa Paint Pot? Give over.
The FA Vase of Euro trophies
No, that’s the UEFA Conference League which the Spanners won in 2023.
Well, at least we won something!
Come back to me when you’ve won everything like we have in the last few years.
Plus Liverpool have won more European Cups/Champions League than Arsenal, City, Villa, Tottenham, Newcastle, Everton, West Ham, and Manchester United combined.
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Director of population statistics at the ONS Mary Gregory says: "Our provisional estimates show net migration has almost halved compared with the previous year, driven by falling numbers of people coming to work and study, particularly student dependants.
"There has also been an increase in emigration over the 12 months to December 2024, especially people leaving who originally came on study visas once pandemic travel restrictions to the UK were eased."
Hilarious that they're trying to spin this as a positive.
There would certainly be plenty spinning it as a negative if it went up.
I find this one interesting, particularly in view of the line being taken by the media, politicians and BTL commentators, and the huge Boris wave of immigrants:
Britons are more likely to describe themselves as anti-immigration (41%) than pro-immigration (28%)
Only 41% are anti-immigration, yet that is the pool that Starmer chose to fish in with his characteristically tin-earred speech.
Bit too simplistic I think. I would describe myself as “pro-immigration” but that doesn’t mean I don’t think that there needs to be some serious limits in the short to medium term.
Ditto, but that wasn't what Starmer was saying in his "island of strangers" speech, referring to the "incalculable damage" caused by immigration.
It would have been far better to talk about the positives of immigration while reducing the numbers.
The state has been talking almost exclusively about the positives of immigration for years. That is why we have Reform leading in the polls. "Shut up plebs you bunch of racists" tends not to win those people round.
(This is not a new thing: I remember a GCSE geography question in 1991: "describe two benefits of immigration" - even at 16 this struck me as curiously unbalanced.)
Actually, I think it's a lot simpler than that:
The Conservative Party, which has historically run on a platform of controlling immigration, completely shit the bed with the Boriswave. In the last year, we've had more net immigration from outside the EU than we have had from the EU in the last decade*. That's the scale of the Conservative failure.
They then elected a charisma free undergraduate as Leader.
* Of course, this is helped by the fact we've had negative EU migration for the last few years
The debate is whether Johnson knew what he was doing (OK, I know that is a stretch) or whether it was just incompetence. And, if the former, whether he was simply relaxed about it, all the right-wing Brexit stuff being merely part of his act, or were the Tories in a panic at the gaps that might appear if all the EU workers suddenly left?
Pumping the NHS full of money (as promised on a bus) led to hundreds of thousands of more NHS workers, much of these had to be immigrants.
Interestingly the number of EU NHS workers also increased after leaving the EU:
Similarly with care workers, greater demand for services required greater need for immigrant workers. And given the low wages paid in the sector immigrant workers from the third world.
The area where the last government was most at fault over was the number of dependents of immigrant workers, especially dependents of low paid workers.
My current carer is Polish, although she's been here several years and is 'established'. She replaced a Brit, and had a trainee with her the other day who, while obviously from an ethnic minority, sounded as though she was second, or even third, generation here.
I wouldn't like to be one of the shipyard engineers.
North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un has condemned a "serious accident" during the launch of a new warship on Thursday, calling it a "criminal act" that could not be tolerated. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c39xzn970pyo
What horrible way will Kim dream up to terminate them I wonder? Pour encourages les autres a great naval tradition of course.
I'm just curious about the meaning of "unscientific empiricism",
..After watching the whole course of the accident, Kim said, "It was a serious accident and criminal act caused by absolute carelessness, irresponsibility and unscientific empiricism which is out of the bounds of possibility and could not be tolerated," according to the KCNA...,/I>
Scientific empiricism is a thing, isn't it? So unscientific empiricism could be the opposite, or at least outside it. We need Leon, who as he keeps reminding us has a philosophy degree.
Or maybe Kim just needed a third item for his list. Three-item lists are a popular rhetorical device. We need Leon, who as he keeps reminding us is the Gazette's top author.
I find this one interesting, particularly in view of the line being taken by the media, politicians and BTL commentators, and the huge Boris wave of immigrants:
Britons are more likely to describe themselves as anti-immigration (41%) than pro-immigration (28%)
Only 41% are anti-immigration, yet that is the pool that Starmer chose to fish in with his characteristically tin-earred speech.
Bit too simplistic I think. I would describe myself as “pro-immigration” but that doesn’t mean I don’t think that there needs to be some serious limits in the short to medium term.
Ditto, but that wasn't what Starmer was saying in his "island of strangers" speech, referring to the "incalculable damage" caused by immigration.
It would have been far better to talk about the positives of immigration while reducing the numbers.
The state has been talking almost exclusively about the positives of immigration for years. That is why we have Reform leading in the polls. "Shut up plebs you bunch of racists" tends not to win those people round.
(This is not a new thing: I remember a GCSE geography question in 1991: "describe two benefits of immigration" - even at 16 this struck me as curiously unbalanced.)
Actually, I think it's a lot simpler than that:
The Conservative Party, which has historically run on a platform of controlling immigration, completely shit the bed with the Boriswave. In the last year, we've had more net immigration from outside the EU than we have had from the EU in the last decade*. That's the scale of the Conservative failure.
They then elected a charisma free undergraduate as Leader.
* Of course, this is helped by the fact we've had negative EU migration for the last few years
The debate is whether Johnson knew what he was doing (OK, I know that is a stretch) or whether it was just incompetence. And, if the former, whether he was simply relaxed about it, all the right-wing Brexit stuff being merely part of his act, or were the Tories in a panic at the gaps that might appear if all the EU workers suddenly left?
Not sure why its a debate - the answer is pretty clear.
The plan was to boost overseas student numbers to 500k, this was a strategy defined in 2019. The, at the time, consensus view, especially in the Conservative party, but broadly establishment including Lab and LD, was to offer generous and open schemes to Ukrainians and Hong Kongers.
Between them they were the vast majority of the Boris wave. There was incompetence in the worker paths but the big three were policy choices, that each make sense on their own, but don't if you aren't willing to build houses.
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Thanks to Sunak's changes
The Tories really can’t take credit for halving migration they quadrupled in the first place
Nor can Labour say Hey look it’s “only” 440,000 - that’s still a horrendously high figure by historical standards
By 2028 - judging by those recent polls of UK attitudes - Labour need it under 100k. People have simply had enough and want it ALL to stop
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Thanks to Sunak's changes
Good luck with spinning that, you'll need it. Not even saying it is particularly wrong, but political credit and blame doesn't work like that.
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Thanks to Sunak's changes
The Tories really can’t take credit for halving migration they quadrupled in the first place
Nor can Labour say Hey look it’s “only” 440,000 - that’s still a horrendously high figure by historical standards
By 2028 - judging by those recent polls of UK attitudes - Labour need it under 100k. People have simply had enough and want it ALL to stop
That’s going to be really hard
I think the boat people angle are more damaging for a government than the legal migration even though they are a small proportion of the total. Sunak promised to stop the boats, didn't, got hammered, Starmer, if he doesn't smash the gangs, I think even lets say they get it down to 200-250k, if there are still 30k people coming via small boats, will be on dicey ground over immigration.
Reading through the Angela Rayner suggestion that are supposed to represent a shattering of the Government into pieces, I'm surprised at how modest they are - mainly closing a few loopholes and a few minor changes, to raise ~£4bn per annum.
If this is significant, rather than just a normal process of debate within Cabinet Governmemt, then they do have a problem.
Is this one of the loopholes Rayner wants to close:
The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Thanks to Sunak's changes
Good luck with spinning that, you'll need it. Not even saying it is particularly wrong, but political credit and blame doesn't work like that.
To be fair Sky are saying this is a result of the last Government's actions
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Thanks to Sunak's changes
The Tories really can’t take credit for halving migration they quadrupled in the first place
Nor can Labour say Hey look it’s “only” 440,000 - that’s still a horrendously high figure by historical standards
By 2028 - judging by those recent polls of UK attitudes - Labour need it under 100k. People have simply had enough and want it ALL to stop
That’s going to be really hard
I think the boat people angle are more damaging for a government than the legal migration even though they are a small proportion of the total. Sunak promised to stop the boats, didn't, got hammered, Starmer, if he doesn't smash the gangs, I think even lets say they get it down to 200-250k, if there are still 30k people coming via small boats, will be on dicey ground over immigration.
