Morning all, the slight retrenchment of Reforms lead continues with YG this week
YouGov / Sky / Times
Here are this week’s voting intention figures
CON 17%(nc), LAB 24%(+1), LDEM 16%(nc), RefUK 26%(-1), GRN 10%(nc)
There's a really wide spread LibDem voting intention figures: I think I've seen both an 8% and a 16% in the last few weeks.
No, LD range is 11 to 17 since March. Since the GE they've had 2 x 9 and 1 x 10 (with Ashcrroft and Freshwater) but since March's 10 with Ashcroft all 11 to 15 mainly with the odd 16 and 17 (mostly with YouGov and Techne)
Maybe he thinks falling out with Trump will rescue falling Tesla sales around the world?
Although in Norway half the population seems to have one already.
As I keep pointing out to people, much of the falling sales are a lack of Model Y this year vs last year. With the new Y now being delivered, the figures will go back to as they were.
It's July now. If what you say is true, there will have to be a large spike very quickly
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I’m not getting any sense of this government’s having a long-term plan.
They have the only politically realistic objective/plan possible. Nudge us towards higher growth whilst avoiding a sovereign debt crisis. The same plan any other party would have in government other than reality-avoiding ones.
Of course there is more than one way to pursue this. Their choice is to increase spending and focus it towards capital projects. Funded by borrowing within market constraints and tax rises within political constraints.
Yes but more is needed for a plan. The state takes it upon itself to run stuff - quite a lot of stuff. The absolutely minimum expectation is that it does all of these myriad functions very well. It is doing that which must lie at the heart of a plan. The public notice delivery. The long term stuff matters of course. Tesco will have a plan for long term building maintenance and logistics like fire extinguishers abnd a IT staff of billions. But the public notice cornflakes and lettuces and price.
One thing to watch tonight in the vote.... If the new reasoned amendment is selected and narrowly fails, there's no guarantee the bill progresses. Rachel Maskell this morning says she's had several say they arent bothering with amendments any more they will just vote the bills second reading itself down. She had 40 signed on her amendment overnight from Labour and claims 'loads more' are rebelling (pinch of salt required of course!) Still tight......
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I’m not getting any sense of this government’s having a long-term plan.
London is filled with policy wonk institutes, staffed by people who are quite clever and formulate policy all the time in all flavours of the spectrum, and are capable, unlike MPs, of thinking simultaneously about social policy, tax, debt, priorities, costs, budgets reality and so on.
It is odd that a fairly centrist government seems to have no coherent narrative or plan when it has so much to draw on. Working out and communicating a social democratic plan should not be that hard. It's been the only real candidate in the UK since 1945.
The problem is the quality of the policy wonks - see our politicians.
It’s been said several times - PB creates better thought out policies. Think about what that means.
If the bill does fall (still expect it to pass by a small margin) then the outfall in my opinion would be the immediate resignation of Kendall (and Timms) and Reeves sacked within a fortnight
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Are you a Labour supporter?
No. Lifelong One Nation Tory currently voting Labour; would vote LD if in one of the 100 seats they are in play. Would look again at the Tories if Hunt was the leader. Would vote Tory currently only to stop Reform or if my old MP, Rory Stewart, was the candidate!
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Until a new gov with a big majority is willing to risk self-immolation at the next GE then nothing radical or big or transformational will ever get done.
There is always one and a half eyes on the next GE and the act of staying in power trumps actually doing anything difficult and unpopular.
Starmer, and Blair, had majorities that would have allowed them to make sweeping changes early on and hope that the electorate would realise four years later that it was actually something good for the country and reward them but they are too cowardly.
I have to say while I didn't vote Labour in 1997, I did think we were going to see some radical policies but the first term was a complete waste of time, effort and political capital while the second term was defined by what happened on September 11th 2001.
There's an element when you come into Government of finding your feet, working out how it all works etc but you should have your first two or three years of legislation ready to go with draft versions of Bills to be worked up by the Civil Service into legislation.
Yes, you have to respond to events - Southport was unforeseeable and Starmer had to respond and being new into Government, the initial response was clumsy but it improved.
The three great radical Governments of the 20th Century were Asquith's in 1906, Attlee's in 1945 and Thatcher's in 1979. Each came in with a clear vision of how they wanted to enact significant and substantial change to Government and institutions and society.
Asquith's Liberals and Attlee's Labour Party both took heavy losses in the next elections but most of what they implemented stuck and was eventually if begrudingly accepted by the Conservatives. Thatcher's real radicalism came in the second term after the 1983 landslide.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Oh come on. You're being unkind. Labour have a plan: spend no money on palliative care and push people into AD. That will save money, as those promoting it are open about. Same with the disabled: if they're made poorer or life becomes horrible and a burden, well, AD is available and can be suggested to them. Again money from the welfare and NHS budgets will be saved.
It's a plan. Not a nice one, I grant you. But a plan nonetheless. Credit should be given.
Really Starmer should sack Kendall and replace her with Leadbetter. She would be very good at presenting all these changes as simply an example of "choice" and "autonomy" for disabled people and, if they disagree, simply ignoring them. She's good at that.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
Yes they did and they really epitomise the very worst of our politics
The whole Tim Farron thing was strange and so is this. Like, what did you expect?
Ooof. That's harsh. It's not the Lib Dems, it is imo that particular priest taking an inappropriate public stance, even if he is of a different view. That will be manna for the National Secular Society - they will be asking "how many of the other Roman Catholic MPs caved in to bullying by their priests?".
The MP is there to represent his constituents, or his own conscience in matters like this.
And the Roman Catholic church teaches the right to an individual conscience. Roughly (AI but about right):
In Catholic teaching, individuals have a right and duty to follow their conscience, which is seen as a judgment of reason that helps them discern good from evil. This right is not absolute, however, as conscience must be formed and informed by objective moral truths, particularly those revealed through Church teaching and Scripture. While individuals are not to be forced to act against their conscience, they also have a responsibility to seek truth and conform their conscience to it.
Good on the MP, and shame on the priest.
I wonder if the excommunication of the MP was sanctioned by the Bishop. If not, it is the Priest who will have questions to answer.
Is this formally "excommunication", which is a very institutionalised word in the RC Church, aiui?
At a parish level, for a Priest to publicly announce and deny communion needs something regarded as 'grave and continuing public sin' - more commonly that could be carrying on a scandalous affair or similar in full view of the community. Traditionally it could also be divorce or cohabitation (?). A public calling out would probably require a public repentance, or private repentance followed by a public announcement.
(TBF some other churches have arrangements such as "disfellowshipping", and the Westminster Confession prescribes three stages of rebuke, based on iirc guidance sent by Saint Paul to one of the congregations who received his NT "letters".)
Here to me the priestly interference with the democratic process seems quite a biggie, maybe up there with someone doing postal votes for an entire family.
I think both the press and the Bishop may have things to say.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
The "policy", such as it was, was unveiled as part of a General Election campaign and appeared a hurriedly put-together ill-conceived set of ideas. As a starting point for a discussion mid way through a Parliament, perhaps but not as an election gimmick.
