Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The challenge for… Labour – politicalbetting.com

24567

Comments

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872
    I have been a Three customer for over 20 years so my status quo bias is huge. But the roaming thing does my f***ing head in. And is reason enough to change so I might just get on the blower to Retentions.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,212
    edited June 2
    @Leon

    Your latest comment has the potential to get the site into a lot of trouble.

    If you want to discuss that subject, ask your mate at the Spectator to submit an article on that and see if they publish it.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 14,500
    isam said:

    Plan for change
    Plan for change
    Plan for change
    Plan for change
    Plan for change

    The phrase has even been adopted by government officials, who are usually shielded from political phrases to maintain their neutrality.

    At a Home Office briefing in April, one official — who had worked on the previous government’s Rwanda policy — used the phrase ten times within an eight-minute period.

    So why is Downing Street so obsessed with cramming in “Plan for Change” in every nook and cranny of government communications?

    It all stems from focus groups and polling organised by Starmer’s political strategist, Morgan McSweeney, that informed the prime minister’s key speech in December that set out six “milestones” that he wants the voting public to measure his government against at the next election


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/keir-starmer-plan-for-change-hooligans-5720t0p86

    How we measure government is of course a matter for us not for them. A sensible first measure is this:

    How excellently and competently have you managed and run each and every element of the UK which parliament has decided is a matter for the state to run at the taxpayers' expense?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,940
    Hermer looks like he will be the chosen sacrifice for reset number 675. Beware betraying a lawyer
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,097

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice review - thanks for the header.
    One opportunity Labour have I think is to say they will recognise Palestine as a state. Popular in the country and may go some way to repairing their very damaged relations with Muslim and Green voters.

    Will David Lammy be the Arthur Balfour of the 21st Century?
    Not auspicious, though I’m sure bumbling, Ill-considered incompetence sowing the seeds of future chaos are well within the powers of Lammy.


    To be fair to Balfour he acknowledged it wouldn't work without a proper Palestine.

    No Hitler/holocaust, no Israel, so we can blame Herr Hitler for the current mess.
    Eh? the Balfour Declaration arose from the First World War so Israel would still be here. There is, however, a school of thought that much of the current animosity comes from years of Nazi propaganda in the Middle East where they were trying to stir up native revolutions against the British,
    so to that extent, it is Hitler's fault.
    The root cause is the French government in Syria who were funding both Arab and Israeli terrorists to attack the British during the Mandate.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,584

    Good morning and an exciting day for the telecommunications industry which I have now been involved with for many years.

    Vodafone and Three have completed their merger with the new business being called VodafoneThree.

    I will be joining their team in the coming months and I am very excited. Sadly that means I will be able to post here significantly less but until that time, I will post any information I can if it would be of interest.

    Will my existing cheap deal with Three go up by:
    a) a little
    b) a lot
    c) a lot a lot

    Vodafone are expensive shysters.
    I have a great broadband deal with BT.

    I now want a mobile contract - they will only supply me through EE and only if I switch to a more expensive broadband contract
    BT are passing all their business over to EE so your next broadband deal will be with EE rather than BT if you want to renew
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,775

    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice review - thanks for the header.
    One opportunity Labour have I think is to say they will recognise Palestine as a state. Popular in the country and may go some way to repairing their very damaged relations with Muslim and Green voters.

    Will David Lammy be the Arthur Balfour of the 21st Century?
    Not auspicious, though I’m sure bumbling, Ill-considered incompetence sowing the seeds of future chaos are well within the powers of Lammy.


    To be fair to Balfour he acknowledged it wouldn't work without a proper Palestine.

    No Hitler/holocaust, no Israel, so we can blame Herr Hitler for the current mess.
    Eh? the Balfour Declaration arose from the First World War so Israel would still be here. There is, however, a school of thought that much of the current animosity comes from years of Nazi propaganda in the Middle East where they were trying to stir up native revolutions against the British, so to that extent, it is Hitler's fault.
    Look at the gap between the Balfour declaration and Israel being created.

    Even Balfour didn't want the whole of Palestine to be converted into a home for Jewish people, he said that would lead to problems.
    Which is what was reflected in the 1947 partition plan. A state each for arabs and jews.

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

    One side accepted it, one rejected it and articulated that rejection with military force.
    How would you react if Denmark decided to take up most of the UK and move in a few million Danes?
    If God had promised the land to the Danes 4000 years ago, we’d just have to accept it.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,986
    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,344
    isam said:

    Plan for change
    Plan for change
    Plan for change
    Plan for change
    Plan for change

    The phrase has even been adopted by government officials, who are usually shielded from political phrases to maintain their neutrality.

    At a Home Office briefing in April, one official — who had worked on the previous government’s Rwanda policy — used the phrase ten times within an eight-minute period.

    So why is Downing Street so obsessed with cramming in “Plan for Change” in every nook and cranny of government communications?

    It all stems from focus groups and polling organised by Starmer’s political strategist, Morgan McSweeney, that informed the prime minister’s key speech in December that set out six “milestones” that he wants the voting public to measure his government against at the next election


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/keir-starmer-plan-for-change-hooligans-5720t0p86

    Further and faster didn't last long then.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,212

    Good morning and an exciting day for the telecommunications industry which I have now been involved with for many years.

    Vodafone and Three have completed their merger with the new business being called VodafoneThree.

    I will be joining their team in the coming months and I am very excited. Sadly that means I will be able to post here significantly less but until that time, I will post any information I can if it would be of interest.

    Will my existing cheap deal with Three go up by:
    a) a little
    b) a lot
    c) a lot a lot

    Vodafone are expensive shysters.
    I have a great broadband deal with BT.

    I now want a mobile contract - they will only supply me through EE and only if I switch to a more expensive broadband contract
    BT are passing all their business over to EE so your next broadband deal will be with EE rather than BT if you want to renew
    Not anymore.

    They've changed tack, again.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/03/08/bt-brand-saved-amid-pressure-billionaire-indian-investor/
  • LeonLeon Posts: 61,432

    @Leon

    Your latest comment has the potential to get the site into a lot of trouble.

    If you want to discuss that subject, ask your mate at the Spectator to submit an article on that and see if they publish it.

    Apologies. Feel free to delete
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 14,500

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    Incitement to kill people is just wrong. As it is when people suggest that shooting boat people would be an excellent policy. IIRC this happened on this platform recently.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,940

    isam said:

    Plan for change
    Plan for change
    Plan for change
    Plan for change
    Plan for change

    The phrase has even been adopted by government officials, who are usually shielded from political phrases to maintain their neutrality.

    At a Home Office briefing in April, one official — who had worked on the previous government’s Rwanda policy — used the phrase ten times within an eight-minute period.

    So why is Downing Street so obsessed with cramming in “Plan for Change” in every nook and cranny of government communications?

    It all stems from focus groups and polling organised by Starmer’s political strategist, Morgan McSweeney, that informed the prime minister’s key speech in December that set out six “milestones” that he wants the voting public to measure his government against at the next election


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/keir-starmer-plan-for-change-hooligans-5720t0p86

    Further and faster didn't last long then.
    Is have thought thr main takeaway they'd get from focus groups is GFY as far and fast as you can
  • LeonLeon Posts: 61,432

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 54,879
    algarkirk said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    Incitement to kill people is just wrong. As it is when people suggest that shooting boat people would be an excellent policy. IIRC this happened on this platform recently.
    It's another irregular verb.

    I am speaking freely
    You are stepping over the line
    He/She/They have been charge with incitement
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,584

    Good morning and an exciting day for the telecommunications industry which I have now been involved with for many years.

    Vodafone and Three have completed their merger with the new business being called VodafoneThree.

    I will be joining their team in the coming months and I am very excited. Sadly that means I will be able to post here significantly less but until that time, I will post any information I can if it would be of interest.

    Will my existing cheap deal with Three go up by:
    a) a little
    b) a lot
    c) a lot a lot

    Vodafone are expensive shysters.
    I have a great broadband deal with BT.

    I now want a mobile contract - they will only supply me through EE and only if I switch to a more expensive broadband contract
    BT are passing all their business over to EE so your next broadband deal will be with EE rather than BT if you want to renew
    Not anymore.

    They've changed tack, again.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/03/08/bt-brand-saved-amid-pressure-billionaire-indian-investor/
    Not sure how that helps other than confuse customers but thanks for that

    I changed last November, but am really pleased with EE once I went through teething issues mainly caused by BT
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872

    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice review - thanks for the header.
    One opportunity Labour have I think is to say they will recognise Palestine as a state. Popular in the country and may go some way to repairing their very damaged relations with Muslim and Green voters.

    Will David Lammy be the Arthur Balfour of the 21st Century?
    Not auspicious, though I’m sure bumbling, Ill-considered incompetence sowing the seeds of future chaos are well within the powers of Lammy.


    To be fair to Balfour he acknowledged it wouldn't work without a proper Palestine.

    No Hitler/holocaust, no Israel, so we can blame Herr Hitler for the current mess.
    Eh? the Balfour Declaration arose from the First World War so Israel would still be here. There is, however, a school of thought that much of the current animosity comes from years of Nazi propaganda in the Middle East where they were trying to stir up native revolutions against the British, so to that extent, it is Hitler's fault.
    Look at the gap between the Balfour declaration and Israel being created.

    Even Balfour didn't want the whole of Palestine to be converted into a home for Jewish people, he said that would lead to problems.
    Which is what was reflected in the 1947 partition plan. A state each for arabs and jews.

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

    One side accepted it, one rejected it and articulated that rejection with military force.
    How would you react if Denmark decided to take up most of the UK and move in a few million Danes?
    How would you react if Portugal launched thousands of highly-trained killer bees at Anfield during the Merseyside derby.

    It's geopolitics, innit, something of which I thought you would have had a better grasp.

    As is well rehearsed, you can go the indigenous or the settler route. If you go the indigenous route then we should, for example, kick all WASP Americans out of America, if you go settler route then you appreciate that Europe's colonisation of the US is facts on the ground.