Yep. The Tory attack line will be 'coming down last year thanks to our policies but record boat crossings this week' - non sequitur argument of course. Labour won't be trumpeting the figures as they are partially thanks to Cleverly etc and they dont want that highlighted whilst gangs are very much unsmashed today (also non sequitur but thems the breaks)
Brighton won’t believe their luck. Played a hungover/stil in Ibiza Liverpool last weekend and have Spurs who will still be pissed from their bus parade this weekend. Put your house on an away win for the seagulls who are chasing a European place still.
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Thanks to Sunak's changes
The Tories really can’t take credit for halving migration they quadrupled in the first place
Nor can Labour say Hey look it’s “only” 440,000 - that’s still a horrendously high figure by historical standards
By 2028 - judging by those recent polls of UK attitudes - Labour need it under 100k. People have simply had enough and want it ALL to stop
That’s going to be really hard
Can't help thinking the UK would have been in much better shape if there had been a couple of years more Sunak and Hunt before Labour had a go...
A lot of talk among U.S. financial bods of a Liz Truss moment unless Trump changes course.
Hmm.
Yes and when I mentioned on here how the "Liz Truss moment" had become global shorthand for self-inflicted fiscal clusterfuck I was accused of making it up! Honestly, I report back from my privileged position in the corridors of economic power and utilise my deep understanding of economics and finance to provide unique insights (eg knowing the difference between 2024 and 2025) and all I get in response is abuse.
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Thanks to Sunak's changes
The Tories really can’t take credit for halving migration they quadrupled in the first place
Nor can Labour say Hey look it’s “only” 440,000 - that’s still a horrendously high figure by historical standards
By 2028 - judging by those recent polls of UK attitudes - Labour need it under 100k. People have simply had enough and want it ALL to stop
That’s going to be really hard
Can't help thinking the UK would have been in much better shape if there had been a couple of years more Sunak and Hunt before Labour had a go...
Or if Boris had pulled the trigger on a GE rather than resigning
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Thanks to Sunak's changes
The Tories really can’t take credit for halving migration they quadrupled in the first place
Nor can Labour say Hey look it’s “only” 440,000 - that’s still a horrendously high figure by historical standards
By 2028 - judging by those recent polls of UK attitudes - Labour need it under 100k. People have simply had enough and want it ALL to stop
That’s going to be really hard
It is more than twice as many migrants net arriving than houses constructed.
Those figures need to be reversed to address the preexisting chronic shortage rather than worsen it.
Brighton won’t believe their luck. Played a hungover/stil in Ibiza Liverpool last weekend and have Spurs who will still be pissed from their bus parade this weekend. Put your house on an away win for the seagulls who are chasing a European place still.
There’s only one team that haven’t been able to beat a pissed up Liverpool team.
Brighton won’t believe their luck. Played a hungover/stil in Ibiza Liverpool last weekend and have Spurs who will still be pissed from their bus parade this weekend. Put your house on an away win for the seagulls who are chasing a European place still.
They need it to lift the gloom of the Palace triumph.
Its a bit like the incredibly amount of borrowing / money printing that has gone on for the past 15 years. We are somewhat desensitized to the scale of it now.
When Cameron was making his pledges about immigration being far too high, that we must get it back to 10ks, that was after a "big" year of I think 300k net.
A lot of talk among U.S. financial bods of a Liz Truss moment unless Trump changes course.
Hmm.
He wants one so he can somehow use it as an excuse to end the fed, reinstate the gold standard and change the world economy. His entire aim is getting the US out of the Federal Reserves hands
Edit - by which i mean he actively wants a major financial crisis point
Yes. Nearly half a million people. It’s still an absolutely gob smacking number. It is higher - I believe - than any year in all British history outside the Boriswave? If not it is very close
Labour would be well advised not to boast about it
The polls show Brits want basically zero or very little (or even negative) net migration. My sense, likewise, is that voters REALLY mean it this time. I actually have some sympathy as Starmer tries to deliver this - because it is fiendishly hard without crippling the economy
I wouldn't like to be one of the shipyard engineers.
North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un has condemned a "serious accident" during the launch of a new warship on Thursday, calling it a "criminal act" that could not be tolerated. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c39xzn970pyo
What horrible way will Kim dream up to terminate them I wonder? Pour encourages les autres a great naval tradition of course.
I'm just curious about the meaning of "unscientific empiricism",
..After watching the whole course of the accident, Kim said, "It was a serious accident and criminal act caused by absolute carelessness, irresponsibility and unscientific empiricism which is out of the bounds of possibility and could not be tolerated," according to the KCNA...,/I>
Scientific empiricism is a thing, isn't it? So unscientific empiricism could be the opposite, or at least outside it. We need Leon, who as he keeps reminding us has a philosophy degree.
Or maybe Kim just needed a third item for his list. Three-item lists are a popular rhetorical device. We need Leon, who as he keeps reminding us is the Gazette's top author.
Maybe unscientific empiricism is just the application of David Hume's ground breaking empirical understanding that events are just one damned thing after another and that the sun having risen yesterday is no guarantee that it will rise tomorrow, and anyway you can't infer from experiencing the sun rising that there is a sun.
Footnote: there is still no satisfactory agreed resolution of Hume's problem of induction arising from this. Have they heard of the British empiricists in North Korea? It would be nice to think that they have.
I find this one interesting, particularly in view of the line being taken by the media, politicians and BTL commentators, and the huge Boris wave of immigrants:
Britons are more likely to describe themselves as anti-immigration (41%) than pro-immigration (28%)
Only 41% are anti-immigration, yet that is the pool that Starmer chose to fish in with his characteristically tin-earred speech.
Bit too simplistic I think. I would describe myself as “pro-immigration” but that doesn’t mean I don’t think that there needs to be some serious limits in the short to medium term.
Ditto, but that wasn't what Starmer was saying in his "island of strangers" speech, referring to the "incalculable damage" caused by immigration.
It would have been far better to talk about the positives of immigration while reducing the numbers.
We can - and have - whittled the speech down to "Island of Strangers". It will get referred to as a massive misstep when we look back on this from years into the future.
Surely the reason why “island of strangers” has attracted so much ire from the usual suspects is it is a direct attack on multiculturalism (as opposed to melting pot).
The British people as a whole are very reasonable but would be much more comfortable with an integration approach. But that’s not what many on the left want.
Even better news.... Lineker's podcast.. which I have never listened to.... will not be available on BBC Sounds. He really has copped it for his arrogance.
I was surprised it was and I suspect that part of the deal came from Lineker wishing to offer something back to the BBC because there is big money in podcasts which is why people like Simon Mayo left the BBC.
It was the opposite. The BBC were paying him off. It was a total farce. His podcasts were available 2-3 days prior to going on the BBC and there was no exclusive content. So they were paying his this content that in a fast moving world people who are fans of those shows will have already consumed outside of the BBC Sound eco-system and Spotify, YouTube, etc. And for this they paid him.
If it was about Lineker giving back, it would have been that his podcasts were on BBC Sounds first, or there was exclusive episodes only available on there.
Interestingly Mayo / Kermode film podcast is really struggling. They have a huge fan base when they were on the BBC, but they are really struggling to get video on YouTube and they have quit doing it in proper studio. It is now very much a budget affair with Kermode in his back bedroom.
It was a really good middlebrow show at the BBC. I tried the podcast, but it just didn't quite work. Perhaps the Beeb should try to get them back ?
How is the competition in the film space holding up? I suspect two large parts of the audience for film reviews are people thinking of seeing a film, and people who have already seen it. Less money for leisure spending will have put the kybosh on both of those, and Hollywood churning out mainly comic book sci-fi adventures won't help either.
Some YouTube Channels for film and tv reviews have become absolutely massive since COVID on the back of poking some fun at the nonsense Hollywood have been pumping out, some culture war stuff etc.
The problem now is there is so much content you can swiftly become out of sight out of mind, which I think has happened to Kermode and Mayo.
I don't much go in for film. But Mayo and Kermode were really good radio. I would deliberately tune in. But I'm not sufficiently motivated to seek out a podcast. It's a much higher hassle-bar to overcome.