It was opposed because it was lacking in key areas and people had some quite fundamental questions and concerns.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
Lib Dems didn't owe the Conservatives any favours, given the way that party treated them in coalition.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
Lib Dems total opportunists? Surely some mistake!
A tedious, inaccurate and rather cheap shot. Especially when one considers the way that the Conservative Party have cost the country trillions in their attempt to solve their own internal split over Europe.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
Mr. 86, to be fair, she did it in the most stupid and cackhanded way possible.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
The "policy", such as it was, was unveiled as part of a General Election campaign and appeared a hurriedly put-together ill-conceived set of ideas. As a starting point for a discussion mid way through a Parliament, perhaps but not as an election gimmick.
It was opposed because it was lacking in key areas and people had some quite fundamental questions and concerns.
Bollocks. She was presenting her plan up front to the electorate rather than sneaking it in after the election.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
Mr. 86, to be fair, she did it in the most stupid and cackhanded way possible.
I don't think she did. I think she thought she was so far ahead in the polls she could get away with including something necessary but unpopular in the manifesto.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I’m not getting any sense of this government’s having a long-term plan.
London is filled with policy wonk institutes, staffed by people who are quite clever and formulate policy all the time in all flavours of the spectrum, and are capable, unlike MPs, of thinking simultaneously about social policy, tax, debt, priorities, costs, budgets reality and so on.
It is odd that a fairly centrist government seems to have no coherent narrative or plan when it has so much to draw on. Working out and communicating a social democratic plan should not be that hard. It's been the only real candidate in the UK since 1945.
The problem is the quality of the policy wonks - see our politicians.
It’s been said several times - PB creates better thought out policies. Think about what that means.
Mostly it means that the so-called think tanks are in fact propaganda machines for shallow and dangerous ideologues.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
The "policy", such as it was, was unveiled as part of a General Election campaign and appeared a hurriedly put-together ill-conceived set of ideas. As a starting point for a discussion mid way through a Parliament, perhaps but not as an election gimmick.
It was opposed because it was lacking in key areas and people had some quite fundamental questions and concerns.
Bollocks. She was presenting her plan up front to the electorate rather than sneaking it in after the election.
Yes but the plan was far from complete and plenty of people had a lot of questions and concerns.
I do agree calling it a "dementia tax" was a cheap and unnecessary shot but it's a complex and complicated area which needs proper discussion and scrutiny not just involving MPs but lots of other organisations and groups.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
Mr. 86, to be fair, she did it in the most stupid and cackhanded way possible.
I don't think she did. I think she thought she was so far ahead in the polls she could get away with including something necessary but unpopular in the manifesto.
My criticism of her and her team was that they weren't prepared for what was going to come. They needed to be prepared to fight hard on it and go for their opponents ("they have no plan" etc. etc.).
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
Lib Dems total opportunists? Surely some mistake!
A tedious, inaccurate and rather cheap shot. Especially when one considers the way that the Conservative Party have cost the country trillions in their attempt to solve their own internal split over Europe.
When it comes to expensive referendums, you might ask Britain's millions of students whether they think tripling tuition fees was worth an ill-fated, self-indulgent poll on changing our voting system.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
Lib Dems total opportunists? Surely some mistake!
A tedious, inaccurate and rather cheap shot. Especially when one considers the way that the Conservative Party have cost the country trillions in their attempt to solve their own internal split over Europe.
It’s PB. It’s full of cheap shots. Plenty from the Lib Dem contingent too. Let he who is free of all sin…..
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
The "policy", such as it was, was unveiled as part of a General Election campaign and appeared a hurriedly put-together ill-conceived set of ideas. As a starting point for a discussion mid way through a Parliament, perhaps but not as an election gimmick.
It was opposed because it was lacking in key areas and people had some quite fundamental questions and concerns.
Bollocks. She was presenting her plan up front to the electorate rather than sneaking it in after the election.
Yes but the plan was far from complete and plenty of people had a lot of questions and concerns.
I do agree calling it a "dementia tax" was a cheap and unnecessary shot but it's a complex and complicated area which needs proper discussion and scrutiny not just involving MPs but lots of other organisations and groups.
‘I had unexpectedly amazing sex with a lawyer who works with my team, and a few days later they sent me a LinkedIn connection request. Is this how lawyers flirt?’
‘I had unexpectedly amazing sex with a lawyer who works with my team, and a few days later they sent me a LinkedIn connection request. Is this how lawyers flirt?’
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
Lib Dems total opportunists? Surely some mistake!
A tedious, inaccurate and rather cheap shot. Especially when one considers the way that the Conservative Party have cost the country trillions in their attempt to solve their own internal split over Europe.
Its not cheap at all. 'Winning here' bar charters are opportunists, always were
Maybe he thinks falling out with Trump will rescue falling Tesla sales around the world?
Although in Norway half the population seems to have one already.
As I keep pointing out to people, much of the falling sales are a lack of Model Y this year vs last year. With the new Y now being delivered, the figures will go back to as they were.
It's July now. If what you say is true, there will have to be a large spike very quickly
A large spike in Norway when the new car went on sale in May A large spike in Australia when the new car went on sale in May I expect a large spike in June in the UK when the new car went on sale. The bigger Tesla centres have been delivering 120-150 per day in June.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Even if Labour won most seats in a hung parliament they would still need LD and maybe SNP backing to govern. The LDs and SNP have both made clear the family farm and family business tax must be scrapped for starters
You need to hope that Swinney and Forbes aren’t replaced by left wingers before the next GE.
‘I had unexpectedly amazing sex with a lawyer who works with my team, and a few days later they sent me a LinkedIn connection request. Is this how lawyers flirt?’
Doesn't one always expect first-time consensual sex...... which it would appear this was ...... to be amazing? It's been many, many many years, so I may have forgotten something.
I don't understand this whole definition of "English" from either side. On one hand we have the revelry of English heroes like St George (never came here) and Richard the Lionheart (here briefly, didn't speak English). On the other hand the absurdist guff posted from McTernan about why patriotism is scary.
The English are a truly multicultural hodgepodge of all that's great in Europe - Celts, Romans, Vikings, Germans, French etc. There is no "ethnic English" but the suggestion that there is is not "truly evil". Celebrate all we are, warts and all.
Maybe he thinks falling out with Trump will rescue falling Tesla sales around the world?
Although in Norway half the population seems to have one already.
As I keep pointing out to people, much of the falling sales are a lack of Model Y this year vs last year. With the new Y now being delivered, the figures will go back to as they were.
It's July now. If what you say is true, there will have to be a large spike very quickly
A large spike in Norway when the new car went on sale in May A large spike in Australia when the new car went on sale in May I expect a large spike in June in the UK when the new car went on sale. The bigger Tesla centres have been delivering 120-150 per day in June.
We'll see how Tesla performed in June in the UK imminently. New UK registrations will be released this week - probably on Thursday, and given there will have been a full month of the new Model Y we will see how big the bounceback is.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
As entertaining as the Habib party launch was, it points towards further ruptions within the pop-right. The less from the 2024 election was that an awful lot of races are close, so it only needs fragmentation of vote blocks for the right to have most votes but lose the seat to the red right...