    For the jews in the middle east there is good evidence that they were indigenous there thousands of years ago and then, for one reason or another that Bob Marley explains well, many if not most of them left. So if you go the indigenous route there is an argument for a jewish homeland in the middle east.

    If you go the settler route, and believe the jews are incomers to the area, and also dismiss Bob's history lesson, then you must accept that that is how nations are formed.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,097

    Taz said:

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is, especially when they bring many economically inactive dependents with them, they do not pay their way. They are a burden on the economy. Migration central expects the dependents in the Boriswave, including carers, to cost £35 billion by 2028

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is that the system became the sale of visas (a crime) for jobs that didn't actually exist.

    Ripping off people from the developing world at £15K at time. So you are taking their saving and probably all the savings of their family. Nice.

    It also had the slight flaw that nearly no-one on such visas ended up working in care.

    So apart from it being a way for criminals to rip off poor people, it didn't work.
    But that was simply a failure of government to monitor issuance
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,365
    edited June 2
    FF43 said:

    Rachel Reeves’s tax raid on farmers will cost the Treasury almost £2bn, analysis has found

    The analysis found that more than 60pc of family businesses and farms were planning to reduce investment by over a fifth in light of the changes.

    Around a quarter have already cut staff. By the end of this parliament, more than 200,000 jobs are expected to be lost, the research showed

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/06/02/labour-tax-raid-on-farmers-to-cost-treasury-up-to-2bn

    Lobbying company talks to 234 family businesses that are extremely pissed off at having to pay the same inheritance tax as everyone else and want you to know it "analysis".

    Some of the edge cases possibly do have an argument. Bit like WASPI women - don't overstate your case.
    I don't think it's the farm changes that are particularly financially damaging. It is the stuff they did on pension pots that makes it harder to pass on small businesses, particularly small businesses premises, without being clobbered for IHT that will be detering investment.

    Basically, it used to be the case that as the owner of a small business, you could create a special pension fund which (subject to some special rules) was able to invest in assets for your business (eg business premises). It was a really tax efficient way to buy your premises as you got a load of tax relief by effectively putting your business assets into your pension wrapper.

    It also made passing the business on without it being destroyed by IHT much easier, as said business assets were classed as a defined contribution pension pot, and exempt from IHT.

    Reeves having changed the rules on this will be reducing business investment - I know, because I was planning on doing this to buy my business it's own premises which would allow for expansion, and this rule change is one of the factors that's potentially derailing my investment plans.

    I've a small business that's quietly profitable. I could just relax and take the money, or I could reinvest the money into growth, creating more jobs, paying more tax. The harder the government makes it to go for growth, the more likely it is I just give up and enjoy the cash.

    Also, the more my business gets dragged into the IHT net, the more likely it is that on my demise my kids will just wind it up and shut the doors, rather than keep it on as a going concern.

    The fools at the treasury don't understand this - they just want to see if the pips are squeaking yet.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,097

    Good morning and an exciting day for the telecommunications industry which I have now been involved with for many years.

    Vodafone and Three have completed their merger with the new business being called VodafoneThree.

    I will be joining their team in the coming months and I am very excited. Sadly that means I will be able to post here significantly less but until that time, I will post any information I can if it would be of interest.

    Will my existing cheap deal with Three go up by:
    a) a little
    b) a lot
    c) a lot a lot

    Vodafone are expensive shysters.
    I have a great broadband deal with BT.

    I now want a mobile contract - they will only supply me through EE and only if I switch to a more expensive broadband contract
    BT are passing all their business over to EE so your next broadband deal will be with EE rather than BT if you want to renew
    I know. It just irritates me that they are insisting I take on a more expensive contract today to expand the services I buy from them

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    Sumption explains the legitimacy of the Connolly sentence.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/26/lucy-connolly-prison-appeal-free-speech/
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 6,205

    Good morning and an exciting day for the telecommunications industry which I have now been involved with for many years.

    Vodafone and Three have completed their merger with the new business being called VodafoneThree.

    I will be joining their team in the coming months and I am very excited. Sadly that means I will be able to post here significantly less but until that time, I will post any information I can if it would be of interest.

    Will my existing cheap deal with Three go up by:
    a) a little
    b) a lot
    c) a lot a lot

    Vodafone are expensive shysters.
    It has to go up, the current model wasn't work.

    People were paying Three £8 a month for unlimited calls/data/texts and wondering why Three didn't have the money to invest in improvements.

    On Market Street in Manchester you can go from getting over 1,000 Mbps with Three and move a few hundred yards towards Piccadilly and no connection.

    That said the big winner out of this deal might be O2 due to spectrum disposal that is needed by Three/Voda.
    I'm paying Three £11 a month, I only get 8Gb of data which is becoming not enough, but I have grandfather rights to Go Roam which is why I am sticking with it
    As for your PAC, retentions will give you an even better deal.
    I don't think I understand any of that
    Ring customer services and say you want your PAC* as you want to take your number to a different network as they have a better deal.

    Use O2 if they ask, and tell them because they have a cheaper package plus you get roaming with them plus they are giving you Disney+ or Amazon Prime free for a year.

    The customer services person will put you through to retentions who will offer you a better deal than you're currently on to keep your business.

    *A PAC allows you to take your number to a different network.
    Thank you. I may try that, as I see they marvel reintroducing roaming deals so hopefully may offer me something. Although I am a low data user, I have only nearly used it this month because I was away on holiday and too lazy to keep asking for wifi passwords
    1pmobile give you access to the EE network (and not second-rank access) at £10 per month, with 50GB data and unlimited calls and texts. And EU roaming.

    More importantly, they have a functioning website. So you will never have to call up a mobile network again.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,741
    HYUFD said:

    algarkirk said:

    pm215 said:

    Taz said:

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is, especially when they bring many economically inactive dependents with them, they do not pay their way. They are a burden on the economy. Migration central expects the dependents in the Boriswave, including carers, to cost £35 billion by 2028

    Looks like they have closed that off for new applications for care workers specifically. https://www.gov.uk/health-care-worker-visa/your-partner-and-children says:

    "If you’re a care worker or senior care worker

    Your partner and children cannot apply to join you or stay in the UK as your dependants unless you were employed as a care worker or senior care worker in the UK and on a Health and Care Worker visa before 11 March 2024 and [you're still on that same visa in some way]".

    These people doing us a favour by doing jobs the millions of UK workless don't want to do are, like the rest of us, people.

    How many of our nice UK doctors etc off to a nice life in Australia/NZ would go if they couldn't take their wife/husband/partner and 2.4 children with them?

    This is OK for young students for a fixed term. But not acceptable if we are serious about treating people who work for us and our elderly parents properly.
    Yes I could see the dependents migrants restriction being eased for carers
    Surely the prime time for emigrating is when people are young and before they have any dependants.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,097

    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice review - thanks for the header.
    One opportunity Labour have I think is to say they will recognise Palestine as a state. Popular in the country and may go some way to repairing their very damaged relations with Muslim and Green voters.

    Will David Lammy be the Arthur Balfour of the 21st Century?
    Not auspicious, though I’m sure bumbling, Ill-considered incompetence sowing the seeds of future chaos are well within the powers of Lammy.


    To be fair to Balfour he acknowledged it wouldn't work without a proper Palestine.

    No Hitler/holocaust, no Israel, so we can blame Herr Hitler for the current mess.
    Eh? the Balfour Declaration arose from the First World War so Israel would still be here. There is, however, a school of thought that much of the current animosity comes from years of Nazi propaganda in the Middle East where they were trying to stir up native revolutions against the British, so to that extent, it is Hitler's fault.
    Look at the gap between the Balfour declaration and Israel being created.

    Even Balfour didn't want the whole of Palestine to be converted into a home for Jewish people, he said that would lead to problems.
    Which is what was reflected in the 1947 partition plan. A state each for arabs and jews.

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

    One side accepted it, one rejected it and articulated that rejection with military force.
    How would you react if Denmark decided to take up most of the UK and move in a few
    million Danes?
    If God had promised the land to the Danes
    4000 years ago, we’d just have to accept it.

    Any yet the Hammer of the Scots was just doing God’s work and you aren’t willing to accept that

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872
    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/26/lucy-connolly-prison-appeal-free-speech/
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,078
    edited June 2

    FF43 said:

    Good morning and an exciting day for the telecommunications industry which I have now been involved with for many years.

    Vodafone and Three have completed their merger with the new business being called VodafoneThree.

    I will be joining their team in the coming months and I am very excited. Sadly that means I will be able to post here significantly less but until that time, I will post any information I can if it would be of interest.

    Will my existing cheap deal with Three go up by:
    a) a little
    b) a lot
    c) a lot a lot

    Vodafone are expensive shysters.
    It has to go up, the current model wasn't work.

    People were paying Three £8 a month for unlimited calls/data/texts and wondering why Three didn't have the money to invest in improvements.

    On Market Street in Manchester you can go from getting over 1,000 Mbps with Three and move a few hundred yards towards Piccadilly and no connection.

    That said the big winner out of this deal might be O2 due to spectrum disposal that is needed by Three/Voda.
    There are certainly patches of poor signal. Then again poor 5G in cities seems to be a perpetual moan that people have regardless of network. Bars are shown by data has flown...
    5G is very short wavelengths compared with 4G, which means it carries a lot of information but is susceptible to physical blockage by buildings etc. I don't think there's anything you can do about that.
    In principle, the solution is pretty easy- have more base stations, so you have more, smaller cells. Helps with the capacity issue as well.

    In practice, ouch, because planning. And all those lessons I have taught about "mobile phone signals are the wrong wavelength to give you cancer" appear to have been in vain.
    Possibly also retain more 4G transmission / lower frequencies under 5G? So phones in poor reception areas still get a decent coverage.