I loved their radio show. I tried the podcast, I don't think their hearts are really in it.
They're boring viewing, just 2 old fellas in cardigans, moaning into microphones in their spare bedrooms. They don't say anything controversial and are keen not to upset the big players. The Critical Drinker, whether you like his opinions or not, is much more entertaining both visually and in content.
As I say, I just don't think their heart is in it and they are signed with Sony, so it was be you must be safe and of course Sony have a massive media production arm.
Critical Drinker when he doesn't go too culture war or too SouthParky, is very funny. I particularly like his production hell videos. Also his straight reviews, where he isn't leaning too much into character / culture war, can be really good in a traditional sense, in which he does talk about the themes, the film making etc. He did one about new vampire film a few days ago and I thought that could easily have been a Kermode.
I sense to some extent he has hit it big with the character, but actually he is a little trapped, where everybody expects sweary drunk bloke ranting about the wokey Marvel slopfest, but he is of course an author and wannabe film maker and I think wants to do more of that.
Nostalgia Critic Syndrome. You play a character, the character is popular, you play up to it, the character is more popular, you try to escape, you can't. I went off him when the majority of his output became videos of his Teams meetings with his chums. I don't like unscripted podcast/Teams formats, as I've said before.
Even better news.... Lineker's podcast.. which I have never listened to.... will not be available on BBC Sounds. He really has copped it for his arrogance.
I was surprised it was and I suspect that part of the deal came from Lineker wishing to offer something back to the BBC because there is big money in podcasts which is why people like Simon Mayo left the BBC.
It was the opposite. The BBC were paying him off. It was a total farce. His podcasts were available 2-3 days prior to going on the BBC and there was no exclusive content. So they were paying his this content that in a fast moving world people who are fans of those shows will have already consumed outside of the BBC Sound eco-system and Spotify, YouTube, etc. And for this they paid him.
If it was about Lineker giving back, it would have been that his podcasts were on BBC Sounds first, or there was exclusive episodes only available on there.
Interestingly Mayo / Kermode film podcast is really struggling. They have a huge fan base when they were on the BBC, but they are really struggling to get video on YouTube and they have quit doing it in proper studio. It is now very much a budget affair with Kermode in his back bedroom.
It was a really good middlebrow show at the BBC. I tried the podcast, but it just didn't quite work. Perhaps the Beeb should try to get them back ?
How is the competition in the film space holding up? I suspect two large parts of the audience for film reviews are people thinking of seeing a film, and people who have already seen it. Less money for leisure spending will have put the kybosh on both of those, and Hollywood churning out mainly comic book sci-fi adventures won't help either.
Some YouTube Channels for film and tv reviews have become absolutely massive since COVID on the back of poking some fun at the nonsense Hollywood have been pumping out, some culture war stuff etc.
The problem now is there is so much content you can swiftly become out of sight out of mind, which I think has happened to Kermode and Mayo.
I don't much go in for film. But Mayo and Kermode were really good radio. I would deliberately tune in. But I'm not sufficiently motivated to seek out a podcast. It's a much higher hassle-bar to overcome.
I loved their radio show. I tried the podcast, I don't think their hearts are really in it.
They're boring viewing, just 2 old fellas in cardigans, moaning into microphones in their spare bedrooms. They don't say anything controversial and are keen not to upset the big players. The Critical Drinker, whether you like his opinions or not, is much more entertaining both visually and in content.
As I say, I just don't think their heart is in it and they are signed with Sony, so it was be you must be safe and of course Sony have a massive media production arm.
Critical Drinker when he doesn't go too culture war or too SouthParky, is very funny. I particularly like his production hell videos. Also his straight reviews, where he isn't leaning too much into character / culture war, can be really good in a traditional sense, in which he does talk about the themes, the film making etc. He did one about new vampire film a few days ago and I thought that could easily have been a Kermode.
I sense to some extent he has hit it big with the character, but actually he is a little trapped, where everybody expects sweary drunk bloke ranting about the wokey Marvel slopfest, but he is of course an author and wannabe film maker and I think wants to do more of that.
Nostalgia Critic Syndrome. You play a character, the character is popular, you play up to it, the character is more popular, you try to escape, you can't. I went off him when the majority of his output became videos of his Teams meetings with his chums. I don't like unscripted podcast/Teams formats, as I've said before.
There is a boxing guy who appeared a couple of years ago with what appeared to be slightly similar schtick. Until about 6 months ago, he was faceless and it was presumed that his over the top cocky geezer voice and language was an old-ish guy really laying it on thick.
Well the channel grew and became quite popular and the guy behind it now does live streams, interviews,etc, and he is actually a really young guy and the super cocky geezer voice is actually him.....
Talking about massive missteps. One of my obsessive points is insisting that cuts cost money. Austerity means we need to cut the budget so lets save £1 here. The flawed calculation is that there is nothing balancing the equation, that when you cut the service you remove the need.
This is cobblers. And now the IFS have done a study into the cut to Sure Start. Every £1 spent saved £2.05. So when provision was axed to save multiples of £1, it cost multiples of £2.05.
Can we stop talking about cost and start talking about benefit?
Ultimately you need to talk about what the state should be doing (a 2.1x multiple is not great). But fundamentally it’s cash entitlements and overheads (productivity) that need to be tackled
A lot of talk among U.S. financial bods of a Liz Truss moment unless Trump changes course.
Hmm.
He wants one so he can somehow use it as an excuse to end the fed, reinstate the gold standard and change the world economy. His entire aim is getting the US out of the Federal Reserves hands
Edit - by which i mean he actively wants a major financial crisis point
I wouldn't impute any sort of masterplan to him other than abuse of power for kicks and financial enrichment.
Are we honestly in a position of handing away UK sovereign territory without a vote in parliament? Apparently it's now being held up by a legal challenge to the Foreign Office. Our MPs look irrelevant.
Talking about massive missteps. One of my obsessive points is insisting that cuts cost money. Austerity means we need to cut the budget so lets save £1 here. The flawed calculation is that there is nothing balancing the equation, that when you cut the service you remove the need.
This is cobblers. And now the IFS have done a study into the cut to Sure Start. Every £1 spent saved £2.05. So when provision was axed to save multiples of £1, it cost multiples of £2.05.
Can we stop talking about cost and start talking about benefit?
Ultimately you need to talk about what the state should be doing (a 2.1x multiple is not great). But fundamentally it’s cash entitlements and overheads (productivity) that need to be tackled
A lot of talk among U.S. financial bods of a Liz Truss moment unless Trump changes course.
Hmm.
He wants one so he can somehow use it as an excuse to end the fed, reinstate the gold standard and change the world economy. His entire aim is getting the US out of the Federal Reserves hands
Edit - by which i mean he actively wants a major financial crisis point
I wouldn't impute any sort of masterplan to him other than abuse of power for kicks and financial enrichment.
No masterplan, it's always been the aim of MAGA to end the fed
At 02:25 BST Mr Justice Goose granted "interim relief" to Chagossian Bertrice Pompe who had brought a case against the Foreign Office.
In his order, the judge said: "The defendant shall take no conclusive or legally binding step to conclude its negotiations concerning the possible transfer of the British Indian Ocean Territory, also known as the Chagos Archipelago, to a foreign government or bind itself as to the particular terms of any such transfer."
Somewhat amusing.
I presume the claimant brought an interesting legal ground, other than Starmer is a traitor.
Are we honestly in a position of handing away UK sovereign territory without a vote in parliament? Apparently it's now being held up by a legal challenge to the Foreign Office. Our MPs look irrelevant.
A PM unable to conduct Foreign Policy is pretty untenable and, depending on the outcome, potentially a resigning matter as treaty signing is a reserved power of the Royal Prerogative, so he's potentially abusing the King's powers
I wouldn't like to be one of the shipyard engineers.
North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un has condemned a "serious accident" during the launch of a new warship on Thursday, calling it a "criminal act" that could not be tolerated. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c39xzn970pyo
What horrible way will Kim dream up to terminate them I wonder? Pour encourages les autres a great naval tradition of course.