A minor alt-Reform party picking up 2 to 3% might also be the difference in some Con-Reform fights. Rural Norfolk for example will likely be very tight fights within a few %
Yes Kemi will be cheering Habib on
I think it unlikely Habib will even reach the giddy heights of 2%.
Maybe he thinks falling out with Trump will rescue falling Tesla sales around the world?
Although in Norway half the population seems to have one already.
As I keep pointing out to people, much of the falling sales are a lack of Model Y this year vs last year. With the new Y now being delivered, the figures will go back to as they were.
It's July now. If what you say is true, there will have to be a large spike very quickly
A large spike in Norway when the new car went on sale in May A large spike in Australia when the new car went on sale in May I expect a large spike in June in the UK when the new car went on sale. The bigger Tesla centres have been delivering 120-150 per day in June.
We'll see how Tesla performed in June in the UK imminently. New UK registrations will be released this week - probably on Thursday, and given there will have been a full month of the new Model Y we will see how big the bounceback is.
We will also - in coming days see what happened to Tesla sales in Norway in June. My guess is that there was a lot of pent up demand (and orders) for the Y that were delivered in May, and that sales fall back somewhat in June.
If the bill does fall (still expect it to pass by a small margin) then the outfall in my opinion would be the immediate resignation of Kendall (and Timms) and Reeves sacked within a fortnight
I don't understand this whole definition of "English" from either side. On one hand we have the revelry of English heroes like St George (never came here) and Richard the Lionheart (here briefly, didn't speak English). On the other hand the absurdist guff posted from McTernan about why patriotism is scary.
The English are a truly multicultural hodgepodge of all that's great in Europe - Celts, Romans, Vikings, Germans, French etc. There is no "ethnic English" but the suggestion that there is is not "truly evil". Celebrate all we are, warts and all.
Evidence for Richard not speaking English?
Also, he wasn't here because he was fighting the French. How much more English do you want him to be?
As the oligarchs in Russia discovered, even being insanely rich offers you very little protection against the power of the state.
In Musk's case, it's even worse, because SpaceX is very dependent on government contracts, while the rest of his empire benefits from the move to renewables and electric cars.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
As entertaining as the Habib party launch was, it points towards further ruptions within the pop-right. The less from the 2024 election was that an awful lot of races are close, so it only needs fragmentation of vote blocks for the right to have most votes but lose the seat to the red right...
A minor alt-Reform party picking up 2 to 3% might also be the difference in some Con-Reform fights. Rural Norfolk for example will likely be very tight fights within a few %
Yes Kemi will be cheering Habib on
I think it unlikely Habib will even reach the giddy heights of 2%.
If he made 2% nationally he would cost Reform some seats in all likelihood.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Theresa May tried to tackle adult social care and the rest of the parties - Tim Farron and the Lib Dems in particular - took advantage.
Mr. 86, to be fair, she did it in the most stupid and cackhanded way possible.
I don't think she did. I think she thought she was so far ahead in the polls she could get away with including something necessary but unpopular in the manifesto.
I wonder if that was in Labour’s mind when they stuck to the ming vase strategy.
Maybe he thinks falling out with Trump will rescue falling Tesla sales around the world?
Although in Norway half the population seems to have one already.
As I keep pointing out to people, much of the falling sales are a lack of Model Y this year vs last year. With the new Y now being delivered, the figures will go back to as they were.
It's July now. If what you say is true, there will have to be a large spike very quickly
A large spike in Norway when the new car went on sale in May A large spike in Australia when the new car went on sale in May I expect a large spike in June in the UK when the new car went on sale. The bigger Tesla centres have been delivering 120-150 per day in June.
We'll see how Tesla performed in June in the UK imminently. New UK registrations will be released this week - probably on Thursday, and given there will have been a full month of the new Model Y we will see how big the bounceback is.
We will also - in coming days see what happened to Tesla sales in Norway in June. My guess is that there was a lot of pent up demand (and orders) for the Y that were delivered in May, and that sales fall back somewhat in June.
Which has been the usual sales pattern for Tesla since the start - quarter end was traditionally when they shifted the most cars.
Then again - and I know its shocking - back when I was buying mechanical cars the best deals were always at quarter end because dealerships & manufacturers needed to hit targets so pushed like crazy...
FPT, Speer’s strategy for evading the gallows was very clever. To accept moral responsibility for the Nazis’ crimes, whilst denying legal responsibility. Had the judges known that he was present, at Himmler’s Posen speeches, he would have hanged.
Most war criminals/criminals against humanity, are not at all pathological. People like Oskar Dirlewanger and Amon Goth are the outliers. There’s a general reluctance to believe that architects of atrocity are frequently people who have read Law, Classics, or French Literature at leading universities.
Ralph Fiennes almost sympathetically portrayed Amon Goeth. Almost!
You’re being very disingenuous there William, I am shocked.
You haven’t posted the context, he’s pointing the evilness of Matt Goodwin saying Rishi Sunak isn’t English.
He'd have been better off saying "The concept of ethnic nationalism is truly evil" (the suspicion being that the left have no qualms about pandering to certain forms of ethnic nationalism).
I don't understand this whole definition of "English" from either side. On one hand we have the revelry of English heroes like St George (never came here) and Richard the Lionheart (here briefly, didn't speak English). On the other hand the absurdist guff posted from McTernan about why patriotism is scary.
The English are a truly multicultural hodgepodge of all that's great in Europe - Celts, Romans, Vikings, Germans, French etc. There is no "ethnic English" but the suggestion that there is is not "truly evil". Celebrate all we are, warts and all.
Evidence for Richard not speaking English?
Also, he wasn't here because he was fighting the French. How much more English do you want him to be?
What he's objecting to is Goodwin's argument that being English comes only from multiple generations of descent, only from blood, rather than Englishness being something that one can acquire culturally.
The whole Tim Farron thing was strange and so is this. Like, what did you expect?
Ooof. That's harsh. It's not the Lib Dems, it is imo that particular priest taking an inappropriate public stance, even if he is of a different view. That will be manna for the National Secular Society - they will be asking "how many of the other Roman Catholic MPs caved in to bullying by their priests?".
The MP is there to represent his constituents, or his own conscience in matters like this.
And the Roman Catholic church teaches the right to an individual conscience. Roughly (AI but about right):
In Catholic teaching, individuals have a right and duty to follow their conscience, which is seen as a judgment of reason that helps them discern good from evil. This right is not absolute, however, as conscience must be formed and informed by objective moral truths, particularly those revealed through Church teaching and Scripture. While individuals are not to be forced to act against their conscience, they also have a responsibility to seek truth and conform their conscience to it.
Good on the MP, and shame on the priest.
I wonder if the excommunication of the MP was sanctioned by the Bishop. If not, it is the Priest who will have questions to answer.
Is this formally "excommunication", which is a very institutionalised word in the RC Church, aiui?
At a parish level, for a Priest to publicly announce and deny communion needs something regarded as 'grave and continuing public sin' - more commonly that could be carrying on a scandalous affair or similar in full view of the community. Traditionally it could also be divorce or cohabitation (?). A public calling out would probably require a public repentance, or private repentance followed by a public announcement.