    I'm curious. What wavelengths might give you cancer?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,009
    To add to Putin's miltary and economic woes, you can add a PR calamity too. The Russian casualites as claimed by Ukraine - dead, maimed, POW and missing - is barely 10,00 off hitting the million mark. Likely to be the full million by the middle of next week.

    That will start permeating to the people - even within Russia.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872
    edited June 2

    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice review - thanks for the header.
    One opportunity Labour have I think is to say they will recognise Palestine as a state. Popular in the country and may go some way to repairing their very damaged relations with Muslim and Green voters.

    Will David Lammy be the Arthur Balfour of the 21st Century?
    Not auspicious, though I’m sure bumbling, Ill-considered incompetence sowing the seeds of future chaos are well within the powers of Lammy.


    To be fair to Balfour he acknowledged it wouldn't work without a proper Palestine.

    No Hitler/holocaust, no Israel, so we can blame Herr Hitler for the current mess.
    Eh? the Balfour Declaration arose from the First World War so Israel would still be here. There is, however, a school of thought that much of the current animosity comes from years of Nazi propaganda in the Middle East where they were trying to stir up native revolutions against the British, so to that extent, it is Hitler's fault.
    Look at the gap between the Balfour declaration and Israel being created.

    Even Balfour didn't want the whole of Palestine to be converted into a home for Jewish people, he said that would lead to problems.
    Which is what was reflected in the 1947 partition plan. A state each for arabs and jews.

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

    One side accepted it, one rejected it and articulated that rejection with military force.
    How would you react if Denmark decided to take up most of the UK and move in a few million Danes?
    If God had promised the land to the Danes 4000 years ago, we’d just have to accept it.
    Was that you I saw at the march on Saturday in Dundee clamouring for the removal of white Americans from North America. It was, wasn't it, despite the mask.

    Free, free Philadelphia.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,911

    HYUFD said:

    algarkirk said:

    pm215 said:

    Taz said:

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is, especially when they bring many economically inactive dependents with them, they do not pay their way. They are a burden on the economy. Migration central expects the dependents in the Boriswave, including carers, to cost £35 billion by 2028

    Looks like they have closed that off for new applications for care workers specifically. https://www.gov.uk/health-care-worker-visa/your-partner-and-children says:

    "If you’re a care worker or senior care worker

    Your partner and children cannot apply to join you or stay in the UK as your dependants unless you were employed as a care worker or senior care worker in the UK and on a Health and Care Worker visa before 11 March 2024 and [you're still on that same visa in some way]".

    These people doing us a favour by doing jobs the millions of UK workless don't want to do are, like the rest of us, people.

    How many of our nice UK doctors etc off to a nice life in Australia/NZ would go if they couldn't take their wife/husband/partner and 2.4 children with them?

    This is OK for young students for a fixed term. But not acceptable if we are serious about treating people who work for us and our elderly parents properly.
    Yes I could see the dependents migrants restriction being eased for carers
    Surely the prime time for emigrating is when people are young and before they have any dependants.
    Parents, brothers and sisters can also be included in dependents
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 54,879

    Taz said:

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is, especially when they bring many economically inactive dependents with them, they do not pay their way. They are a burden on the economy. Migration central expects the dependents in the Boriswave, including carers, to cost £35 billion by 2028

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is that the system became the sale of visas (a crime) for jobs that didn't actually exist.

    Ripping off people from the developing world at £15K at time. So you are taking their saving and probably all the savings of their family. Nice.

    It also had the slight flaw that nearly no-one on such visas ended up working in care.

    So apart from it being a way for criminals to rip off poor people, it didn't work.
    But that was simply a failure of government to monitor issuance
    When the government started removing the right to issue visas from those selling them, the scheme collapsed to next to no visas.

    The scheme nearly never got care workers into the care homes.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 14,500
    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,486

    Starmer is noticeably stronger on the defence stuff than other matters of domestic policy. There is a lot I criticise him for, but I think he is doing a relatively good job here.

    Deborah Haynes on Sky and other defence experts are highly critical of the lack of commitment to the 3% as being an ambition is simply not enough when it comes to spending on defence

    https://news.sky.com/story/politics-latest-labour-reform-starmer-farage-defence-tories-migration-12593360
    Yes, we do need to spend more, and the government need to work out how we ramp this up quickly. And yes, we do need to move from aspiration to results in quick order. But I do have sympathy with Starmer on the messaging here.

    Assuming he does want to increase spending further - and as of now I think he does and will give him the benefit of the doubt - it is a tricky political tightrope to have to walk, with the backdrop to difficult spending decisions being made elsewhere.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,741
    algarkirk said:

    Taz said:

    algarkirk said:

    Taz said:

    algarkirk said:

    pm215 said:

    Taz said:

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is, especially when they bring many economically inactive dependents with them, they do not pay their way. They are a burden on the economy. Migration central expects the dependents in the Boriswave, including carers, to cost £35 billion by 2028

    Looks like they have closed that off for new applications for care workers specifically. https://www.gov.uk/health-care-worker-visa/your-partner-and-children says:

    "If you’re a care worker or senior care worker

    Your partner and children cannot apply to join you or stay in the UK as your dependants unless you were employed as a care worker or senior care worker in the UK and on a Health and Care Worker visa before 11 March 2024 and [you're still on that same visa in some way]".

    These people doing us a favour by doing jobs the millions of UK workless don't want to do are, like the rest of us, people.

    How many of our nice UK doctors etc off to a nice life in Australia/NZ would go if they couldn't take their wife/husband/partner and 2.4 children with them?

    This is OK for young students for a fixed term. But not acceptable if we are serious about treating people who work for us and our elderly parents properly.
    We’re not talking about skilled workers but minimum wage workers and the cost of them runs into billions. It is absolutely acceptable as are the changes to ILR.

    They are used to suppress wages and people may point to the additional cost of wages but these people will never be net contributors but cost the state billions over the years taking out far more than they put in. For what ? To save care home owners a bit of money. Bonkers

    Skilled migration we should welcome. Unskilled is another matter.
    True, but a slightly different question.
    You compared the min wage carers to skilled doctors. Skilled doctors will be net contributors. Their dependents should be welcomed.
    The comparison I am making is that they are people.

    The context is one in which we, the UK, are rightly or wrongly, asking them in to do, long term, a job that needs doing. It is oppressive and wrong to expect that they abandon their families to do so, and we would not ask this of ourselves, or German bankers, or Russian oligarchs.
    No we are not. We are just inviting young, single people
  • LeonLeon Posts: 61,432
    https://x.com/costellowilliam/status/1928957288217464842?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Really short men have fewer lifetime sexual partners than taller men. Well I never

    The amazing thing is the low number. The median for everyone is 7 in a lifetime.

    7.

    SEVEN


    Not a typo

    😶
  • AugustusCarp2AugustusCarp2 Posts: 347
    Vwey informative and thought-provoking thread, thank you. But I have one question - is there an agreed definition of the term "Red Wall"? It seems to mean slightly different things to different analysts in different contexts. So, what is a Red Wall seat, please?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 14,500

    HYUFD said:

    algarkirk said:

    pm215 said:

    Taz said:

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is, especially when they bring many economically inactive dependents with them, they do not pay their way. They are a burden on the economy. Migration central expects the dependents in the Boriswave, including carers, to cost £35 billion by 2028

    Looks like they have closed that off for new applications for care workers specifically. https://www.gov.uk/health-care-worker-visa/your-partner-and-children says:

    "If you’re a care worker or senior care worker

    Your partner and children cannot apply to join you or stay in the UK as your dependants unless you were employed as a care worker or senior care worker in the UK and on a Health and Care Worker visa before 11 March 2024 and [you're still on that same visa in some way]".

    These people doing us a favour by doing jobs the millions of UK workless don't want to do are, like the rest of us, people.

    How many of our nice UK doctors etc off to a nice life in Australia/NZ would go if they couldn't take their wife/husband/partner and 2.4 children with them?

    This is OK for young students for a fixed term. But not acceptable if we are serious about treating people who work for us and our elderly parents properly.
    Yes I could see the dependents migrants restriction being eased for carers
    Surely the prime time for emigrating is when people are young and before they have any dependants.
    Yes, but that is a different issue.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872

    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice review - thanks for the header.
    One opportunity Labour have I think is to say they will recognise Palestine as a state. Popular in the country and may go some way to repairing their very damaged relations with Muslim and Green voters.

    Will David Lammy be the Arthur Balfour of the 21st Century?
    Not auspicious, though I’m sure bumbling, Ill-considered incompetence sowing the seeds of future chaos are well within the powers of Lammy.


    To be fair to Balfour he acknowledged it wouldn't work without a proper Palestine.

    No Hitler/holocaust, no Israel, so we can blame Herr Hitler for the current mess.
    Eh? the Balfour Declaration arose from the First World War so Israel would still be here. There is, however, a school of thought that much of the current animosity comes from years of Nazi propaganda in the Middle East where they were trying to stir up native revolutions against the British, so to that extent, it is Hitler's fault.
    Look at the gap between the Balfour declaration and Israel being created.

    Even Balfour didn't want the whole of Palestine to be converted into a home for Jewish people, he said that would lead to problems.
    Which is what was reflected in the 1947 partition plan. A state each for arabs and jews.

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

    One side accepted it, one rejected it and articulated that rejection with military force.
    How would you react if Denmark decided to take up most of the UK and move in a few
    million Danes?
    If God had promised the land to the Danes
    4000 years ago, we’d just have to accept it.

    Any yet the Hammer of the Scots was just doing God’s work and you aren’t willing to accept that

    It's perfectly understandable (cf Kneecap, the Taoiseach, Greta), that many people, it seems including our very own divvie, see the entire world in simple, black and white (soz) terms of good vs evil. There is also a good deal of wh*t* saviour about their actions.

    In their world view there are the good guys and the bad guys and in the absence of any critical thinking, they save time by using simple indicators. The "weak" are good and the "strong" are bad.