I'm just curious about the meaning of "unscientific empiricism",
..After watching the whole course of the accident, Kim said, "It was a serious accident and criminal act caused by absolute carelessness, irresponsibility and unscientific empiricism which is out of the bounds of possibility and could not be tolerated," according to the KCNA...,/I>
Scientific empiricism is a thing, isn't it? So unscientific empiricism could be the opposite, or at least outside it. We need Leon, who as he keeps reminding us has a philosophy degree.
Or maybe Kim just needed a third item for his list. Three-item lists are a popular rhetorical device. We need Leon, who as he keeps reminding us is the Gazette's top author.
Maybe unscientific empiricism is just the application of David Hume's ground breaking empirical understanding that events are just one damned thing after another and that the sun having risen yesterday is no guarantee that it will rise tomorrow, and anyway you can't infer from experiencing the sun rising that there is a sun.
Footnote: there is still no satisfactory agreed resolution of Hume's problem of induction arising from this. Have they heard of the British empiricists in North Korea? It would be nice to think that they have.
From reports seems to have been engineered as a side launch, always a bit tricky, but the stern released prematurely and the ship rotated, with the bow still on the quay then it capsized. So they'll need to right it first and there's likely to be considerable local structural damage where it was cantilevered over the quay edge.
Are we honestly in a position of handing away UK sovereign territory without a vote in parliament? Apparently it's now being held up by a legal challenge to the Foreign Office. Our MPs look irrelevant.
A PM unable to conduct Foreign Policy is pretty untenable and, depending on the outcome, potentially a resigning matter as treaty signing is a reserved power of the Royal Prerogative, so he's potentially abusing the King's powers
Did Boris Johnson resign over the prorogation crisis?
At 02:25 BST Mr Justice Goose granted "interim relief" to Chagossian Bertrice Pompe who had brought a case against the Foreign Office.
In his order, the judge said: "The defendant shall take no conclusive or legally binding step to conclude its negotiations concerning the possible transfer of the British Indian Ocean Territory, also known as the Chagos Archipelago, to a foreign government or bind itself as to the particular terms of any such transfer."
Somewhat amusing.
I presume the claimant brought an interesting legal ground, other than Starmer is a traitor.
Dereliction of duty under Human Rights Act and Equality acts etc by failing to consult the Chagossians properly over handing their land to a foreign power
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Thanks to Sunak's changes
The Tories really can’t take credit for halving migration they quadrupled in the first place
Nor can Labour say Hey look it’s “only” 440,000 - that’s still a horrendously high figure by historical standards
By 2028 - judging by those recent polls of UK attitudes - Labour need it under 100k. People have simply had enough and want it ALL to stop
That’s going to be really hard
I think the boat people angle are more damaging for a government than the legal migration even though they are a small proportion of the total. Sunak promised to stop the boats, didn't, got hammered, Starmer, if he doesn't smash the gangs, I think even lets say they get it down to 200-250k, if there are still 30k people coming via small boats, will be on dicey ground over immigration.
I think that's right. The numbers are mind-boggling, but in many cases explicable: HK and Ukrainians, genuine students, NHS workers, white collar first world professionals ... I'm sure most of us know a dozen or so examples personally. The numbers may be huge, but need not necessarily be a huge problem politically, particularly in an era of natural population decline. The illegals may be smaller in number but are a bigger problem politically: more visible, and more associated with criminality. If Labour could smash the gangs (ha ha ha), the legals would be much less toxic (Bart's perfectly reasonable point about the need for housing and infrastructure notwithstanding).
Are we honestly in a position of handing away UK sovereign territory without a vote in parliament? Apparently it's now being held up by a legal challenge to the Foreign Office. Our MPs look irrelevant.
A PM unable to conduct Foreign Policy is pretty untenable and, depending on the outcome, potentially a resigning matter as treaty signing is a reserved power of the Royal Prerogative, so he's potentially abusing the King's powers
Did Boris Johnson resign over the prorogation crisis?
No. And there were very serious calls for him to do so right up until he put it to the electorate Boris being a dick doesn't mean Keir can too
Are we honestly in a position of handing away UK sovereign territory without a vote in parliament? Apparently it's now being held up by a legal challenge to the Foreign Office. Our MPs look irrelevant.
I imagine it's a prerogative function. Of course they are now justiciable, as the Supreme Court found when deciding that Boris's prorogation was unlawful.
I still don't understand why we don't just cede it to the Americans. Trump might even pay us for it. We would have to sort the Chagossians out of course, but there's not many of them.
Are we honestly in a position of handing away UK sovereign territory without a vote in parliament? Apparently it's now being held up by a legal challenge to the Foreign Office. Our MPs look irrelevant.
I imagine it's a prerogative function. Of course they are now justiciable, as the Supreme Court found when deciding that Boris's prorogation was unlawful.
I still don't understand why we don't just cede it to the Americans. Trump might even pay us for it. We would have to sort the Chagossians out of course, but there's not many of them.
Why cede it at all? We use the base, better to be the owner operator than a tenant. We only need the base, give the rest of the territory to the Chagossians with their security guaranteed by the UK milItary at their request
Starmer is done, he's just being kept in place until Ange gets her hair did ready for the coronation
Forget about her hair, what she needs is a better seat or she'll spend the next four years fighting a rearguard action to keep her existing one.
Unless one of the Liverpool or Central Manchester seats is going or she moves into the arse end of London there are no safer seats for Labour, they are all under threat
Given she's on manuvers, if Starmer had friends we'd get constituency polling showing just how weak her position it.
Was the leak from Rayner though? Is she close to the Telegraph?
Oh, and while we aren't on the subject, how at PMQs did Kemi contrive to allude to the tax memo but not ask Starmer directly? We seem to have a whole generation of politicians, on all sides of the House, who know damn all about politics.
On the subject of PMQs, it was the same old story. Oral slips from Starmer. Kemi asking the wrong questions badly. Starmer not answering by batting away some peripheral matter Kemi raised in her meandering build-up. Kemi not noticing Starmer's WFA concession until halfway through, when presumably someone whispered in her ear.
Kemi probably found out about it via twitter which seems to be her main window on the world.
I don't think JohnL's assessment is very accurate. Kemi did ask Starmer to commit to not raising any taxes as a response to the Rayner memo, and it went rather well for her.
Pity me. I now have to drive 19,389 miles to pick up my older daughter from university - who cleverly chose the university which is, on the British mainland, the furthest possible from her doting father
Utterly OT, but I can recommend the History of Byzantium podcast, for anyone into that sort of thing.
Unfortunately I've got past the high point in the narrative and am just about to reach the "everything gets progressively worse all the time" period...
It is more than the number of new homes built in 2023 and 2024 combined.
Yes more than 1 person can live in a home, though actually over 30% of homes have only person living in them, and we have a chronic shortage already that needs addressing.
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Thanks to Sunak's changes
Good luck with spinning that, you'll need it. Not even saying it is particularly wrong, but political credit and blame doesn't work like that.
It isn't BG that needs luck to deliver his spin - it is Starmer who will need to luck to spin his 'positive story' on immigration numbers when net migration will still be up by hundreds of thousands and nobody will notice any improvements in getting a house, doctors appointment etc.
See also 'inflation coming down' but prices still going up.
Pity me. I now have to drive 19,389 miles to pick up my older daughter from university - who cleverly chose the university which is, on the British mainland, the furthest possible from her doting father
It's only 12,000 miles to Beijing and back so you must be going on an interesting detour!
At 02:25 BST Mr Justice Goose granted "interim relief" to Chagossian Bertrice Pompe who had brought a case against the Foreign Office.
In his order, the judge said: "The defendant shall take no conclusive or legally binding step to conclude its negotiations concerning the possible transfer of the British Indian Ocean Territory, also known as the Chagos Archipelago, to a foreign government or bind itself as to the particular terms of any such transfer."
Somewhat amusing.
I presume the claimant brought an interesting legal ground, other than Starmer is a traitor.
The fact that the government can be told what to do in the middle of the night by a single high court judge, instantly obey it, refrain from attacking the judge, and make its case in a civilized way before court in due course and accept its conclusions used to be something taken for granted.
The whole Boris 'Enemies of the State' and Prorogation period muddied the waters quite a bit and meant for a time that a proper relationship of judiciary and executive could not be taken for granted.