(TBF some other churches have arrangements such as "disfellowshipping", and the Westminster Confession prescribes three stages of rebuke, based on iirc guidance sent by Saint Paul to one of the congregations who received his NT "letters".)
Here to me the priestly interference with the democratic process seems quite a biggie, maybe up there with someone doing postal votes for an entire family.
I think both the press and the Bishop may have things to say.
How interesting. As a non RC Christian I entirely support the move towards assisted dying, and think the current bill does not go far enough. Lots of other Christians think the same.
I think the imposition of RC communion discipline, if done at all, should be a more private matter.
An RC MP is entirely proper if they vote against assisted dying on ground of conscience. They owe their electors their best mind as a representative (Edmund Burke), and they are not a delegate armed with their constituents' programme.
Finally, I await the day when RC priests are calling out in public and refusing communion to married couples who, after having several much loved children who they bring up in the faith, then decide that a bit of contraception would be in order. I'll be waiting a long time.
The thing about the RC 'natural law' argument (contraception, abortion, assisted dying, same sex relations are all examples) is that if it isn't all true, then it is all in question.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Some good points here. All the "Starmer is a dipstick" stuff is fine (I'm not blind to his flaws myself) however I'm a tad disappointed by how rarely it's accompanied by a recognition of how tough the gig of government is right now.
Growth has been sluggish for almost two decades. This isn't UK specific, it's across the developed world. There are deep structural reasons for it. Many of these are immune to the powers of a domestic political leader in a liberal democracy.
Looking at what can be done (by a UK government in a parliamentary term) the main tool is £££ but after the shocks of the GFC and Covid and the return of inflation - and the state response thereto - there is zero slack in the finances. They're tight as a drum. So is the politics. We can't borrow more and the public won't tolerate big spending cuts or tax rises.
Therefore whoever is in government is to a large extent hemmed in as regards economic and fiscal policy. They're in a box constructed by the public and the bond markets. Any assessment of the government that makes no allowance for this is whistling up a gum tree. It's either partisan wibble or just emoting.
Course, where would we be without partisan wibble and emoting. A much poorer site. So don't read me wrong and stop doing it. All I ask is that every so often when a poster offers up a "worse government in recorded history" missive they follow it in brackets by "although I recognise the scale of the task and it's not clear anybody else would be a great deal better."
I don't understand this whole definition of "English" from either side. On one hand we have the revelry of English heroes like St George (never came here) and Richard the Lionheart (here briefly, didn't speak English). On the other hand the absurdist guff posted from McTernan about why patriotism is scary.
The English are a truly multicultural hodgepodge of all that's great in Europe - Celts, Romans, Vikings, Germans, French etc. There is no "ethnic English" but the suggestion that there is is not "truly evil". Celebrate all we are, warts and all.
Evidence for Richard not speaking English?
Also, he wasn't here because he was fighting the French. How much more English do you want him to be?
I thought he was also (obsv at different times) fighting the Moslems in Palestine. I would have thought some here (not all, again obsv) would have applauded. I don't think he was allied to the Jews, though.
Which should worry me more?! The possibility of the Border Feds finding edgeporn on my phone or the possibility of being murdered by a Fent addict in Nob Hill?
Which should worry me more?! The possibility of the Border Feds finding edgeporn on my phone or the possibility of being murdered by a Fent addict in Nob Hill?
You should be more worried about getting bummed senseless by the gays in Frisco.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
Some good points here. All the "Starmer is a dipstick" stuff is fine (I'm not blind to his flaws myself) however I'm a tad disappointed by how rarely it's accompanied by a recognition of how tough the gig of government is right now.
Growth has been sluggish for almost two decades. This isn't UK specific, it's across the developed world. There are deep structural reasons for it. Many of these are immune to the powers of a domestic political leader in a liberal democracy.
Looking at what can be done (by a UK government in a parliamentary term) the main tool is £££ but after the shocks of the GFC and Covid and the return of inflation - and the state response thereto - there is zero slack in the finances. They're tight as a drum. So is the politics. We can't borrow more and the public won't tolerate big spending cuts or tax rises.
Therefore whoever is in government is to a large extent hemmed in as regards economic and fiscal policy. They're in a box constructed by the public and the bond markets. Any assessment of the government that makes no allowance for this is whistling up a gum tree. It's either partisan wibble or just emoting.
Course, where would we be without partisan wibble and emoting. A much poorer site. So don't read me wrong and stop doing it. All I ask is that every so often when a poster offers up a "worse government in recorded history" missive they follow it in brackets by "although I recognise the scale of the task and it's not clear anybody else would be a great deal better."
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
All great points, but missing one thing. The task of government is leadership not followership. That people want no/low tax and great public services is just the way human nature is.
Which means that government must explain, persuade, tell a story, inspire, encourage and lead. They must also accept that the govern is to choose between actual alternatives, that not all good things are compatible with all other good things, and so on.
I think the good or great leaders all have a decent story to tell: Churchill, Attlee, Thatcher, Blair. All will come unstuck somewhere, none of these left office at exactly the moment of their choosing. The present lot's best chance is to learn from them and accept that at some point their wheels too will come off.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I’m not getting any sense of this government’s having a long-term plan.
London is filled with policy wonk institutes, staffed by people who are quite clever and formulate policy all the time in all flavours of the spectrum, and are capable, unlike MPs, of thinking simultaneously about social policy, tax, debt, priorities, costs, budgets reality and so on.
It is odd that a fairly centrist government seems to have no coherent narrative or plan when it has so much to draw on. Working out and communicating a social democratic plan should not be that hard. It's been the only real candidate in the UK since 1945.
The problem is the quality of the policy wonks - see our politicians.
It’s been said several times - PB creates better thought out policies. Think about what that means.
Mostly it means that the so-called think tanks are in fact propaganda machines for shallow and dangerous ideologues.
You seem to assume that they have enough depth to be shallow.
"Three former senior staff at the hospital where nurse Lucy Letby murdered seven babies and attempted to kill seven others have been arrested, Cheshire Police has confirmed.
All three suspects worked on the senior leadership team at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016 and are being questioned on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter."
Which should worry me more?! The possibility of the Border Feds finding edgeporn on my phone or the possibility of being murdered by a Fent addict in Nob Hill?
So Rachel should be allowed to mark her own homework? Not sure that gets us anywhere.
Wasn't one of the things which spooked the markets about Truss's mini budget that it was done without reference to the OBR?
That's why they named it a 'mini budget' - so the OBR didn't get involved. There are plenty of things that could be done to improve Rachel, but I'm not sure that freeing her from scrutiny is one of them.
You’re being very disingenuous there William, I am shocked.
You haven’t posted the context, he’s pointing the evilness of Matt Goodwin saying Rishi Sunak isn’t English.
This is chilling stuff Goodwin is trading in. Yes, he circles around it, but ultimately this is just the world view of the skinhead.
Yes. But it is one of the inevitable outcomes of mass migration without the wholehearted consent of the exisiting population. Ethnicity is a fact - as well as a social imaginary. That nations have the right to control borders is a fact. The failure of border control leads to deadly focussing on ethnicity.