    We see this time and again applied to any conflict apart, of course, from those they don't understand. Such as those taking place in Sudan and Yemen and Kashmir and so forth.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,741
    algarkirk said:

    HYUFD said:

    algarkirk said:

    pm215 said:

    Taz said:

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is, especially when they bring many economically inactive dependents with them, they do not pay their way. They are a burden on the economy. Migration central expects the dependents in the Boriswave, including carers, to cost £35 billion by 2028

    Looks like they have closed that off for new applications for care workers specifically. https://www.gov.uk/health-care-worker-visa/your-partner-and-children says:

    "If you’re a care worker or senior care worker

    Your partner and children cannot apply to join you or stay in the UK as your dependants unless you were employed as a care worker or senior care worker in the UK and on a Health and Care Worker visa before 11 March 2024 and [you're still on that same visa in some way]".

    These people doing us a favour by doing jobs the millions of UK workless don't want to do are, like the rest of us, people.

    How many of our nice UK doctors etc off to a nice life in Australia/NZ would go if they couldn't take their wife/husband/partner and 2.4 children with them?

    This is OK for young students for a fixed term. But not acceptable if we are serious about treating people who work for us and our elderly parents properly.
    Yes I could see the dependents migrants restriction being eased for carers
    Surely the prime time for emigrating is when people are young and before they have any dependants.
    Yes, but that is a different issue.
    Why? It means we invite young, single immigrants to do care jobs.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 55,516
    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    But that's not what she was sentenced for. The charge was "distributing material with the intention of stirring up racial hatred".
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,986

    Good morning and an exciting day for the telecommunications industry which I have now been involved with for many years.

    Vodafone and Three have completed their merger with the new business being called VodafoneThree.

    I will be joining their team in the coming months and I am very excited. Sadly that means I will be able to post here significantly less but until that time, I will post any information I can if it would be of interest.

    Will my existing cheap deal with Three go up by:
    a) a little
    b) a lot
    c) a lot a lot

    Vodafone are expensive shysters.
    I have a great broadband deal with BT.

    I now want a mobile contract - they will only supply me through EE and only if I switch to a more expensive broadband contract
    BT are passing all their business over to EE so your next broadband deal will be with EE rather than BT if you want to renew
    I know. It just irritates me that they are insisting I take on a more expensive contract today to expand the services I buy from them

    EE won't let me upgrade my £50 a month service to a £55 one because the contract still has a few months to run, never mind that they'd actually be getting more money. Computer says no.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,741
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    algarkirk said:

    pm215 said:

    Taz said:

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is, especially when they bring many economically inactive dependents with them, they do not pay their way. They are a burden on the economy. Migration central expects the dependents in the Boriswave, including carers, to cost £35 billion by 2028

    Looks like they have closed that off for new applications for care workers specifically. https://www.gov.uk/health-care-worker-visa/your-partner-and-children says:

    "If you’re a care worker or senior care worker

    Your partner and children cannot apply to join you or stay in the UK as your dependants unless you were employed as a care worker or senior care worker in the UK and on a Health and Care Worker visa before 11 March 2024 and [you're still on that same visa in some way]".

    These people doing us a favour by doing jobs the millions of UK workless don't want to do are, like the rest of us, people.

    How many of our nice UK doctors etc off to a nice life in Australia/NZ would go if they couldn't take their wife/husband/partner and 2.4 children with them?

    This is OK for young students for a fixed term. But not acceptable if we are serious about treating people who work for us and our elderly parents properly.
    Yes I could see the dependents migrants restriction being eased for carers
    Surely the prime time for emigrating is when people are young and before they have any dependants.
    Parents, brothers and sisters can also be included in dependents
    They shouldn't be. In UK benefit law they wouldn't be, neither are elderly parents. People can send money home if they want, and adult family members can apply to enter the country as single adults in the same way.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 61,432

    To add to Putin's miltary and economic woes, you can add a PR calamity too. The Russian casualites as claimed by Ukraine - dead, maimed, POW and missing - is barely 10,00 off hitting the million mark. Likely to be the full million by the middle of next week.

    That will start permeating to the people - even within Russia.

    The trouble is - this ain’t so

    I read a very good article at the weekend - apols, forget where, possibly the FT - which observed that

    1. The Russian economy is doing really quite well (much better than ours)

    And

    2. Putin has cleverly ensured that volunteers for the army (mainly from the ethnic periphery of Russia) get paid REALLY well. With massive bonuses etc

    This has created economic boomlets as the soldiers remit the money home, to previously impoverished boondocks. So the war is actually quite popular in places where you’d expect it to be wildly unpopular

    Russia is nowhere near cracking up, Putin is not in trouble with his people. It’s unfortunate but there it is

    Ukraine is better off concentrating on brilliant drone attacks and other stealth warfare than praying for the Putin regime to fall over
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,986

    To add to Putin's miltary and economic woes, you can add a PR calamity too. The Russian casualites as claimed by Ukraine - dead, maimed, POW and missing - is barely 10,00 off hitting the million mark. Likely to be the full million by the middle of next week.

    That will start permeating to the people - even within Russia.

    Maybe, although it might just invoke the Blitz spirit, or whatever the German equivalent was called. Revenge is often valued more highly than peace.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,960
    edited June 2
    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane

    The Labour councillor who told people to slit throats is still out on bail
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 14,500

    algarkirk said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    Incitement to kill people is just wrong. As it is when people suggest that shooting boat people would be an excellent policy. IIRC this happened on this platform recently.
    It's another irregular verb.

    I am speaking freely
    You are stepping over the line
    He/She/They have been charge with incitement
    People are free to hold the repugnant opinion that group X should be shot on sight or their houses set on fire or that all members of group Y should be gassed in a new holocaust. That is what freedom of opinion means.

    But those who hold such opinions - and it is this sort of group we are talking about - need to be aware that the line between lawfully holding and expressing the opinion and unlawfully encouraging people to act on it is drawn by society fairly tightly. For myself, I like it that way.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872
    isam said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane
    Once more.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/26/lucy-connolly-prison-appeal-free-speech/

    I very much like Sumption and I don't think he can be accused of being a lily-livered lefty. The size of the sentence I imagine followed sentencing guidelines.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,109
    edited June 2
    Leon said:

    https://x.com/costellowilliam/status/1928957288217464842?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Really short men have fewer lifetime sexual partners than taller men. Well I never

    The amazing thing is the low number. The median for everyone is 7 in a lifetime.

    7.

    SEVEN


    Not a typo

    😶

    You can't claim your 400 conquests, you know the rules hookers don't count, but even so....

  • LeonLeon Posts: 61,432
    I found one of the articles about Russia’s annoyingly buoyant economy. Well worth a read

    “Is the Ukraine war crushing Russia’s economy? Quite the opposite”

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/6ed736a7-6e34-404c-855f-ca52d197c36c?shareToken=be6a2e4328c20284da6f57f3f8e3456a
  • isamisam Posts: 41,960
    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane
    Once more.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/26/lucy-connolly-prison-appeal-free-speech/

    I very much like Sumption and I don't think he can be accused of being a lily-livered lefty. The size of the sentence I imagine followed sentencing guidelines.
    I like Sumption as well, but don’t subscribe to The Telegraph so can’t read that
  • theProle said:

    FF43 said:

    Rachel Reeves’s tax raid on farmers will cost the Treasury almost £2bn, analysis has found

    The analysis found that more than 60pc of family businesses and farms were planning to reduce investment by over a fifth in light of the changes.

    Around a quarter have already cut staff. By the end of this parliament, more than 200,000 jobs are expected to be lost, the research showed

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/06/02/labour-tax-raid-on-farmers-to-cost-treasury-up-to-2bn

    Lobbying company talks to 234 family businesses that are extremely pissed off at having to pay the same inheritance tax as everyone else and want you to know it "analysis".

    Some of the edge cases possibly do have an argument. Bit like WASPI women - don't overstate your case.
    I don't think it's the farm changes that are particularly financially damaging. It is the stuff they did on pension pots that makes it harder to pass on small businesses, particularly small businesses premises, without being clobbered for IHT that will be detering investment.

    Basically, it used to be the case that as the owner of a small business, you could create a special pension fund which (subject to some special rules) was able to invest in assets for your business (eg business premises). It was a really tax efficient way to buy your premises as you got a load of tax relief by effectively putting your business assets into your pension wrapper.

    It also made passing the business on without it being destroyed by IHT much easier, as said business assets were classed as a defined contribution pension pot, and exempt from IHT.

    Reeves having changed the rules on this will be reducing business investment - I know, because I was planning on doing this to buy my business it's own premises which would allow for expansion, and this rule change is one of the factors that's potentially derailing my investment plans.

    I've a small business that's quietly profitable. I could just relax and take the money, or I could reinvest the money into growth, creating more jobs, paying more tax. The harder the government makes it to go for growth, the more likely it is I just give up and enjoy the cash.

    Also, the more my business gets dragged into the IHT net, the more likely it is that on my demise my kids will just wind it up and shut the doors, rather than keep it on as a going concern.

    The fools at the treasury don't understand this - they just want to see if the pips are squeaking yet.
    This isn't right. Under pre-Reeves tax rules, there was no need to try to shelter the value of your business from IHT because it would attract 100% relief on death anyway, plus of course rebasing of value for CGT purposes. Your business was the LAST thing you would use your SSAS or SIPP (the kind of pension scheme you're thinking of) to shelter from tax.

    The benefits of these types of schemes are often oversold, or rather not done on a proper A/B comparison basis.

    Pension tax relief is like glitter that is often sprinkled over otherwise unattractive looking ideas.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,775

    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice review - thanks for the header.
    One opportunity Labour have I think is to say they will recognise Palestine as a state. Popular in the country and may go some way to repairing their very damaged relations with Muslim and Green voters.

    Will David Lammy be the Arthur Balfour of the 21st Century?
    Not auspicious, though I’m sure bumbling, Ill-considered incompetence sowing the seeds of future chaos are well within the powers of Lammy.