Trumpian approaches to all this now make us look like an ark of civilization in an anarchic universe. Labour should be commended for this return to normality.
I think most of the public seriously underestimate how good our senior judiciary are.
Pity me. I now have to drive 19,389 miles to pick up my older daughter from university - who cleverly chose the university which is, on the British mainland, the furthest possible from her doting father
It's only 12,000 miles to Beijing and back so you must be going on an interesting detour!
He’s probably going to visit every whorehouse within a 100 mile radius of his journey.
It is more than the number of new homes built in 2023 and 2024 combined.
Yes more than 1 person can live in a home, though actually over 30% of homes have only person living in them, and we have a chronic shortage already that needs addressing.
We absolutely need to address the housing shortage.
I note the average number of people per household in the UK is 2.36 (2023 figure). So divide the net immigration figure by 2.36.
It is more than the number of new homes built in 2023 and 2024 combined.
Yes more than 1 person can live in a home, though actually over 30% of homes have only person living in them, and we have a chronic shortage already that needs addressing.
We absolutely need to address the housing shortage.
I note the average number of people per household in the UK is 2.36 (2023 figure). So divide the net immigration figure by 2.36.
Pity me. I now have to drive 19,389 miles to pick up my older daughter from university - who cleverly chose the university which is, on the British mainland, the furthest possible from her doting father
From almost everywhere Aberdeen university - a fine and ancient institution suffering a bit from being in the wrong place - is further. Though, TBF, not if you are starting from Foula, Fair Isle or Fetla. (Or Wick).
We should all take a moment to reflect and laugh at Manchester United.
As a bitter Arsenal fan I’m still traumatised from last night ! Typical Utd couldn’t fluke another win !
For the Europa Paint Pot? Give over.
It’s a bigger trophy than the FA Cup which is all Arteta has won in nearly six years.
In good Essex-related news Southend are through to the final of the competition for promotion back to League 2 after several years in the National League (and near bankruptcy). A trip to Wembley awaits, against Oldham. Who, on form, ought to be favourites, but there again, so were the other two teams Southend played to get where they are!
I remember playing the Shrimpers in League 1, I am sure that we will meet again in the league, hopefully because of you on the way up rather than us on the way down!
Pity me. I now have to drive 19,389 miles to pick up my older daughter from university - who cleverly chose the university which is, on the British mainland, the furthest possible from her doting father
So nothing in next week's Gazette about helicopters then?
Pity me. I now have to drive 19,389 miles to pick up my older daughter from university - who cleverly chose the university which is, on the British mainland, the furthest possible from her doting father
A pedant says *cough* Aberdeen? *cough*
Actually, I mildly envy you. A 12 hour drive with just yourself for company - then another 12 hour drive with your daughter for company? Sounds rather pleasant.
At 02:25 BST Mr Justice Goose granted "interim relief" to Chagossian Bertrice Pompe who had brought a case against the Foreign Office.
In his order, the judge said: "The defendant shall take no conclusive or legally binding step to conclude its negotiations concerning the possible transfer of the British Indian Ocean Territory, also known as the Chagos Archipelago, to a foreign government or bind itself as to the particular terms of any such transfer."
Somewhat amusing.
I presume the claimant brought an interesting legal ground, other than Starmer is a traitor.
The fact that the government can be told what to do in the middle of the night by a single high court judge, instantly obey it, refrain from attacking the judge, and make its case in a civilized way before court in due course and accept its conclusions used to be something taken for granted.
The whole Boris 'Enemies of the State' and Prorogation period muddied the waters quite a bit and meant for a time that a proper relationship of judiciary and executive could not be taken for granted.
Trumpian approaches to all this now make us look like an ark of civilization in an anarchic universe. Labour should be commended for this return to normality.
I think most of the public seriously underestimate how good our senior judiciary are.
Or as Lord Sumption called it the empire of law. Yes rule of law is crucial but at what point does it makes things impossible to function. And those that have access to it will always be disproportionately wealthy or knowledgeable.
I would also like to believe our judiciary are great but have an increasing sense that there are more and more activists in their number with left wing views.
It is more than the number of new homes built in 2023 and 2024 combined.
Yes more than 1 person can live in a home, though actually over 30% of homes have only person living in them, and we have a chronic shortage already that needs addressing.
We absolutely need to address the housing shortage.
I note the average number of people per household in the UK is 2.36 (2023 figure). So divide the net immigration figure by 2.36.
If we are to make any headway on solving our housing shortage we need to be building hundreds of thousands of homes more than the net increase in demand though. Otherwise we are just standing still in a chronic shortage, not addressing the shortage.
So that puts us as falling even further backwards, not even standing still, let alone adding net hundreds of thousands of homes to fill in the shortage.
Are we honestly in a position of handing away UK sovereign territory without a vote in parliament? Apparently it's now being held up by a legal challenge to the Foreign Office. Our MPs look irrelevant.
I imagine it's a prerogative function. Of course they are now justiciable, as the Supreme Court found when deciding that Boris's prorogation was unlawful.
I still don't understand why we don't just cede it to the Americans. Trump might even pay us for it. We would have to sort the Chagossians out of course, but there's not many of them.
Legal logic requires that the question of whether a matter is justiciable is itself justiciable. Anyway, I haven't seen a report of the grounds, but government always has to obey its own laws. So, for example, it can't do prerogative action X because it has failed to do legally required action Y (eg consult Z).
A judge will grant an injunction not because something like that has been proved, but merely because such a thing is arguable AND justice is best served by delay to see what the arguments are like, not best done at 2 am on a Thursday morning.
Pity me. I now have to drive 19,389 miles to pick up my older daughter from university - who cleverly chose the university which is, on the British mainland, the furthest possible from her doting father
I don't pity you. A long drive with Test Match Special for company on the first day of summer?* I'm wading through bad handwriting trying to see if my students listened to anything I said in this years lectures. I'd rather be driving to Wick and back.
*First test match of the summer = first day of summer for me.
We should all take a moment to reflect and laugh at Manchester United.
As a bitter Arsenal fan I’m still traumatised from last night ! Typical Utd couldn’t fluke another win !
For the Europa Paint Pot? Give over.
It’s a bigger trophy than the FA Cup which is all Arteta has won in nearly six years.
In good Essex-related news Southend are through to the final of the competition for promotion back to League 2 after several years in the National League (and near bankruptcy). A trip to Wembley awaits, against Oldham. Who, on form, ought to be favourites, but there again, so were the other two teams Southend played to get where they are!
I remember playing the Shrimpers in League 1, I am sure that we will meet again in the league, hopefully because of you on the way up rather than us on the way down!
Thanks; that would be good! The new owners seem to have made a considerable difference, if only by ensuring financial stability.
Summer sport now; Test against Zimbabwe starts today, Ireland beat the Windies yesterday and England Women beat their Windies opposite numbers too.
Zim batting is brittle. The team needs more tests which they are getting this year but the batsmen blow hot and cold. They often get into winning positions but manage to lose as the did against Ireland and Afghanistan.
The bowlers aren’t too bad and Sikandar Raza is a terrific player. They also have a young lad called Naqvi coming up. He’s a talent.
Pity me. I now have to drive 19,389 miles to pick up my older daughter from university - who cleverly chose the university which is, on the British mainland, the furthest possible from her doting father
I don't pity you. A long drive with Test Match Special for company on the first day of summer?* I'm wading through bad handwriting trying to see if my students listened to anything I said in this years lectures. I'd rather be driving to Wick and back.
*First test match of the summer = first day of summer for me.
Pity me. I now have to drive 19,389 miles to pick up my older daughter from university - who cleverly chose the university which is, on the British mainland, the furthest possible from her doting father
I don't pity you. A long drive with Test Match Special for company on the first day of summer?* I'm wading through bad handwriting trying to see if my students listened to anything I said in this years lectures. I'd rather be driving to Wick and back.
*First test match of the summer = first day of summer for me.
Two day test, England by an innings.
A bold prediction. Wary of the rain on saturday I've nibbled at the draw (11-1). England have on occasion made a pigs ear of some of these season openers. Ireland rolled us in 2019 (albeit they fell apart in the second innings for an England win).
Are we honestly in a position of handing away UK sovereign territory without a vote in parliament? Apparently it's now being held up by a legal challenge to the Foreign Office. Our MPs look irrelevant.