A further danger is seeing and diagnosing this issue as one of 'right' or 'left'. It isn't.
If one is a constituent of Priti Patel and is foolish enough to email her for assistance there is a downside. One get's her monthly email to constituents, and in the latest is a bitter attack on the deal with Mauritius over the Chagos Islands. Labour have, apparently, betrayed the Chagossians.
Correct if I'm wrong but I thought the deal was negotiated under the Conservatives and simply (rightly or wrongly) signed off as a done deal by Starmer and Lammy?
Which should worry me more?! The possibility of the Border Feds finding edgeporn on my phone or the possibility of being murdered by a Fent addict in Nob Hill?
As a Reform supporter, you should be safe enough from the Feds. Just keep your knob away from Nob Hill.
If one is a constituent of Priti Patel and is foolish enough to email her for assistance there is a downside. One get's her monthly email to constituents, and in the latest is a bitter attack on the deal with Mauritius over the Chagos Islands. Labour have, apparently, betrayed the Chagossians.
Correct if I'm wrong but I thought the deal was negotiated under the Conservatives and simply (rightly or wrongly) signed off as a done deal by Starmer and Lammy?
Sounds like a data protection violation, adding you to the list without asking. Naughty.
You’re being very disingenuous there William, I am shocked.
You haven’t posted the context, he’s pointing the evilness of Matt Goodwin saying Rishi Sunak isn’t English.
This is chilling stuff Goodwin is trading in. Yes, he circles around it, but ultimately this is just the world view of the skinhead.
Yes. But it is one of the inevitable outcomes of mass migration without the wholehearted consent of the exisiting population. Ethnicity is a fact - as well as a social imaginary. That nations have the right to control borders is a fact. The failure of border control leads to deadly focussing on ethnicity.
A further danger is seeing and diagnosing this issue as one of 'right' or 'left'. It isn't.
I'd be interested to hear whether McTernan thinks there are any other ethnicities the concept of which is evil, or is it just the English?
"Three former senior staff at the hospital where nurse Lucy Letby murdered seven babies and attempted to kill seven others have been arrested, Cheshire Police has confirmed.
All three suspects worked on the senior leadership team at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016 and are being questioned on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter."
If one is a constituent of Priti Patel and is foolish enough to email her for assistance there is a downside. One get's her monthly email to constituents, and in the latest is a bitter attack on the deal with Mauritius over the Chagos Islands. Labour have, apparently, betrayed the Chagossians.
Correct if I'm wrong but I thought the deal was negotiated under the Conservatives and simply (rightly or wrongly) signed off as a done deal by Starmer and Lammy?
No. Negotiations began under the Tories after the court ruling. The deal we have was agreed by Labour. The high court have expedited a hearing for the Chagossians that tge deal is illegal as they were not consulted. To be heard mid July.
And I 100% disagree. The article is entirely disingenuous. If put into place parliament will get even worse at taking any serious responsibility for future generations who don't currently have a vote.
You’re being very disingenuous there William, I am shocked.
You haven’t posted the context, he’s pointing the evilness of Matt Goodwin saying Rishi Sunak isn’t English.
This is chilling stuff Goodwin is trading in. Yes, he circles around it, but ultimately this is just the world view of the skinhead.
Yes. But it is one of the inevitable outcomes of mass migration without the wholehearted consent of the exisiting population. Ethnicity is a fact - as well as a social imaginary. That nations have the right to control borders is a fact. The failure of border control leads to deadly focussing on ethnicity.
A further danger is seeing and diagnosing this issue as one of 'right' or 'left'. It isn't.
Goodwin wasn't talking about immigration though. He was demarcating people on purely racial grounds.
If one is a constituent of Priti Patel and is foolish enough to email her for assistance there is a downside. One get's her monthly email to constituents, and in the latest is a bitter attack on the deal with Mauritius over the Chagos Islands. Labour have, apparently, betrayed the Chagossians.
Correct if I'm wrong but I thought the deal was negotiated under the Conservatives and simply (rightly or wrongly) signed off as a done deal by Starmer and Lammy?
Sounds like a data protection violation, adding you to the list without asking. Naughty.
Interesting thought. I must ask a couple of my friends whether they've emailed her, and if so whether they get her emails.
To fair, I've been getting them for ages, long before people got really worked up over data protection.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I’m not getting any sense of this government’s having a long-term plan.
Yes. This is the big surprise. You would have thought that after the disaster of Cameron and co having no secret but comprehensive plan for Brexit if the referendum were lost they would have learned. It's fine for the plan to be secret during the election, but there has to be one and it has to command the narrative from the day you form a government. Of course it involves breaking promises. You can't both win an election and run a country without it.
But busting the party for a few billion isn't a plan. If you are going to have 150 MPs rebelling, let it be over issues that actually change the direction of the country in good ways.
Cameron had a secret plan for Brexit: Resign.
The difference is that Cameron was campaigning against Brexit, while Starmer was campaigning to be elected. So Starmer really should have had a plan for what to do if he achieved that.
"Three former senior staff at the hospital where nurse Lucy Letby murdered seven babies and attempted to kill seven others have been arrested, Cheshire Police has confirmed.
All three suspects worked on the senior leadership team at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016 and are being questioned on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter."
I smell a messy, failed prosecution.
That will get the Letby Truthers going...
Isn't their negligence not doing anything about Letby?
"Three former senior staff at the hospital where nurse Lucy Letby murdered seven babies and attempted to kill seven others have been arrested, Cheshire Police has confirmed.
All three suspects worked on the senior leadership team at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016 and are being questioned on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter."
I smell a messy, failed prosecution.
That will get the Letby Truthers going...
There was someone here, who commented, that the Letby prosecution was probably used to hide wider failing. Not that she was any less or more guilty - just a good way to hide bad news stats.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Four years like the last 12 months, might see public patience with Labour completely exhausted.
That said, I’d expect Reform to be winning 150-200 or so seats, next time, with Labour winning somewhat more.
That's the unknown.
How far will this government continue to drown after being thrown in the deep end? Or will some of its members start to do a fair approximation of swimming?
How much will some of the longer term bets (energy, planning, Europe) be seen to have paid off by 2028/9?
The electorate are far less patient than in the past. But with no election imminent, that doesn't matter. And most governments would be happy with second place and a single-figure deficit at this stage.
It didn't get thrown, it jumped in. And, unlike Cameron and Osborne who laid out austerity (such as it was) from the start, Starmer and Reeves didn't bother with anything like that. Which may not have been terribly clever.
I won't argue Starmer and Reeves seemed ill-prepared for coming into Government - perhaps they didn't brlieve the polls (some on here didn't) but we all knew the Conservatives were exhausted after 14 years running the Government - they were out of ideas and were reduced to kicking the poor old can down the poorly-maintained road.
Across a range of issues, it wasn't that the Conservatives tried things and got them wrong - they simply gave up trying, perhaps understandable after Covid but nonetheless countries can't drift on inertia which is why you change Government but the new Government faces the same problems and has to come up with responses if not solutions.
The problem is across a range of inter-connected and inter-dependent issues there are no easy solutions - at best, there are costly and unpopular schemes which might pay dividends a decade or more down the road but that's not how modern politics functions and so frustration sets in.