    To be fair to Balfour he acknowledged it wouldn't work without a proper Palestine.

    No Hitler/holocaust, no Israel, so we can blame Herr Hitler for the current mess.
    Eh? the Balfour Declaration arose from the First World War so Israel would still be here. There is, however, a school of thought that much of the current animosity comes from years of Nazi propaganda in the Middle East where they were trying to stir up native revolutions against the British, so to that extent, it is Hitler's fault.
    Look at the gap between the Balfour declaration and Israel being created.

    Even Balfour didn't want the whole of Palestine to be converted into a home for Jewish people, he said that would lead to problems.
    Which is what was reflected in the 1947 partition plan. A state each for arabs and jews.

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

    One side accepted it, one rejected it and articulated that rejection with military force.
    How would you react if Denmark decided to take up most of the UK and move in a few
    million Danes?
    If God had promised the land to the Danes
    4000 years ago, we’d just have to accept it.

    Any yet the Hammer of the Scots was just doing God’s work and you aren’t willing to accept that

    But he (or rather the fruit of his loins) had his arse kicked. God's will obviously.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 14,500
    edited June 2
    isam said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane

    The Labour councillor who told people to slit throats is still out on bail
    Agree on the whole. Sentence a bit steep. And agree that the system seems to favour some repugnant statements and incitements and over others.

    But the point about freedom of speech/opinion is that it is the alternative to violence, not a vehicle for encouraging it.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,078
    Excellent and detailed header. Very little here that I disagree with. The 2024 election already feels historical with the electoral landscape completely changed.
  • theProle said:

    FF43 said:

    Rachel Reeves’s tax raid on farmers will cost the Treasury almost £2bn, analysis has found

    The analysis found that more than 60pc of family businesses and farms were planning to reduce investment by over a fifth in light of the changes.

    Around a quarter have already cut staff. By the end of this parliament, more than 200,000 jobs are expected to be lost, the research showed

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/06/02/labour-tax-raid-on-farmers-to-cost-treasury-up-to-2bn

    Lobbying company talks to 234 family businesses that are extremely pissed off at having to pay the same inheritance tax as everyone else and want you to know it "analysis".

    Some of the edge cases possibly do have an argument. Bit like WASPI women - don't overstate your case.
    I don't think it's the farm changes that are particularly financially damaging. It is the stuff they did on pension pots that makes it harder to pass on small businesses, particularly small businesses premises, without being clobbered for IHT that will be detering investment.

    Basically, it used to be the case that as the owner of a small business, you could create a special pension fund which (subject to some special rules) was able to invest in assets for your business (eg business premises). It was a really tax efficient way to buy your premises as you got a load of tax relief by effectively putting your business assets into your pension wrapper.

    It also made passing the business on without it being destroyed by IHT much easier, as said business assets were classed as a defined contribution pension pot, and exempt from IHT.

    Reeves having changed the rules on this will be reducing business investment - I know, because I was planning on doing this to buy my business it's own premises which would allow for expansion, and this rule change is one of the factors that's potentially derailing my investment plans.

    I've a small business that's quietly profitable. I could just relax and take the money, or I could reinvest the money into growth, creating more jobs, paying more tax. The harder the government makes it to go for growth, the more likely it is I just give up and enjoy the cash.

    Also, the more my business gets dragged into the IHT net, the more likely it is that on my demise my kids will just wind it up and shut the doors, rather than keep it on as a going concern.

    The fools at the treasury don't understand this - they just want to see if the pips are squeaking yet.
    This isn't right. Under pre-Reeves tax rules, there was no need to try to shelter the value of your business from IHT because it would attract 100% relief on death anyway, plus of course rebasing of value for CGT purposes. Your business was the LAST thing you would use your SSAS or SIPP (the kind of pension scheme you're thinking of) to shelter from tax.

    The benefits of these types of schemes are often oversold, or rather not done on a proper A/B comparison basis.

    Pension tax relief is like glitter that is often sprinkled over otherwise unattractive looking ideas.
    To clarify, it's

    "I don't think it's the farm changes that are particularly financially damaging. It is the stuff they did on pension pots that makes it harder to pass on small businesses, particularly small businesses premises, without being clobbered for IHT that will be detering investment."

    that isn't right.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,584
    Starmer about to announce his defence review from Glasgow

    Farage to make a speech in Aberdeen half an hour later

    The media's cup overflows
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 6,205
    algarkirk said:

    isam said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane

    The Labour councillor who told people to slit throats is still out on bail
    Agree on the whole. Sentence a bit steep. And agree that the system seems to favour some repugnant statements and incitements and over others.

    But the point about freedom of speech/opinion is that it is the alternative to violence, not a vehicle for encouraging it.
    Sentence seems steep - but more than that, denying her bail when she'd already retracted the tweet seemed pretty shoddy.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872
    isam said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane
    Once more.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/26/lucy-connolly-prison-appeal-free-speech/

    I very much like Sumption and I don't think he can be accused of being a lily-livered lefty. The size of the sentence I imagine followed sentencing guidelines.
    I like Sumption as well, but don’t subscribe to The Telegraph so can’t read that
    Her conviction (she was prosecuted under public order laws) was justified because it was aggravated incitement to violence.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,109

    Starmer about to announce his defence review from Glasgow

    Farage to make a speech in Aberdeen half an hour later

    The media's cup overflows

    The leader of the party with 5 MPs gets equal billing to the Prime Minister. PM Farage becomes a self fulfilling media prophesy.

    Mind you Starmer is spending billions on Ukraine whilst the defence cost saving from Farage will be remarkable if he can get a NATO-free unilateral peace deal with Putin.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,486
    Leon said:

    To add to Putin's miltary and economic woes, you can add a PR calamity too. The Russian casualites as claimed by Ukraine - dead, maimed, POW and missing - is barely 10,00 off hitting the million mark. Likely to be the full million by the middle of next week.

    That will start permeating to the people - even within Russia.

    The trouble is - this ain’t so

    I read a very good article at the weekend - apols, forget where, possibly the FT - which observed that

    1. The Russian economy is doing really quite well (much better than ours)

    And

    2. Putin has cleverly ensured that volunteers for the army (mainly from the ethnic periphery of Russia) get paid REALLY well. With massive bonuses etc

    This has created economic boomlets as the soldiers remit the money home, to previously impoverished boondocks. So the war is actually quite popular in places where you’d expect it to be wildly unpopular

    Russia is nowhere near cracking up, Putin is not in trouble with his people. It’s unfortunate but there it is

    Ukraine is better off concentrating on brilliant drone attacks and other stealth warfare than praying for the Putin regime to fall over
    I think we will find out in future that the regime came very close to collapse in Spring/Summer 2023 (around the time of Prigozhin’s shenanigans, albeit that this wouldn’t have been the only element), but I think the most dangerous moment for Putin passed then and since then he has consolidated power further if anything.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,775
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice review - thanks for the header.
    One opportunity Labour have I think is to say they will recognise Palestine as a state. Popular in the country and may go some way to repairing their very damaged relations with Muslim and Green voters.

    Will David Lammy be the Arthur Balfour of the 21st Century?
    Not auspicious, though I’m sure bumbling, Ill-considered incompetence sowing the seeds of future chaos are well within the powers of Lammy.


    To be fair to Balfour he acknowledged it wouldn't work without a proper Palestine.

    No Hitler/holocaust, no Israel, so we can blame Herr Hitler for the current mess.
    Eh? the Balfour Declaration arose from the First World War so Israel would still be here. There is, however, a school of thought that much of the current animosity comes from years of Nazi propaganda in the Middle East where they were trying to stir up native revolutions against the British, so to that extent, it is Hitler's fault.
    Look at the gap between the Balfour declaration and Israel being created.

    Even Balfour didn't want the whole of Palestine to be converted into a home for Jewish people, he said that would lead to problems.
    Which is what was reflected in the 1947 partition plan. A state each for arabs and jews.

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

    One side accepted it, one rejected it and articulated that rejection with military force.
    How would you react if Denmark decided to take up most of the UK and move in a few million Danes?
    If God had promised the land to the Danes 4000 years ago, we’d just have to accept it.
    Was that you I saw at the march on Saturday in Dundee clamouring for the removal of white Americans from North America. It was, wasn't it, despite the mask.

    Free, free Philadelphia.
    I can hardly imagine why you might be in Dundee (is there a Lochee Hunt or was there a countryside despoiling shoot nearby?), but I certainly wasn't.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,741

    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice review - thanks for the header.
    One opportunity Labour have I think is to say they will recognise Palestine as a state. Popular in the country and may go some way to repairing their very damaged relations with Muslim and Green voters.

    Will David Lammy be the Arthur Balfour of the 21st Century?
    Not auspicious, though I’m sure bumbling, Ill-considered incompetence sowing the seeds of future chaos are well within the powers of Lammy.


    To be fair to Balfour he acknowledged it wouldn't work without a proper Palestine.

    No Hitler/holocaust, no Israel, so we can blame Herr Hitler for the current mess.
    Eh? the Balfour Declaration arose from the First World War so Israel would still be here. There is, however, a school of thought that much of the current animosity comes from years of Nazi propaganda in the Middle East where they were trying to stir up native revolutions against the British, so to that extent, it is Hitler's fault.
    Look at the gap between the Balfour declaration and Israel being created.

    Even Balfour didn't want the whole of Palestine to be converted into a home for Jewish people, he said that would lead to problems.
    Which is what was reflected in the 1947 partition plan. A state each for arabs and jews.

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

    One side accepted it, one rejected it and articulated that rejection with military force.
    How would you react if Denmark decided to take up most of the UK and move in a few million Danes?
    Er, they did. The English are Anglo-Danes.

    What we can't do is to claim that Lower Saxony was promised to us by God, move back in and kick the Germans out
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,344

    Good morning and an exciting day for the telecommunications industry which I have now been involved with for many years.