I imagine it's a prerogative function. Of course they are now justiciable, as the Supreme Court found when deciding that Boris's prorogation was unlawful.
I still don't understand why we don't just cede it to the Americans. Trump might even pay us for it. We would have to sort the Chagossians out of course, but there's not many of them.
Presumably we could hand over Kent in an EU negotiation without needing a vote in parliament either?
At 02:25 BST Mr Justice Goose granted "interim relief" to Chagossian Bertrice Pompe who had brought a case against the Foreign Office.
In his order, the judge said: "The defendant shall take no conclusive or legally binding step to conclude its negotiations concerning the possible transfer of the British Indian Ocean Territory, also known as the Chagos Archipelago, to a foreign government or bind itself as to the particular terms of any such transfer."
Somewhat amusing.
I presume the claimant brought an interesting legal ground, other than Starmer is a traitor.
The fact that the government can be told what to do in the middle of the night by a single high court judge, instantly obey it, refrain from attacking the judge, and make its case in a civilized way before court in due course and accept its conclusions used to be something taken for granted.
The whole Boris 'Enemies of the State' and Prorogation period muddied the waters quite a bit and meant for a time that a proper relationship of judiciary and executive could not be taken for granted.
Trumpian approaches to all this now make us look like an ark of civilization in an anarchic universe. Labour should be commended for this return to normality.
I think most of the public seriously underestimate how good our senior judiciary are.
Or as Lord Sumption called it the empire of law. Yes rule of law is crucial but at what point does it makes things impossible to function. And those that have access to it will always be disproportionately wealthy or knowledgeable.
I would also like to believe our judiciary are great but have an increasing sense that there are more and more activists in their number with left wing views.
On the whole the blockage of process is more caused by the plethora of statute and regulation passed or agreed by parliament than by the courts acting on their own initiative to make up the law. Only parliament can decide that we need fewer, sharper and better laws and ten million repeals. If the courts went around saying that parliament's own laws can be overlooked then they would be becoming high handed.
As to access, this problem is not new and getting worse. The might of the big money outfits are best dealt with by the organisations which seek to litigate and act in a collective interest of some large group of ordinary punters.
Yes, the current position of Legal Aid is a scandal. This is decided by parliament and government, not the courts.
At 02:25 BST Mr Justice Goose granted "interim relief" to Chagossian Bertrice Pompe who had brought a case against the Foreign Office.
In his order, the judge said: "The defendant shall take no conclusive or legally binding step to conclude its negotiations concerning the possible transfer of the British Indian Ocean Territory, also known as the Chagos Archipelago, to a foreign government or bind itself as to the particular terms of any such transfer."
Somewhat amusing.
I presume the claimant brought an interesting legal ground, other than Starmer is a traitor.
The fact that the government can be told what to do in the middle of the night by a single high court judge, instantly obey it, refrain from attacking the judge, and make its case in a civilized way before court in due course and accept its conclusions used to be something taken for granted.
The whole Boris 'Enemies of the State' and Prorogation period muddied the waters quite a bit and meant for a time that a proper relationship of judiciary and executive could not be taken for granted.
Trumpian approaches to all this now make us look like an ark of civilization in an anarchic universe. Labour should be commended for this return to normality.
I think most of the public seriously underestimate how good our senior judiciary are.
Or as Lord Sumption called it the empire of law. Yes rule of law is crucial but at what point does it makes things impossible to function. And those that have access to it will always be disproportionately wealthy or knowledgeable.
I would also like to believe our judiciary are great but have an increasing sense that there are more and more activists in their number with left wing views.
I think there are more and more radical right social media accounts pushing a line imported from the US about activist judges. However, our judiciary is appointed in an entirely different way to in the US and, if anything, remain more conservative than the general population.
It is more than the number of new homes built in 2023 and 2024 combined.
Yes more than 1 person can live in a home, though actually over 30% of homes have only person living in them, and we have a chronic shortage already that needs addressing.
We absolutely need to address the housing shortage.
I note the average number of people per household in the UK is 2.36 (2023 figure). So divide the net immigration figure by 2.36.
If we are to make any headway on solving our housing shortage we need to be building hundreds of thousands of homes more than the net increase in demand though. Otherwise we are just standing still in a chronic shortage, not addressing the shortage.
So that puts us as falling even further backwards, not even standing still, let alone adding net hundreds of thousands of homes to fill in the shortage.
I think those figures aren't quite right, and I hold no candle for UK housebuilding but:
The BBC figure is "About 107,000 new homes were recorded since last July's election, down 10% on the same six months a year earlier." since July
Sam Altman's best friend reckons:
"NHBC covers around 70–80% of the new-build market, mostly private sector builds. It doesn't include: All housing associations. All local authority housing. Homes built under other warranty providers (e.g., LABC Warranty, Premier Guarantee). ➡️ NHBC completions (124,000) in 2024 reflect homes completed under their warranty, not the entire market. ➡️ The government figure (184,410) in 2024 covers the entire market, making it broader in scope."
Net migration down to 431,000 for year ending December 2024
Someone was predicting 55% down the other day, so that's close to where it is.
That looks to me like an interim positive and a defensible position, that needs continuation of the same trend for longer. That is similar to be significant from a change-of-direction angle, but still not as large an impact on the total as Keir Starmer needs to win the narrative battle, as we see in NHS Waiting List reductions.
I wonder what the full number for 25Q3 to 26Q2 will be when we get it?
The next update is in November but that will only cover the year to June 2025. That should also see a big fall .
Thanks to Sunak's changes
Good luck with spinning that, you'll need it. Not even saying it is particularly wrong, but political credit and blame doesn't work like that.
It isn't BG that needs luck to deliver his spin - it is Starmer who will need to luck to spin his 'positive story' on immigration numbers when net migration will still be up by hundreds of thousands and nobody will notice any improvements in getting a house, doctors appointment etc.
See also 'inflation coming down' but prices still going up.
Starmer will be cautious on the spin as he is with everything, he won't big this up. And they are fishing in quite different ponds - the Tories need to regain most of the people who think immigration is far too high, and convince those voters they are a better choice than Reform - which isn't going to happen (at least quickly). Meanwhile Labour need to regain a smaller share of the people who think immigration is a bit too high, which feels far more achievable.
Starmer is done, he's just being kept in place until Ange gets her hair did ready for the coronation
Forget about her hair, what she needs is a better seat or she'll spend the next four years fighting a rearguard action to keep her existing one.
Unless one of the Liverpool or Central Manchester seats is going or she moves into the arse end of London there are no safer seats for Labour, they are all under threat
Given she's on manuvers, if Starmer had friends we'd get constituency polling showing just how weak her position it.
Was the leak from Rayner though? Is she close to the Telegraph?
Oh, and while we aren't on the subject, how at PMQs did Kemi contrive to allude to the tax memo but not ask Starmer directly? We seem to have a whole generation of politicians, on all sides of the House, who know damn all about politics.
On the subject of PMQs, it was the same old story. Oral slips from Starmer. Kemi asking the wrong questions badly. Starmer not answering by batting away some peripheral matter Kemi raised in her meandering build-up. Kemi not noticing Starmer's WFA concession until halfway through, when presumably someone whispered in her ear.
Kemi probably found out about it via twitter which seems to be her main window on the world.
I don't think JohnL's assessment is very accurate. Kemi did ask Starmer to commit to not raising any taxes as a response to the Rayner memo, and it went rather well for her.
Here are Kemi's six questions, stripped of their preambles:-
When will the PM recognise it is Labour's budget that is driving up inflation?
He has not got a clue, has he?
Will the Prime Minister rule out new tax rises this year?
Is he planning to U-turn on winter fuel cuts?
Just like the British public, how can any of them [backbench MPs] ever trust him again?
The truth is, and we all know it, that it is this Prime Minister, this Labour Government and their policies that are shafting the country, is it not?
Question 3 follows the Rayner memo. No MP would expect an answer to that particular question from any Prime Minister six months out from the budget. What Kemi should have asked is who leaked it, and follow up by asking whether he agrees.
We reach question 4 before Kemi alights on Starmer's key announcement made just a couple of minutes earlier.