Adult social care is an enormous issue but neither Labour nor Conservatives have felt willing or able to tackle it despite big Parliamentary majorities. That's a damning indictment of where we are or rather where we aren't.
The reason for no planning was not that Labour did not follow the pollsters' bar charts, but that Starmer and Reeves are both technocrats, believing there is a technically (or for Starmer, legally) correct answer to every problem. Whitehall knew what needed to be done but had been stopped by evil, corrupt and possibly insane Conservatives.
Some ministers, we should observe, did hit the ground running. Miliband, Haigh, Phillipson and Streeting at least made an early start, whether or not what they did was correct or popular.
What he's objecting to is Goodwin's argument that being English comes only from multiple generations of descent, only from blood, rather than Englishness being something that one can acquire culturally.
This differs for differing nationalities. For instance Brazil is a real melting pot of differing ethnicities whereas South Korea is full of ethnic Koreans. We're neither Brazil nor Korea so the question of what constitutes England and the English is an interesting one.
"Three former senior staff at the hospital where nurse Lucy Letby murdered seven babies and attempted to kill seven others have been arrested, Cheshire Police has confirmed.
All three suspects worked on the senior leadership team at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016 and are being questioned on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter."
I smell a messy, failed prosecution.
That will get the Letby Truthers going...
Isn't their negligence not doing anything about Letby?
A lot of evidence points to their being negligent with or without Letby.
Indeed Letby might be a scapegoat who fell for their negligence.
You’re being very disingenuous there William, I am shocked.
You haven’t posted the context, he’s pointing the evilness of Matt Goodwin saying Rishi Sunak isn’t English.
This is chilling stuff Goodwin is trading in. Yes, he circles around it, but ultimately this is just the world view of the skinhead.
Yes. But it is one of the inevitable outcomes of mass migration without the wholehearted consent of the exisiting population. Ethnicity is a fact - as well as a social imaginary. That nations have the right to control borders is a fact. The failure of border control leads to deadly focussing on ethnicity.
A further danger is seeing and diagnosing this issue as one of 'right' or 'left'. It isn't.
Three of my partners grandparents are Irish. As in born in Ireland, Irish accents, still live there/died there. All of mine were born and bred in London. I’d say, without any malice, this makes her less English than me, and by extension, my two children are also less English than me. I am less Irish than them. My partner certainly considers herself quite Irish, despite only spending time there on frequent family visits. I don’t see how any of this would be controversial. Do we deny her Irish blood? Or do we pretend she is just as English as me on top of being Irish as well?
"Three former senior staff at the hospital where nurse Lucy Letby murdered seven babies and attempted to kill seven others have been arrested, Cheshire Police has confirmed.
All three suspects worked on the senior leadership team at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016 and are being questioned on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter."
I smell a messy, failed prosecution.
That will get the Letby Truthers going...
Isn't their negligence not doing anything about Letby?
Yes, precisely. I'm expecting her supporters to say that this is the authorities doubling down.
Apparently there’s a new fashion for men to spit at women runners on the streets of Britain - LBC today
Gee. I wonder where this surge in misogyny has come from. Probably the fault of Trump. Or Musk
Well the article says that it's happening internationally (it mentions Japan specifically) and talks about educating young boys. This leads me to think it's an Andrew Tatey social media thing. Sorry if that means you can't link it to the trans issue or some other anti woke bugbear.
The whole Tim Farron thing was strange and so is this. Like, what did you expect?
Ooof. That's harsh. It's not the Lib Dems, it is imo that particular priest taking an inappropriate public stance, even if he is of a different view. That will be manna for the National Secular Society - they will be asking "how many of the other Roman Catholic MPs caved in to bullying by their priests?".
The MP is there to represent his constituents, or his own conscience in matters like this.
And the Roman Catholic church teaches the right to an individual conscience. Roughly (AI but about right):
In Catholic teaching, individuals have a right and duty to follow their conscience, which is seen as a judgment of reason that helps them discern good from evil. This right is not absolute, however, as conscience must be formed and informed by objective moral truths, particularly those revealed through Church teaching and Scripture. While individuals are not to be forced to act against their conscience, they also have a responsibility to seek truth and conform their conscience to it.
Good on the MP, and shame on the priest.
I wonder if the excommunication of the MP was sanctioned by the Bishop. If not, it is the Priest who will have questions to answer.
Is this formally "excommunication", which is a very institutionalised word in the RC Church, aiui?
At a parish level, for a Priest to publicly announce and deny communion needs something regarded as 'grave and continuing public sin' - more commonly that could be carrying on a scandalous affair or similar in full view of the community. Traditionally it could also be divorce or cohabitation (?). A public calling out would probably require a public repentance, or private repentance followed by a public announcement.
(TBF some other churches have arrangements such as "disfellowshipping", and the Westminster Confession prescribes three stages of rebuke, based on iirc guidance sent by Saint Paul to one of the congregations who received his NT "letters".)
Here to me the priestly interference with the democratic process seems quite a biggie, maybe up there with someone doing postal votes for an entire family.
I think both the press and the Bishop may have things to say.
How interesting. As a non RC Christian I entirely support the move towards assisted dying, and think the current bill does not go far enough. Lots of other Christians think the same.
I think the imposition of RC communion discipline, if done at all, should be a more private matter.
An RC MP is entirely proper if they vote against assisted dying on ground of conscience. They owe their electors their best mind as a representative (Edmund Burke), and they are not a delegate armed with their constituents' programme.
Finally, I await the day when RC priests are calling out in public and refusing communion to married couples who, after having several much loved children who they bring up in the faith, then decide that a bit of contraception would be in order. I'll be waiting a long time.
The thing about the RC 'natural law' argument (contraception, abortion, assisted dying, same sex relations are all examples) is that if it isn't all true, then it is all in question.
“She told me the story about — in kids terms — how she had taken birth control … and that the priest said because of that, it was against church teaching, God’s rules, or however she put it for me, that she couldn’t go to Communion anymore,” Davis told Catholic News Service during an August interview. “But, she still went to church every week.” https://dosafl.com/2021/11/12/catholics-who-dont-receive-communion-shouldnt-be-shamed-scholars-say/
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Even if Labour won most seats in a hung parliament they would still need LD and maybe SNP backing to govern. The LDs and SNP have both made clear the family farm and family business tax must be scrapped for starters
You need to hope that Swinney and Forbes aren’t replaced by left wingers before the next GE.
Even then the LDs would still be opposed to the family farms tax and the SNP likely would remain so too given the rural seats the SNP hold
You’re being very disingenuous there William, I am shocked.
You haven’t posted the context, he’s pointing the evilness of Matt Goodwin saying Rishi Sunak isn’t English.
This is chilling stuff Goodwin is trading in. Yes, he circles around it, but ultimately this is just the world view of the skinhead.
Yes. But it is one of the inevitable outcomes of mass migration without the wholehearted consent of the exisiting population. Ethnicity is a fact - as well as a social imaginary. That nations have the right to control borders is a fact. The failure of border control leads to deadly focussing on ethnicity.