    Vodafone and Three have completed their merger with the new business being called VodafoneThree.

    I will be joining their team in the coming months and I am very excited. Sadly that means I will be able to post here significantly less but until that time, I will post any information I can if it would be of interest.

    Will my existing cheap deal with Three go up by:
    a) a little
    b) a lot
    c) a lot a lot

    Vodafone are expensive shysters.
    I have a great broadband deal with BT.

    I now want a mobile contract - they will only supply me through EE and only if I switch to a more expensive broadband contract
    BT are passing all their business over to EE so your next broadband deal will be with EE rather than BT if you want to renew
    I know. It just irritates me that they are insisting I take on a more expensive contract today to expand the services I buy from them

    EE won't let me upgrade my £50 a month service to a £55 one because the contract still has a few months to run, never mind that they'd actually be getting more money. Computer says no.
    My last change of contract, I was on EE, there was a deal, they said only new customers. I rung up and said I have been with you for 10 years, come on man, no, new customers only. I said, so if I tell you now I am leaving, no new customers only. So if I tell you I am leaving and then I put the phone down and ring up straight away am I new customer...yes....ok, so that is what I am going to do, can't you just save all the paperwork and give the deal....COMPUTER SAYS NO.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,775
    Leon said:

    I found one of the articles about Russia’s annoyingly buoyant economy. Well worth a read

    “Is the Ukraine war crushing Russia’s economy? Quite the opposite”

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/6ed736a7-6e34-404c-855f-ca52d197c36c?shareToken=be6a2e4328c20284da6f57f3f8e3456a

    Isn't that a reason for Putin (a bit like Bibi) being very unmotivated about ending the war?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,344
    edited June 2
    How is Starmer getting himself in just a muddle over defence spending and the commitment is for 10 years time. In reality, no commitment ever survives two terms in government without adjustment, who knows how the economy will go over the course of a decade, so he has nothing to lose by saving they are committed to it and move on.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,078
    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    Incitement to kill people is just wrong. As it is when people suggest that shooting boat people would be an excellent policy. IIRC this happened on this platform recently.
    It's another irregular verb.

    I am speaking freely
    You are stepping over the line
    He/She/They have been charge with incitement
    People are free to hold the repugnant opinion that group X should be shot on sight or their houses set on fire or that all members of group Y should be gassed in a new holocaust. That is what freedom of opinion means.

    But those who hold such opinions - and it is this sort of group we are talking about - need to be aware that the line between lawfully holding and expressing the opinion and unlawfully encouraging people to act on it is drawn by society fairly tightly. For myself, I like it that way.
    There seems to be a conflation of arguments: that Connolly didn't incite; that she should be free to say anything she wants.

    The court found on the facts that Connolly did incite mass violence. If the facts had been different the sentence would have been different. But her supporters don't accept that, so it's not clear what they are arguing anymore, beyond "she's one of us". That by itself tells me this law is necessary.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,741
    isam said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane

    The Labour councillor who told people to slit throats is still out on bail
    I presume that there is a legal presumption/precedent thing here.

    Otherwise someone could say "I wouldn't mind if someone shot my husband" in the right company, and subsequently claim to have nothing to do with his death.
  • TazTaz Posts: 18,727
    algarkirk said:

    Taz said:

    algarkirk said:

    Taz said:

    algarkirk said:

    pm215 said:

    Taz said:

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is, especially when they bring many economically inactive dependents with them, they do not pay their way. They are a burden on the economy. Migration central expects the dependents in the Boriswave, including carers, to cost £35 billion by 2028

    Looks like they have closed that off for new applications for care workers specifically. https://www.gov.uk/health-care-worker-visa/your-partner-and-children says:

    "If you’re a care worker or senior care worker

    Your partner and children cannot apply to join you or stay in the UK as your dependants unless you were employed as a care worker or senior care worker in the UK and on a Health and Care Worker visa before 11 March 2024 and [you're still on that same visa in some way]".

    These people doing us a favour by doing jobs the millions of UK workless don't want to do are, like the rest of us, people.

    How many of our nice UK doctors etc off to a nice life in Australia/NZ would go if they couldn't take their wife/husband/partner and 2.4 children with them?

    This is OK for young students for a fixed term. But not acceptable if we are serious about treating people who work for us and our elderly parents properly.
    We’re not talking about skilled workers but minimum wage workers and the cost of them runs into billions. It is absolutely acceptable as are the changes to ILR.

    They are used to suppress wages and people may point to the additional cost of wages but these people will never be net contributors but cost the state billions over the years taking out far more than they put in. For what ? To save care home owners a bit of money. Bonkers

    Skilled migration we should welcome. Unskilled is another matter.
    True, but a slightly different question.
    You compared the min wage carers to skilled doctors. Skilled doctors will be net contributors. Their dependents should be welcomed.
    The comparison I am making is that they are people.

    The context is one in which we, the UK, are rightly or wrongly, asking them in to do, long term, a job that needs doing. It is oppressive and wrong to expect that they abandon their families to do so, and we would not ask this of ourselves, or German bankers, or Russian oligarchs.
    High net worth individuals are leaving due to the tax regime anyway, so we do ask something of them, and we’ve been after more and more from them

    It is not oppressive nor is it wrong. They know the terms and are free to do as they wish. The profile of those who come may change as a consequence. So be it. It is wrong to saddle the tax payer with an excessive burden in the billions just to save a few quid for wealthy care home owners.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 61,432
    carnforth said:

    algarkirk said:

    isam said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane

    The Labour councillor who told people to slit throats is still out on bail
    Agree on the whole. Sentence a bit steep. And agree that the system seems to favour some repugnant statements and incitements and over others.

    But the point about freedom of speech/opinion is that it is the alternative to violence, not a vehicle for encouraging it.
    Sentence seems steep - but more than that, denying her bail when she'd already retracted the tweet seemed pretty shoddy.
    It was clearly a punitive sentence designed to deter; I personally think it is grossly severe - but I can see a grim logic

    The trouble is, the authorities apparently only punish - with this severity - certain types of crimes to deter certain types of people. Two Tier Kier

    As noted above, the Labour councillor literally filmed in a crowd calling for throats to be cut - a far more obvious incitement to violence, and this done out on the streets during the riots - still walks free

    So there is no logic to it at all, unless “two tier justice” IS the logic
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,344
    edited June 2
    Leon said:

    https://x.com/costellowilliam/status/1928957288217464842?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Really short men have fewer lifetime sexual partners than taller men. Well I never

    The amazing thing is the low number. The median for everyone is 7 in a lifetime.

    7.

    SEVEN


    Not a typo

    😶

    I wonder what the breakdown by age is? I would naively presume oldies lower than that, children of the 80s probably a fair bit higher than the median.

    In the noughties, there were seemingly limitless opportunities to get out and about with people looking to get their end away with the chain nightclubs and 18-30 holidays if that is what you wanted.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 30,986
    isam said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane
    Once more.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/26/lucy-connolly-prison-appeal-free-speech/

    I very much like Sumption and I don't think he can be accused of being a lily-livered lefty. The size of the sentence I imagine followed sentencing guidelines.
    I like Sumption as well, but don’t subscribe to The Telegraph so can’t read that
    Here is a free gift link to the Sumption article:-
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/fa5c3d85b0c16878
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,940

    Starmer about to announce his defence review from Glasgow

    Farage to make a speech in Aberdeen half an hour later

    The media's cup overflows

    'We are cutting away from the PM to go LIVE to Nigel Farage'
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,584

    How is Starmer getting himself in just a muddle over defence spending and the commitment is for 10 years time. In reality, no commitment ever survives two terms in government without adjustment, who knows how the economy will go over the course of a decade, so he has nothing to lose by saving they are committed to it and move on.

    He simply cannot commit to 3% without making choices that are alien to him

    However, without it the review is just words and you can be certain it will lack credibility
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,376
    Great article @GarethoftheVale2
    Looking forward to the subsequent installments!
  • TazTaz Posts: 18,727
    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane
    Once more.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/26/lucy-connolly-prison-appeal-free-speech/

    I very much like Sumption and I don't think he can be accused of being a lily-livered lefty. The size of the sentence I imagine followed sentencing guidelines.
    I like Sumption as well, but don’t subscribe to The Telegraph so can’t read that
    Her conviction (she was prosecuted under public order laws) was justified because it was aggravated incitement to violence.
    She also pleaded guilty.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 61,432

    Leon said:

    https://x.com/costellowilliam/status/1928957288217464842?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Really short men have fewer lifetime sexual partners than taller men. Well I never

    The amazing thing is the low number. The median for everyone is 7 in a lifetime.

    7.

    SEVEN


    Not a typo

    😶

    I wonder what the breakdown by age is? I would naively presume oldies lower than that, children of the 80s probably a fair bit higher than the median.
    Yes. And probably trending down again since the noughties - as kids have got more Puritan and keener on porn and TikTok than actual sex

    It’s only us oversexed bohemian roues of the 80s and 90s keeping the median above, say, 3
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872
    PLEASE NOTE

    You can read the very good Sumption article for free if you sign up to a 7-day free trial of the Telegraph.

    It is well worth a read, in particular for the purposes of today's discussion.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 61,432

    Leon said:

    I found one of the articles about Russia’s annoyingly buoyant economy. Well worth a read

    “Is the Ukraine war crushing Russia’s economy? Quite the opposite”

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/6ed736a7-6e34-404c-855f-ca52d197c36c?shareToken=be6a2e4328c20284da6f57f3f8e3456a

    Isn't that a reason for Putin (a bit like Bibi) being very unmotivated about ending the war?
    Sadly, yes

    He’s a got a wartime economy motoring along, Russia doesn’t appear particularly restive. Some previously unhappy far flung provinces are quite chuffed with the war. Why stop now? Especially as he is slowly grinding Ukraine down?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice review - thanks for the header.
    One opportunity Labour have I think is to say they will recognise Palestine as a state. Popular in the country and may go some way to repairing their very damaged relations with Muslim and Green voters.