Kemi's only good question is number 5, not for the question itself but in her attempt to turn Labour MPs against the Prime Minister, in the same way Tories got fed up of defending Boris on the wireless only to find he'd changed the position.
Questions 2 and 6 barely rise above playground abuse.
PMQs is Kemi's chance to grab the initiative, to shape the narrative, or at least to give the vague impression she knows what is going on in the country around her. Every week Kemi fails in precisely the same ways and it is not funny any more. She needs new advisors.
It is more than the number of new homes built in 2023 and 2024 combined.
Yes more than 1 person can live in a home, though actually over 30% of homes have only person living in them, and we have a chronic shortage already that needs addressing.
We absolutely need to address the housing shortage.
I note the average number of people per household in the UK is 2.36 (2023 figure). So divide the net immigration figure by 2.36.
182,627 houses required.
2024 Completions:
184,390
Rejoice !
And housing immigrants is going to be a lot easier than the general population. Fewer single person households. Indeed, the complaint that so many come with dependents has a silver lining which is the number of homes required is fewer.
At 02:25 BST Mr Justice Goose granted "interim relief" to Chagossian Bertrice Pompe who had brought a case against the Foreign Office.
In his order, the judge said: "The defendant shall take no conclusive or legally binding step to conclude its negotiations concerning the possible transfer of the British Indian Ocean Territory, also known as the Chagos Archipelago, to a foreign government or bind itself as to the particular terms of any such transfer."
Somewhat amusing.
I presume the claimant brought an interesting legal ground, other than Starmer is a traitor.
The fact that the government can be told what to do in the middle of the night by a single high court judge, instantly obey it, refrain from attacking the judge, and make its case in a civilized way before court in due course and accept its conclusions used to be something taken for granted.
The whole Boris 'Enemies of the State' and Prorogation period muddied the waters quite a bit and meant for a time that a proper relationship of judiciary and executive could not be taken for granted.
Trumpian approaches to all this now make us look like an ark of civilization in an anarchic universe. Labour should be commended for this return to normality.
I think most of the public seriously underestimate how good our senior judiciary are.
Or as Lord Sumption called it the empire of law. Yes rule of law is crucial but at what point does it makes things impossible to function. And those that have access to it will always be disproportionately wealthy or knowledgeable.
I would also like to believe our judiciary are great but have an increasing sense that there are more and more activists in their number with left wing views.
I think there are more and more radical right social media accounts pushing a line imported from the US about activist judges. However, our judiciary is appointed in an entirely different way to in the US and, if anything, remain more conservative than the general population.
Yes. Pushing a line and the truth are different things. To look at 'judicial activism' in fact you have to examine the trends of the higher courts - the Court of Appeal (both divisions) and the Supreme Court. Courts below that have no binding authority, and without exception each decision on law that lower courts make can be appealed. The government (of course) has in practice unlimited funds - thank you tax payer - for this function and uses it all the time. Like every day.
IMHO the higher courts are in no sense 'activist' either in progressive or conservative directions.
It is more than the number of new homes built in 2023 and 2024 combined.
Yes more than 1 person can live in a home, though actually over 30% of homes have only person living in them, and we have a chronic shortage already that needs addressing.
We absolutely need to address the housing shortage.
I note the average number of people per household in the UK is 2.36 (2023 figure). So divide the net immigration figure by 2.36.
If we are to make any headway on solving our housing shortage we need to be building hundreds of thousands of homes more than the net increase in demand though. Otherwise we are just standing still in a chronic shortage, not addressing the shortage.
So that puts us as falling even further backwards, not even standing still, let alone adding net hundreds of thousands of homes to fill in the shortage.
I think those figures aren't quite right, and I hold no candle for UK housebuilding but:
The BBC figure is "About 107,000 new homes were recorded since last July's election, down 10% on the same six months a year earlier." since July
Sam Altman's best friend reckons:
"NHBC covers around 70–80% of the new-build market, mostly private sector builds. It doesn't include: All housing associations. All local authority housing. Homes built under other warranty providers (e.g., LABC Warranty, Premier Guarantee). ➡️ NHBC completions (124,000) in 2024 reflect homes completed under their warranty, not the entire market. ➡️ The government figure (184,410) in 2024 covers the entire market, making it broader in scope."
Fair point, so if we go with 184,410 in 2024 completed, deducting 431,000/2.36 then the net constructed figure is an utterly pathetic 1,782 net new homes built last year.
We aren't going to address our housing shortage building 1,782 net new homes per year.
Of course some houses get demolished every year too, struggling to find the figure, but wouldn't surprise me if it is about the 2k mark meaning that we still net didn't gain any new houses actually.
Are we honestly in a position of handing away UK sovereign territory without a vote in parliament? Apparently it's now being held up by a legal challenge to the Foreign Office. Our MPs look irrelevant.
A PM unable to conduct Foreign Policy is pretty untenable and, depending on the outcome, potentially a resigning matter as treaty signing is a reserved power of the Royal Prerogative, so he's potentially abusing the King's powers
Did Boris Johnson resign over the prorogation crisis?
The trouble I'm afraid was with a monarch who always insisted on acting on the advice of her Prime minister. You'd hardly want a monarch who tried to be interfering but if they always do what the PM wants, what is the point of them being there.
Of course we had the ridiculous spectacle of the coronation and Charles committing to defend us against Rome rather than from a potentially demagogic government in an era of potential enormous state power and with a system described by Lord Hailsham as an elective dictatorship.
Pity me. I now have to drive 19,389 miles to pick up my older daughter from university - who cleverly chose the university which is, on the British mainland, the furthest possible from her doting father
So nothing in next week's Gazette about helicopters then?
A motoring YouTuber would seize the opportunity for a "challenge" to do the trip on one tank of fuel. I think they all got the idea from watching Jeremy Clarkson do it several times on Top Gear.
It is more than the number of new homes built in 2023 and 2024 combined.
Yes more than 1 person can live in a home, though actually over 30% of homes have only person living in them, and we have a chronic shortage already that needs addressing.
We absolutely need to address the housing shortage.
I note the average number of people per household in the UK is 2.36 (2023 figure). So divide the net immigration figure by 2.36.
If we are to make any headway on solving our housing shortage we need to be building hundreds of thousands of homes more than the net increase in demand though. Otherwise we are just standing still in a chronic shortage, not addressing the shortage.
So that puts us as falling even further backwards, not even standing still, let alone adding net hundreds of thousands of homes to fill in the shortage.
I think those figures aren't quite right, and I hold no candle for UK housebuilding but:
The BBC figure is "About 107,000 new homes were recorded since last July's election, down 10% on the same six months a year earlier." since July
Sam Altman's best friend reckons:
"NHBC covers around 70–80% of the new-build market, mostly private sector builds. It doesn't include: All housing associations. All local authority housing. Homes built under other warranty providers (e.g., LABC Warranty, Premier Guarantee). ➡️ NHBC completions (124,000) in 2024 reflect homes completed under their warranty, not the entire market. ➡️ The government figure (184,410) in 2024 covers the entire market, making it broader in scope."
Fair point, so if we go with 184,410 in 2024 completed, deducting 431,000/2.36 then the net constructed figure is an utterly pathetic 1,782 net new homes built last year.
We aren't going to address our housing shortage building 1,782 net new homes per year.
Of course some houses get demolished every year too, struggling to find the figure, but wouldn't surprise me if it is about the 2k mark meaning that we still net didn't gain any new houses actually.
I think we've roughly stood still in 2024 from where we were, the new starts figure is more concerning than the completions tbh - so unless immigration drops severely from 2024 2025's eventual figures will be worse.
Pity me. I now have to drive 19,389 miles to pick up my older daughter from university - who cleverly chose the university which is, on the British mainland, the furthest possible from her doting father
A pedant says *cough* Aberdeen? *cough*
Actually, I mildly envy you. A 12 hour drive with just yourself for company - then another 12 hour drive with your daughter for company? Sounds rather pleasant.
For the edification of this board, I have split the country into 'drives to endure' (blue shape below) and 'drives to enjoy'. The map only goes up to the top of England - pretty much all driving in Scotland is enjoyable. Unfortunately, the blue shape covers a large percentage of all long drives in the country.
It is more than the number of new homes built in 2023 and 2024 combined.