A further danger is seeing and diagnosing this issue as one of 'right' or 'left'. It isn't.
Three of my partners grandparents are Irish. As in born in Ireland, Irish accents, still live there/died there. All of mine were born and bred in London. I’d say, without any malice, this makes her less English than me, and by extension, my two children are also less English than me. I am less Irish than them. My partner certainly considers herself quite Irish, despite only spending time there on frequent family visits. I don’t see how any of this would be controversial. Do we deny her Irish blood? Or do we pretend she is just as English as me on top of being Irish as well?
This is why I roll my eyes at petty identity stuff (or "flagshagging" as it got dubbed at one point). In this country it's pretty hard to be "pure". And pure-what? Witness the knuckle-draggers complaining about immigrants as getting favours instead of "pure-bred Anglo-Saxons". Yeah, that hyphen might cause a problem with "pure", never mind that both are migrants.
England and the English should be proud of our mixed heritage. It literally defines who we are, how we speak, the names of the places we live, our history.
You’re being very disingenuous there William, I am shocked.
You haven’t posted the context, he’s pointing the evilness of Matt Goodwin saying Rishi Sunak isn’t English.
This is chilling stuff Goodwin is trading in. Yes, he circles around it, but ultimately this is just the world view of the skinhead.
Yes. But it is one of the inevitable outcomes of mass migration without the wholehearted consent of the exisiting population. Ethnicity is a fact - as well as a social imaginary. That nations have the right to control borders is a fact. The failure of border control leads to deadly focussing on ethnicity.
A further danger is seeing and diagnosing this issue as one of 'right' or 'left'. It isn't.
Three of my partners grandparents are Irish. As in born in Ireland, Irish accents, still live there/died there. All of mine were born and bred in London. I’d say, without any malice, this makes her less English than me, and by extension, my two children are also less English than me. I am less Irish than them. My partner certainly considers herself quite Irish, despite only spending time there on frequent family visits. I don’t see how any of this would be controversial. Do we deny her Irish blood? Or do we pretend she is just as English as me on top of being Irish as well?
The logical result of that is I, with no English grandparents, am not English, when I quite clearly am.
On recent polling; Labour are having a terrible time but are not losing further ground; Reform have peaked for now and are not gaining from Labour's woes. Four years to go.
I think the bookies are right in making Labour favourite for most seats. Such a result almost certainly excludes a Reform/Reform led government.
It is not easy (though possible) - to imagine Labour being worse in the next four years than they have been so far.
Payroll/public sector vote, benefits class vote, liberal middle class vote, BAME vote/stop Farage vote/young people vote/Tory vote splitting Reform + me should see Labour home.
Spanner in this works: the biggest by far is a Tory/Reform electoral pact.
Bet accordingly. DYOR.
Even if Labour won most seats in a hung parliament they would still need LD and maybe SNP backing to govern. The LDs and SNP have both made clear the family farm and family business tax must be scrapped for starters
You need to hope that Swinney and Forbes aren’t replaced by left wingers before the next GE.
Even then the LDs would still be opposed to the family farms tax and the SNP likely would remain so too given the rural seats the SNP hold
It's sweet that you think that the "farms tax" will be a key issue in 2029 coalition negotiations.
Which should worry me more?! The possibility of the Border Feds finding edgeporn on my phone or the possibility of being murdered by a Fent addict in Nob Hill?
By most accounts, SF has cleaned up significantly. Your being deported as an undesirable ? Seems unlikely given those making the judgment.
You’re being very disingenuous there William, I am shocked.
You haven’t posted the context, he’s pointing the evilness of Matt Goodwin saying Rishi Sunak isn’t English.
This is chilling stuff Goodwin is trading in. Yes, he circles around it, but ultimately this is just the world view of the skinhead.
Yes. But it is one of the inevitable outcomes of mass migration without the wholehearted consent of the exisiting population. Ethnicity is a fact - as well as a social imaginary. That nations have the right to control borders is a fact. The failure of border control leads to deadly focussing on ethnicity.
A further danger is seeing and diagnosing this issue as one of 'right' or 'left'. It isn't.
Three of my partners grandparents are Irish. As in born in Ireland, Irish accents, still live there/died there. All of mine were born and bred in London. I’d say, without any malice, this makes her less English than me, and by extension, my two children are also less English than me. I am less Irish than them. My partner certainly considers herself quite Irish, despite only spending time there on frequent family visits. I don’t see how any of this would be controversial. Do we deny her Irish blood? Or do we pretend she is just as English as me on top of being Irish as well?
The logical result of that is I, with no English grandparents, am not English, when I quite clearly am.
Presumably Goodwin thinks Donald Trump is not American.
You’re being very disingenuous there William, I am shocked.
You haven’t posted the context, he’s pointing the evilness of Matt Goodwin saying Rishi Sunak isn’t English.
This is chilling stuff Goodwin is trading in. Yes, he circles around it, but ultimately this is just the world view of the skinhead.
Yes. But it is one of the inevitable outcomes of mass migration without the wholehearted consent of the exisiting population. Ethnicity is a fact - as well as a social imaginary. That nations have the right to control borders is a fact. The failure of border control leads to deadly focussing on ethnicity.
A further danger is seeing and diagnosing this issue as one of 'right' or 'left'. It isn't.
Three of my partners grandparents are Irish. As in born in Ireland, Irish accents, still live there/died there. All of mine were born and bred in London. I’d say, without any malice, this makes her less English than me, and by extension, my two children are also less English than me. I am less Irish than them. My partner certainly considers herself quite Irish, despite only spending time there on frequent family visits. I don’t see how any of this would be controversial. Do we deny her Irish blood? Or do we pretend she is just as English as me on top of being Irish as well?
No; she's like me: British. My father was Welsh, my mother English. I've done the family history and all my father's ancestors, so far as I can find were born and bred in Wales and until very recently spoke Welsh as their first language. My mother's ancestors were farmers and the like in Bedfordshire, again as far back as one can find. So I always describe myself as British.
Comments
Since the GE they've had 2 x 9 and 1 x 10 (with Ashcrroft and Freshwater) but since March's 10 with Ashcroft all 11 to 15 mainly with the odd 16 and 17 (mostly with YouGov and Techne)
Edit - and a 10 with Opinium in late 2024
If the new reasoned amendment is selected and narrowly fails, there's no guarantee the bill progresses. Rachel Maskell this morning says she's had several say they arent bothering with amendments any more they will just vote the bills second reading itself down. She had 40 signed on her amendment overnight from Labour and claims 'loads more' are rebelling (pinch of salt required of course!)
Still tight......
It’s been said several times - PB creates better thought out policies. Think about what that means.
There's an element when you come into Government of finding your feet, working out how it all works etc but you should have your first two or three years of legislation ready to go with draft versions of Bills to be worked up by the Civil Service into legislation.
Yes, you have to respond to events - Southport was unforeseeable and Starmer had to respond and being new into Government, the initial response was clumsy but it improved.
The three great radical Governments of the 20th Century were Asquith's in 1906, Attlee's in 1945 and Thatcher's in 1979. Each came in with a clear vision of how they wanted to enact significant and substantial change to Government and institutions and society.