    Will David Lammy be the Arthur Balfour of the 21st Century?
    Not auspicious, though I’m sure bumbling, Ill-considered incompetence sowing the seeds of future chaos are well within the powers of Lammy.


    To be fair to Balfour he acknowledged it wouldn't work without a proper Palestine.

    No Hitler/holocaust, no Israel, so we can blame Herr Hitler for the current mess.
    Eh? the Balfour Declaration arose from the First World War so Israel would still be here. There is, however, a school of thought that much of the current animosity comes from years of Nazi propaganda in the Middle East where they were trying to stir up native revolutions against the British, so to that extent, it is Hitler's fault.
    Look at the gap between the Balfour declaration and Israel being created.

    Even Balfour didn't want the whole of Palestine to be converted into a home for Jewish people, he said that would lead to problems.
    Which is what was reflected in the 1947 partition plan. A state each for arabs and jews.

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

    One side accepted it, one rejected it and articulated that rejection with military force.
    How would you react if Denmark decided to take up most of the UK and move in a few million Danes?
    If God had promised the land to the Danes 4000 years ago, we’d just have to accept it.
    Was that you I saw at the march on Saturday in Dundee clamouring for the removal of white Americans from North America. It was, wasn't it, despite the mask.

    Free, free Philadelphia.
    I can hardly imagine why you might be in Dundee (is there a Lochee Hunt or was there a countryside despoiling shoot nearby?), but I certainly wasn't.
    A countryside-preserving shoot you mean? Only simulated game rn. But no, Dundee was luckily enough to avoid me. (Scottish) pound to a penny there was a Free Palestine demo there, however.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872
    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    Incitement to kill people is just wrong. As it is when people suggest that shooting boat people would be an excellent policy. IIRC this happened on this platform recently.
    It's another irregular verb.

    I am speaking freely
    You are stepping over the line
    He/She/They have been charge with incitement
    People are free to hold the repugnant opinion that group X should be shot on sight or their houses set on fire or that all members of group Y should be gassed in a new holocaust. That is what freedom of opinion means.

    But those who hold such opinions - and it is this sort of group we are talking about - need to be aware that the line between lawfully holding and expressing the opinion and unlawfully encouraging people to act on it is drawn by society fairly tightly. For myself, I like it that way.
    There seems to be a conflation of arguments: that Connolly didn't incite; that she should be free to say anything she wants.

    The court found on the facts that Connolly did incite mass violence. If the facts had been different the sentence would have been different. But her supporters don't accept that, so it's not clear what they are arguing anymore, beyond "she's one of us". That by itself tells me this law is necessary.
    It was aggravated incitement to violence.

    Which is an offence all day long.

    No idea about the sentence, but surely followed guidelines.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 19,055

    isam said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane

    The Labour councillor who told people to slit throats is still out on bail
    I presume that there is a legal presumption/precedent thing here.

    Otherwise someone could say "I wouldn't mind if someone shot my husband" in the right company, and subsequently claim to have nothing to do with his death.
    Pace Thomas a Becket, or St Thomas of Canterbury as he became.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 10,833
    Leon said:

    https://x.com/costellowilliam/status/1928957288217464842?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Really short men have fewer lifetime sexual partners than taller men. Well I never

    The amazing thing is the low number. The median for everyone is 7 in a lifetime.

    7.

    SEVEN


    Not a typo

    😶

    These stats are stupid. If you're in a long-term relationship having loads of great sex then you score badly.

    If you extrapolated the number of different partners young people have when they are single across a couple of decades it could stretch into the hundreds. But most people are able to sustain and enjoy long-term relationships.

    For me, those single periods were exciting but unfulfilling. I don't pine for them in the same way I do previous long term partners, which suggests they weren't particularly meaningful.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872
    Taz said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane
    Once more.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/26/lucy-connolly-prison-appeal-free-speech/

    I very much like Sumption and I don't think he can be accused of being a lily-livered lefty. The size of the sentence I imagine followed sentencing guidelines.
    I like Sumption as well, but don’t subscribe to The Telegraph so can’t read that
    Her conviction (she was prosecuted under public order laws) was justified because it was aggravated incitement to violence.
    She also pleaded guilty.
    Plus she took post down quickly. But in that time it had been seen hundreds of thousands of times and hence was not a sufficient mitigating factor.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,775

    Starmer about to announce his defence review from Glasgow

    Farage to make a speech in Aberdeen half an hour later

    The media's cup overflows

    'We are cutting away from the PM to go LIVE to Nigel Farage'
    Is there any indication as to why Farage is starting his campaigning for the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by election in Aberdeen (140 miles away) of all places? He should at least be putting his Royal Mile (40 miles away) befouled underwear moment behind him.
  • TazTaz Posts: 18,727

    Taz said:

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is, especially when they bring many economically inactive dependents with them, they do not pay their way. They are a burden on the economy. Migration central expects the dependents in the Boriswave, including carers, to cost £35 billion by 2028

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is that the system became the sale of visas (a crime) for jobs that didn't actually exist.

    Ripping off people from the developing world at £15K at time. So you are taking their saving and probably all the savings of their family. Nice.

    It also had the slight flaw that nearly no-one on such visas ended up working in care.

    So apart from it being a way for criminals to rip off poor people, it didn't work.
    Indeed. Many stories like these. It is really hard, irrespective of one’s feelings about the Boriswave, not to feel sorry for these people and someone should be held to account for this. No one will.

    https://news.sky.com/story/more-than-100-migrants-face-being-in-uk-illegally-as-care-agency-is-stripped-of-ability-to-endorse-visas-13178490
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872

    Starmer about to announce his defence review from Glasgow

    Farage to make a speech in Aberdeen half an hour later

    The media's cup overflows

    'We are cutting away from the PM to go LIVE to Nigel Farage'
    Is there any indication as to why Farage is starting his campaigning for the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by election in Aberdeen (140 miles away) of all places? He should at least be putting his Royal Mile (40 miles away) befouled underwear moment behind him.
    He probably believes, like any right-thinking Englishman, that it is all the same.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 55,516
    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    Incitement to kill people is just wrong. As it is when people suggest that shooting boat people would be an excellent policy. IIRC this happened on this platform recently.
    It's another irregular verb.

    I am speaking freely
    You are stepping over the line
    He/She/They have been charge with incitement
    People are free to hold the repugnant opinion that group X should be shot on sight or their houses set on fire or that all members of group Y should be gassed in a new holocaust. That is what freedom of opinion means.

    But those who hold such opinions - and it is this sort of group we are talking about - need to be aware that the line between lawfully holding and expressing the opinion and unlawfully encouraging people to act on it is drawn by society fairly tightly. For myself, I like it that way.
    There seems to be a conflation of arguments: that Connolly didn't incite; that she should be free to say anything she wants.

    The court found on the facts that Connolly did incite mass violence. If the facts had been different the sentence would have been different. But her supporters don't accept that, so it's not clear what they are arguing anymore, beyond "she's one of us". That by itself tells me this law is necessary.
    It was aggravated incitement to violence.

    Which is an offence all day long.

    No idea about the sentence, but surely followed guidelines.
    She wasn't sentenced for incitement to violence but for stirring up racial hatred.

    https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/R-v-Lucy-Connolly.pdf
  • TazTaz Posts: 18,727
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice review - thanks for the header.
    One opportunity Labour have I think is to say they will recognise Palestine as a state. Popular in the country and may go some way to repairing their very damaged relations with Muslim and Green voters.

    Will David Lammy be the Arthur Balfour of the 21st Century?
    Not auspicious, though I’m sure bumbling, Ill-considered incompetence sowing the seeds of future chaos are well within the powers of Lammy.


    To be fair to Balfour he acknowledged it wouldn't work without a proper Palestine.

    No Hitler/holocaust, no Israel, so we can blame Herr Hitler for the current mess.
    Eh? the Balfour Declaration arose from the First World War so Israel would still be here. There is, however, a school of thought that much of the current animosity comes from years of Nazi propaganda in the Middle East where they were trying to stir up native revolutions against the British, so to that extent, it is Hitler's fault.
    Look at the gap between the Balfour declaration and Israel being created.

    Even Balfour didn't want the whole of Palestine to be converted into a home for Jewish people, he said that would lead to problems.
    Which is what was reflected in the 1947 partition plan. A state each for arabs and jews.

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

    One side accepted it, one rejected it and articulated that rejection with military force.
    How would you react if Denmark decided to take up most of the UK and move in a few million Danes?
    If God had promised the land to the Danes 4000 years ago, we’d just have to accept it.
    Was that you I saw at the march on Saturday in Dundee clamouring for the removal of white Americans from North America. It was, wasn't it, despite the mask.

    Free, free Philadelphia.
    Did they drive there in bare feet, gorging on Toblerone ?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,584

    Starmer about to announce his defence review from Glasgow

    Farage to make a speech in Aberdeen half an hour later

    The media's cup overflows

    'We are cutting away from the PM to go LIVE to Nigel Farage'
    Is there any indication as to why Farage is starting his campaigning for the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by election in Aberdeen (140 miles away) of all places? He should at least be putting his Royal Mile (40 miles away) befouled underwear moment behind him.
    I assume Aberdeen is likely to be receptive to his message over oil and fishing
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,344
    edited June 2
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    https://x.com/costellowilliam/status/1928957288217464842?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Really short men have fewer lifetime sexual partners than taller men. Well I never

    The amazing thing is the low number. The median for everyone is 7 in a lifetime.

    7.