Yes more than 1 person can live in a home, though actually over 30% of homes have only person living in them, and we have a chronic shortage already that needs addressing.
We absolutely need to address the housing shortage.
I note the average number of people per household in the UK is 2.36 (2023 figure). So divide the net immigration figure by 2.36.
182,627 houses required.
2024 Completions:
184,390
Rejoice !
And housing immigrants is going to be a lot easier than the general population. Fewer single person households. Indeed, the complaint that so many come with dependents has a silver lining which is the number of homes required is fewer.
Not really as when those dependent children grow up they will quite rightly want and need a house of their own, so the average figure is the appropriate one to use.
And using the average figure, our net new housing built in 2024 was effectively zero. We aren't going to address our shortage with effectively no new homes built.
Comments
How long this can last who knows. But as I keep saying, there is enough private money to sustain a UK-only period of growth if only our companies and consumers can start spending their Covid savings.
Or maybe Kim just needed a third item for his list. Three-item lists are a popular rhetorical device. We need Leon, who as he keeps reminding us is the Gazette's top author.
The plan was to boost overseas student numbers to 500k, this was a strategy defined in 2019.
The, at the time, consensus view, especially in the Conservative party, but broadly establishment including Lab and LD, was to offer generous and open schemes to Ukrainians and Hong Kongers.
Between them they were the vast majority of the Boris wave. There was incompetence in the worker paths but the big three were policy choices, that each make sense on their own, but don't if you aren't willing to build houses.
Nor can Labour say Hey look it’s “only” 440,000 - that’s still a horrendously high figure by historical standards
By 2028 - judging by those recent polls of UK attitudes - Labour need it under 100k. People have simply had enough and want it ALL to stop
That’s going to be really hard
The Pensions Increase (Pension Scheme for Keir Starmer QC) Regulations 2013
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/2588/contents/made
Mind you it is still far too high
Labour won't be trumpeting the figures as they are partially thanks to Cleverly etc and they dont want that highlighted whilst gangs are very much unsmashed today (also non sequitur but thems the breaks)
Hmm.
Those figures need to be reversed to address the preexisting chronic shortage rather than worsen it.
Arteta’s failures.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2408hu0zAI
When Cameron was making his pledges about immigration being far too high, that we must get it back to 10ks, that was after a "big" year of I think 300k net.
Edit - by which i mean he actively wants a major financial crisis point
Labour would be well advised not to boast about it
The polls show Brits want basically zero or very little (or even negative) net migration. My sense, likewise, is that voters REALLY mean it this time. I actually have some sympathy as Starmer tries to deliver this - because it is fiendishly hard without crippling the economy
Footnote: there is still no satisfactory agreed resolution of Hume's problem of induction arising from this. Have they heard of the British empiricists in North Korea? It would be nice to think that they have.
The British people as a whole are very reasonable but would be much more comfortable with an integration approach. But that’s not what many on the left want.
Well the channel grew and became quite popular and the guy behind it now does live streams, interviews,etc, and he is actually a really young guy and the super cocky geezer voice is actually him.....
I presume the claimant brought an interesting legal ground, other than Starmer is a traitor.
Net migration of over 400,000 for Labour’s first year of government.
Not as high as the great Tory betrayal, but still disastrous.
https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/1925481607953076506?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
“The true face of Labour.
Foreign-both residents occupy 48% of London social housing.
72% of Somalis live in social housing.
When @CPhilpOfficial cited official statistics a Labour MP shouted he was “race baiting.”
But when I invited him to say it on the record he bottled it:”
https://x.com/nj_timothy/status/1925465441561907611?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
It is so mindboggling I wonder if it is true
72%????
So they'll need to right it first and there's likely to be considerable local structural damage where it was cantilevered over the quay edge.
Boris being a dick doesn't mean Keir can too
I still don't understand why we don't just cede it to the Americans. Trump might even pay us for it. We would have to sort the Chagossians out of course, but there's not many of them.
We only need the base, give the rest of the territory to the Chagossians with their security guaranteed by the UK milItary at their request
Yes more than 1 person can live in a home, though actually over 30% of homes have only person living in them, and we have a chronic shortage already that needs addressing.
See also 'inflation coming down' but prices still going up.
You need to cite the number of Somalis as well as the proportion. If we are talking about 5 Somalis, then that is different to 5,000,000 Somalis.
The whole Boris 'Enemies of the State' and Prorogation period muddied the waters quite a bit and meant for a time that a proper relationship of judiciary and executive could not be taken for granted.
Trumpian approaches to all this now make us look like an ark of civilization in an anarchic universe. Labour should be commended for this return to normality.
I think most of the public seriously underestimate how good our senior judiciary are.
I note the average number of people per household in the UK is 2.36 (2023 figure). So divide the net immigration figure by 2.36.
2024 Completions:
184,390
Rejoice !
Actually, I mildly envy you. A 12 hour drive with just yourself for company - then another 12 hour drive with your daughter for company? Sounds rather pleasant.
I would also like to believe our judiciary are great but have an increasing sense that there are more and more activists in their number with left wing views.
2024 - 124k new homes according to the NHBC.
So that puts us as falling even further backwards, not even standing still, let alone adding net hundreds of thousands of homes to fill in the shortage.
A judge will grant an injunction not because something like that has been proved, but merely because such a thing is arguable AND justice is best served by delay to see what the arguments are like, not best done at 2 am on a Thursday morning.
*First test match of the summer = first day of summer for me.
The bowlers aren’t too bad and Sikandar Raza is a terrific player. They also have a young lad called Naqvi coming up. He’s a talent.
As to access, this problem is not new and getting worse. The might of the big money outfits are best dealt with by the organisations which seek to litigate and act in a collective interest of some large group of ordinary punters.
Yes, the current position of Legal Aid is a scandal. This is decided by parliament and government, not the courts.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/articles/somalipopulationsenglandandwales/census2021
11.3% of the population of Brum is Somali
The BBC figure is "About 107,000 new homes were recorded since last July's election, down 10% on the same six months a year earlier." since July
Sam Altman's best friend reckons:
"NHBC covers around 70–80% of the new-build market, mostly private sector builds.
It doesn't include:
All housing associations.
All local authority housing.
Homes built under other warranty providers (e.g., LABC Warranty, Premier Guarantee).
➡️ NHBC completions (124,000) in 2024 reflect homes completed under their warranty, not the entire market.
➡️ The government figure (184,410) in 2024 covers the entire market, making it broader in scope."
- When will the PM recognise it is Labour's budget that is driving up inflation?
- He has not got a clue, has he?
- Will the Prime Minister rule out new tax rises this year?
- Is he planning to U-turn on winter fuel cuts?
- Just like the British public, how can any of them [backbench MPs] ever trust him again?
- The truth is, and we all know it, that it is this Prime Minister, this Labour Government and their policies that are shafting the country, is it not?
Question 3 follows the Rayner memo. No MP would expect an answer to that particular question from any Prime Minister six months out from the budget. What Kemi should have asked is who leaked it, and follow up by asking whether he agrees.We reach question 4 before Kemi alights on Starmer's key announcement made just a couple of minutes earlier.
Kemi's only good question is number 5, not for the question itself but in her attempt to turn Labour MPs against the Prime Minister, in the same way Tories got fed up of defending Boris on the wireless only to find he'd changed the position.
Questions 2 and 6 barely rise above playground abuse.
PMQs is Kemi's chance to grab the initiative, to shape the narrative, or at least to give the vague impression she knows what is going on in the country around her. Every week Kemi fails in precisely the same ways and it is not funny any more. She needs new advisors.
IMHO the higher courts are in no sense 'activist' either in progressive or conservative directions.
We aren't going to address our housing shortage building 1,782 net new homes per year.
Of course some houses get demolished every year too, struggling to find the figure, but wouldn't surprise me if it is about the 2k mark meaning that we still net didn't gain any new houses actually.
Of course we had the ridiculous spectacle of the coronation and Charles committing to defend us against Rome rather than from a potentially demagogic government in an era of potential enormous state power and with a system described by Lord Hailsham as an elective dictatorship.
Unfortunately, the blue shape covers a large percentage of all long drives in the country.
And using the average figure, our net new housing built in 2024 was effectively zero. We aren't going to address our shortage with effectively no new homes built.