Asquith's Liberals and Attlee's Labour Party both took heavy losses in the next elections but most of what they implemented stuck and was eventually if begrudingly accepted by the Conservatives. Thatcher's real radicalism came in the second term after the 1983 landslide.
It's a plan. Not a nice one, I grant you. But a plan nonetheless. Credit should be given.
Really Starmer should sack Kendall and replace her with Leadbetter. She would be very good at presenting all these changes as simply an example of "choice" and "autonomy" for disabled people and, if they disagree, simply ignoring them. She's good at that.
FPT Is this formally "excommunication", which is a very institutionalised word in the RC Church, aiui?
At a parish level, for a Priest to publicly announce and deny communion needs something regarded as 'grave and continuing public sin' - more commonly that could be carrying on a scandalous affair or similar in full view of the community. Traditionally it could also be divorce or cohabitation (?). A public calling out would probably require a public repentance, or private repentance followed by a public announcement.
(TBF some other churches have arrangements such as "disfellowshipping", and the Westminster Confession prescribes three stages of rebuke, based on iirc guidance sent by Saint Paul to one of the congregations who received his NT "letters".)
Here to me the priestly interference with the democratic process seems quite a biggie, maybe up there with someone doing postal votes for an entire family.
I think both the press and the Bishop may have things to say.
It was opposed because it was lacking in key areas and people had some quite fundamental questions and concerns.
https://x.com/johnmcternan/status/1939781925029257308
The concept of ethnic English is truly evil
I do agree calling it a "dementia tax" was a cheap and unnecessary shot but it's a complex and complicated area which needs proper discussion and scrutiny not just involving MPs but lots of other organisations and groups.
It’s PB. It’s full of cheap shots. Plenty from the Lib Dem contingent too. Let he who is free of all sin…..
Perhaps one can advise
‘I had unexpectedly amazing sex with a lawyer who works with my team, and a few days later they sent me a LinkedIn connection request. Is this how lawyers flirt?’
https://x.com/fesshole/status/1939812449139507711?s=46&t=d8CnRhyZJ-m4vy0k55W8XQ
A large spike in Australia when the new car went on sale in May
I expect a large spike in June in the UK when the new car went on sale. The bigger Tesla centres have been delivering 120-150 per day in June.
The weather is mainly sunny skies and an agreeable 25C. Down there in the valleys it is an impossible 38C. Ugh
The minaret in the village is poignant. This was a Muslim village within living memory - but now they’ve all fled
@AndrewDesiderio
Collins now says she would prefer going back to the two-bill approach that Thune initially pushed for.
She sang the praises of the main tax provisions of the bill as well. But clearly has issues with health provisions & more
It's been many, many many years, so I may have forgotten something.
The English are a truly multicultural hodgepodge of all that's great in Europe - Celts, Romans, Vikings, Germans, French etc. There is no "ethnic English" but the suggestion that there is is not "truly evil". Celebrate all we are, warts and all.
You haven’t posted the context, he’s pointing the evilness of Matt Goodwin saying Rishi Sunak isn’t English.
Also, he wasn't here because he was fighting the French. How much more English do you want him to be?
In Musk's case, it's even worse, because SpaceX is very dependent on government contracts, while the rest of his empire benefits from the move to renewables and electric cars.
Then again - and I know its shocking - back when I was buying mechanical cars the best deals were always at quarter end because dealerships & manufacturers needed to hit targets so pushed like crazy...
I think the imposition of RC communion discipline, if done at all, should be a more private matter.
An RC MP is entirely proper if they vote against assisted dying on ground of conscience. They owe their electors their best mind as a representative (Edmund Burke), and they are not a delegate armed with their constituents' programme.
Finally, I await the day when RC priests are calling out in public and refusing communion to married couples who, after having several much loved children who they bring up in the faith, then decide that a bit of contraception would be in order. I'll be waiting a long time.
The thing about the RC 'natural law' argument (contraception, abortion, assisted dying, same sex relations are all examples) is that if it isn't all true, then it is all in question.
Growth has been sluggish for almost two decades. This isn't UK specific, it's across the developed world. There are deep structural reasons for it. Many of these are immune to the powers of a domestic political leader in a liberal democracy.
Looking at what can be done (by a UK government in a parliamentary term) the main tool is £££ but after the shocks of the GFC and Covid and the return of inflation - and the state response thereto - there is zero slack in the finances. They're tight as a drum. So is the politics. We can't borrow more and the public won't tolerate big spending cuts or tax rises.
Therefore whoever is in government is to a large extent hemmed in as regards economic and fiscal policy. They're in a box constructed by the public and the bond markets. Any assessment of the government that makes no allowance for this is whistling up a gum tree. It's either partisan wibble or just emoting.
Course, where would we be without partisan wibble and emoting. A much poorer site. So don't read me wrong and stop doing it. All I ask is that every so often when a poster offers up a "worse government in recorded history" missive they follow it in brackets by "although I recognise the scale of the task and it's not clear anybody else would be a great deal better."
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
I don't think he was allied to the Jews, though.
Which should worry me more?! The possibility of the Border Feds finding edgeporn on my phone or the possibility of being murdered by a Fent addict in Nob Hill?
Which means that government must explain, persuade, tell a story, inspire, encourage and lead. They must also accept that the govern is to choose between actual alternatives, that not all good things are compatible with all other good things, and so on.
I think the good or great leaders all have a decent story to tell: Churchill, Attlee, Thatcher, Blair. All will come unstuck somewhere, none of these left office at exactly the moment of their choosing. The present lot's best chance is to learn from them and accept that at some point their wheels too will come off.
#NU10K
"Three former senior staff at the hospital where nurse Lucy Letby murdered seven babies and attempted to kill seven others have been arrested, Cheshire Police has confirmed.
All three suspects worked on the senior leadership team at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016 and are being questioned on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter."
I smell a messy, failed prosecution.
A further danger is seeing and diagnosing this issue as one of 'right' or 'left'. It isn't.
Correct if I'm wrong but I thought the deal was negotiated under the Conservatives and simply (rightly or wrongly) signed off as a done deal by Starmer and Lammy?
Gee. I wonder where this surge in misogyny has come from. Probably the fault of Trump. Or Musk
The high court have expedited a hearing for the Chagossians that tge deal is illegal as they were not consulted. To be heard mid July.
To fair, I've been getting them for ages, long before people got really worked up over data protection.
The difference is that Cameron was campaigning against Brexit, while Starmer was campaigning to be elected. So Starmer really should have had a plan for what to do if he achieved that.
Some ministers, we should observe, did hit the ground running. Miliband, Haigh, Phillipson and Streeting at least made an early start, whether or not what they did was correct or popular.
We're neither Brazil nor Korea so the question of what constitutes England and the English is an interesting one.
Indeed Letby might be a scapegoat who fell for their negligence.
https://dosafl.com/2021/11/12/catholics-who-dont-receive-communion-shouldnt-be-shamed-scholars-say/
England and the English should be proud of our mixed heritage. It literally defines who we are, how we speak, the names of the places we live, our history.
Your being deported as an undesirable ? Seems unlikely given those making the judgment.
So I always describe myself as British.