    SEVEN


    Not a typo

    😶

    I wonder what the breakdown by age is? I would naively presume oldies lower than that, children of the 80s probably a fair bit higher than the median.
    Yes. And probably trending down again since the noughties - as kids have got more Puritan and keener on porn and TikTok than actual sex

    It’s only us oversexed bohemian roues of the 80s and 90s keeping the median above, say, 3
    I can't imagine social media helps in terms of kids being relaxed about hooking up with others. Constant walking on eggshells of one of your mates snapping you snogging a random and also having to keep up appearances on the gram. Plus #MeToo of course.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,435

    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Nice review - thanks for the header.
    One opportunity Labour have I think is to say they will recognise Palestine as a state. Popular in the country and may go some way to repairing their very damaged relations with Muslim and Green voters.

    Will David Lammy be the Arthur Balfour of the 21st Century?
    Not auspicious, though I’m sure bumbling, Ill-considered incompetence sowing the seeds of future chaos are well within the powers of Lammy.


    To be fair to Balfour he acknowledged it wouldn't work without a proper Palestine.

    No Hitler/holocaust, no Israel, so we can blame Herr Hitler for the current mess.
    Eh? the Balfour Declaration arose from the First World War so Israel would still be here. There is, however, a school of thought that much of the current animosity comes from years of Nazi propaganda in the Middle East where they were trying to stir up native revolutions against the British, so to that extent, it is Hitler's fault.
    Look at the gap between the Balfour declaration and Israel being created.

    Even Balfour didn't want the whole of Palestine to be converted into a home for Jewish people, he said that would lead to problems.
    Which is what was reflected in the 1947 partition plan. A state each for arabs and jews.

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

    One side accepted it, one rejected it and articulated that rejection with military force.
    How would you react if Denmark decided to take up most of the UK and move in a few million Danes?
    They already have done that, albeit 1,000 years ago.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,775

    Starmer about to announce his defence review from Glasgow

    Farage to make a speech in Aberdeen half an hour later

    The media's cup overflows

    'We are cutting away from the PM to go LIVE to Nigel Farage'
    Is there any indication as to why Farage is starting his campaigning for the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by election in Aberdeen (140 miles away) of all places? He should at least be putting his Royal Mile (40 miles away) befouled underwear moment behind him.
    I assume Aberdeen is likely to be receptive to his message over oil and fishing
    'Brexit worked out really well for you fisherman, with me in charge it'll be even greaterer!'

    Hope he goes for a walkabout pint, the Prince of Wales (longest bar in UK) would be an obvious choice.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,872

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    Incitement to kill people is just wrong. As it is when people suggest that shooting boat people would be an excellent policy. IIRC this happened on this platform recently.
    It's another irregular verb.

    I am speaking freely
    You are stepping over the line
    He/She/They have been charge with incitement
    People are free to hold the repugnant opinion that group X should be shot on sight or their houses set on fire or that all members of group Y should be gassed in a new holocaust. That is what freedom of opinion means.

    But those who hold such opinions - and it is this sort of group we are talking about - need to be aware that the line between lawfully holding and expressing the opinion and unlawfully encouraging people to act on it is drawn by society fairly tightly. For myself, I like it that way.
    There seems to be a conflation of arguments: that Connolly didn't incite; that she should be free to say anything she wants.

    The court found on the facts that Connolly did incite mass violence. If the facts had been different the sentence would have been different. But her supporters don't accept that, so it's not clear what they are arguing anymore, beyond "she's one of us". That by itself tells me this law is necessary.
    It was aggravated incitement to violence.

    Which is an offence all day long.

    No idea about the sentence, but surely followed guidelines.
    She wasn't sentenced for incitement to violence but for stirring up racial hatred.

    https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/R-v-Lucy-Connolly.pdf
    Section 19 of the Public Order Act.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,109
    edited June 2

    How is Starmer getting himself in just a muddle over defence spending and the commitment is for 10 years time. In reality, no commitment ever survives two terms in government without adjustment, who knows how the economy will go over the course of a decade, so he has nothing to lose by saving they are committed to it and move on.

    He simply cannot commit to 3% without making choices that are alien to him

    However, without it the review is just words and you can be certain it will lack credibility
    I am not sure you can write that first paragraph with a straight face when this government have been the most heartless in history, cutting, foreign aid to the neediest nations, WFP payments for very poor pensioners and removing PIP payments from the poorliest people in the country

    LibDem saying 2.5% and 3% in 2034 is not enough and not swift enough.

    LibDem on LBC suggesting that Starmer has given Putin a green light to attack the Baltic States of Ukraine peace is agreed. Lib Dems using a digital services tax to pay for 3% today.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,344
    THE shirtless flamethrowing and firebomb "terrorist" Mohamed Sabry Soliman has been described as an "illegal alien" by a White House official. The Egyptian national, 45, illegally overstayed his visa before being issued a new work permit in the US, federal officials said.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 54,879
    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is, especially when they bring many economically inactive dependents with them, they do not pay their way. They are a burden on the economy. Migration central expects the dependents in the Boriswave, including carers, to cost £35 billion by 2028

    The problem with visas for minimum wage carers is that the system became the sale of visas (a crime) for jobs that didn't actually exist.

    Ripping off people from the developing world at £15K at time. So you are taking their saving and probably all the savings of their family. Nice.

    It also had the slight flaw that nearly no-one on such visas ended up working in care.

    So apart from it being a way for criminals to rip off poor people, it didn't work.
    Indeed. Many stories like these. It is really hard, irrespective of one’s feelings about the Boriswave, not to feel sorry for these people and someone should be held to account for this. No one will.

    https://news.sky.com/story/more-than-100-migrants-face-being-in-uk-illegally-as-care-agency-is-stripped-of-ability-to-endorse-visas-13178490
    Why would you have any negative feelings about the immigrants who came? They came to try and build a better life. They often come from countries where a bribe is how things work - especially for those at the bottom. In fact, they probably didn't know that being sold a visa was irregular. It's usually dressed up as "fees" or "expenses".

    Which is why I advocate a law that such people can take the "employers" to court and take money off them - no hiding assets in the usual multiple companies stuff. Use the Proceeds of Crime acts.

    Just imagine the moment when it dawns on the scum - that all the people they've mistreated can take their money... all those people in their sweat shops have "the whip hand now", like the chap said.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 16,545
    Leon said:

    https://x.com/costellowilliam/status/1928957288217464842?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Really short men have fewer lifetime sexual partners than taller men. Well I never

    The amazing thing is the low number. The median for everyone is 7 in a lifetime.

    7.

    SEVEN


    Not a typo

    😶

    Seems pretty high to me!
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 10,833
    Quite surprised at the lack of media coverage on the small boats numbers. Not in the Most read section on the BBC; didn't make the Telegraph or Mail front pages.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,435
    Leon said:

    https://x.com/costellowilliam/status/1928957288217464842?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    Really short men have fewer lifetime sexual partners than taller men. Well I never

    The amazing thing is the low number. The median for everyone is 7 in a lifetime.

    7.

    SEVEN


    Not a typo

    😶

    About 20% of men probably have none, and about 30% probably have just one or two, about another 40% have 5-8 partners and the top 10% probably have dozens and dozens.

    So, it doesn't surprise me.
  • TazTaz Posts: 18,727
    TOPPING said:

    Taz said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    algarkirk said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    If Lucy Connolly had prefaced her tweet with “I wouldn’t care if someone…” rather than ended it with “…for all I care” would that have made any difference

    If you support, in general, exemplary sentences, then Lucy Connolly got what she deserved. If not, then it is another example of 2-tier justice because that is, almost by definition, what exemplary sentencing means. But there's a lot of people who want to free Connolly but were quite happy to see young people locked up for stealing water a decade ago.
    The difference is that Connolly did nothing - was not personally and physically involved. And her tweet was deleted within 3 hours

    The water stealers were directly involved in riots. Albeit simply stealing water
    She incited. By way of comparison, in a contract killing the initiator is not personally and physically involved in the shooting. They charcteristically are treated by the courts as being even more culpable than the physical killer.

    Inciters are often quite bright. Actors in riots are often quite dim.

    Having said all of that, the sentence was a bit steep. But incitemenmt to kill should be taken very seriously.
    What she tweeted wasn’t a rallying call though was it? She wasn’t instructing people to do something, more saying she wouldn’t care if it happened, and as she is not a person of any influence, it shouldn’t be thought to carry any weight. Jo Brand saying it was a shame Farage never got battery acid flung at him seems the same to me. You could interpret it as a “nice place you’ve got here, shame if anything happened to it” type of threat/encouragement or think of it as a joke/letting off steam. Either way 2 1/2 years in prison for it insane
    Once more.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/26/lucy-connolly-prison-appeal-free-speech/

    I very much like Sumption and I don't think he can be accused of being a lily-livered lefty. The size of the sentence I imagine followed sentencing guidelines.
    I like Sumption as well, but don’t subscribe to The Telegraph so can’t read that
    Her conviction (she was prosecuted under public order laws) was justified because it was aggravated incitement to violence.
    She also pleaded guilty.
    Plus she took post down quickly. But in that time it had been seen hundreds of thousands of times and hence was not a sufficient mitigating factor.
    Also worth remembering, even if not directly linked, some people did actually set fire to migrant hotels.

    Although I feel her sentence is excessive she pleaded guilty and, quite frankly, deserves to be punished.

    I must admit I don’t get people seeing her as a free speech martyr or political prisoner. She did a foolish thing in a moment and is now paying the price.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,584

    How is Starmer getting himself in just a muddle over defence spending and the commitment is for 10 years time. In reality, no commitment ever survives two terms in government without adjustment, who knows how the economy will go over the course of a decade, so he has nothing to lose by saving they are committed to it and move on.

    He simply cannot commit to 3% without making choices that are alien to him

    However, without it the review is just words and you can be certain it will lack credibility
    I am not sure you can write that first paragraph with a straight face when this government have been the most heartless in history, cutting, foreign aid to the neediest nations, WFP payments for very poor pensioners and removing PIP payments from the poorliest people in the country

    LibDem saying 2.5% and 3% in 2034 is not enough and not swift enough.
    There are plenty of areas to reduce or cut but your comment confirms in many ways how the left will not let him do it
Sign In or Register to comment.