Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it is gone it is very difficult to get back

System · July 2

Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it is gone it is very difficult to get back – politicalbetting.com

I am loathed to jump to conclusions given the inherent sexism in politics about female ministers ‘crying’ etc, but much of Westminster is wondering if that was a moment of genuine upset for Reeves.

Read the full story here

tlg86 · July 2

First.

TheScreamingEagles · July 2

I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

This modernized version replicates your current community design while bringing the benefits of our most flexible and future-ready theming system. With Foundation, you’ll enjoy:

A user-friendly Theme Editor for easier customization

Compatibility with the latest Vanilla features

Improved mobile responsiveness and SEO performance

We’re happy to incorporate your chosen images (banners, category icons etc) into your new theme. Please share any collateral with us within the next two weeks so we can be sure they are included. After that, we’ll move the new theme to your production site July 18th 2025.

If you have any questions or want help reviewing the changes afterwards, feel free to reach out! I will also be sending you a message directly on your dashboard to make sure you don’t miss this important update.

Best,

Kirstie

bondegezou · July 2

FPT...

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

SonofContrarian said:
https://news.sky.com/story/more-criminal-charges-being-considered-over-baby-deaths-at-lucy-letby-hospitals-13391159

But I thought it was all one woman's fault..🥴
There is a potentially serious issue here. If Letby is innocent (I don't know either way) then going after people who didn't stop her from murdering babies is going to be wrong.

There are some on PB who remain fully convinced of her guilt - the trial was lengthy and the jury convicted.
There are others (myself included) who have concerns about the trial.

PB users, in the main, tend to be better at statistics than the general public. If you have 20 neo-natal units then there is a chance that one of them will have more deaths than the average, simply on randomness alone. And that's without considering the possibility of other factors such as sub-standard care overall, poorly trained staff, a unit struggling to cope.

I see now that prosecuters are looking at other charges. So these will cases where babies died when Letby was present that were not thought suspiciuous until now. This is dangerous - it wouldn't be the first time that a suspect has been identified and the evidence is then chosen to fit.
"If you have 20 neo-natal units then there is a chance that one of them will have more deaths than the average, simply on randomness alone." Letby had a historically long trial. The prosecution case did not go, "Look, this neo-natal unit has had more deaths than average. Here ends our case."

"And that's without considering the possibility of other factors such as sub-standard care overall, poorly trained staff, a unit struggling to cope." There were a high number of unusual and unexpected deaths. These are not the sort of deaths that occur because of poor quality care or staff. There was evidence, accepted by the defence, that some babies had been deliberately killed.

"This is dangerous - it wouldn't be the first time that a suspect has been identified and the evidence is then chosen to fit." This is conspiratorial thinking. You are dismissing new evidence on the grounds that you've already made up your mind. Surely new evidence should be welcomed if you are interested in the truth. Let that new evidence be examined.
You are misconstruing my first point. Why did suspicion start - because there were more deaths than expected/usual. See the case of the Dutch nurse who was convicted and later exhonerated in similar circumstances. Once a problem was identified, explanations were sought, and a case made against Letby. The construction of that case is complex, and the trial was complex and lengthy. Clearly the case was not just that there were more deaths.

It is also the case that the exact cases included changed over time. During the time of the the 7 babies she has been convicted of killing, 10 others died. It is not the case that the 7 that died were happy, bonny babies. They were all in need of significant levels of care.

Did the defence accept that some of the babies had been deliberately killed? I was not aware of this, and if true that is NOT the basis for the current concerns (i.e. plenty of experts believe it likely that NONE of the deaths were murder). It would also suggest that the defence was saying 'Letby wasn't the killer, someone else was" and I don't recall that.

I am dismissing no new evidence. Let it be tried in court. But I would ask this - any baby deaths that Letby may be accused of from previous institutions - what was the recorded cause of death on the Coroners report? Were any of them seen as suspicious at the time?

I have consistently said that I do not know if she is innocent or guilty. I DO think there are significant causes for concern in the conviction.
"Why did suspicion start - because there were more deaths than expected/usual." That's at best a very simplistic summary. There were more deaths, but there were also crucially unexpected deaths, babies who seemed fine suddenly deteriorating. Staff became suspicious of Letby early on, but Letby continued working at the hospital for a long period after those early suspicions. Management sought alternative explanations. Eventually the police were brought in. They then investigated, gathering evidence. It is wrong to imply that this was simply a high mortality rate, so they picked on Letby and constructed a case around that assumption. The new negligence charges appear to be precisely because some in management spent so long trying to excuse Letby, not accuse her.

Babies die in neonatal units, so of course there is a process of filtering out the suspicious cases. Obviously, all the babies on such a unit require significant care, but clinical staff have a good idea of the babies who require care but are on track for a healthy outcome and those likely to die. The judgements around each case were put before the court and the jury.

I misremembered the details. The defence accepted that Babies F and L had been poisoned with insulin, but those were two of the babies who survived and those were attempted murder charges. I don't think the defence accepted any of the murder charges were murder.

"any baby deaths that Letby may be accused of from previous institutions - what was the recorded cause of death on the Coroners report? Were any of them seen as suspicious at the time?" Harold Shipman killed about 250 patients and about 250 of them were not seen as suspicious at the time.
The defence accepted that Babies F and L had been poisoned with insulin.

I wonder if this it a legal approach and is to do with lack of expert knowledge coupled to a belief that a jury would likely accept evidence presented by experts? (Covoluted phrasing).

I work with analysis of samples all the time. I am aware of the hoops needed to go through for QC purposes and I am also aware that things can go wrong. IIRC the labs in question have produced erroneous data on insulin testing when other samples have been submitted. I cannot recall the details.

I think it an odd approach to accept that the babies were subject to an attack but that it wasn't Letby, as that would imply another killer was responsible. I would have thought challenging the insulin data would be a better approach,
Maybe they accepted that Babies F and L had been poisoned with insulin because the evidence very clearly shows that. It takes a fair amount of chutzpah to conclude that you know better than both prosecution and defence!
All evidence can be challenged, you must concede that? How many repeats, when was the equipment calibrated, is it QC passed? Where other forms of analysis considered? I'm not suggesting I know better than either, although the quality of her defence has been questioned.

We are not going to agree on this, and thats fine.
All evidence can be challenged, but you need a good reason to challenge it. Too many start with the assumption that Letby is innocent and then try to explain away all the evidence.

So, sure, you can challenge evidence and challenged it has been, but two juries have sat and listened to a multitude of evidence and come to a conclusion. Multiple appeal court judges have re-examined the case and not found any problems.
So a different question then, why do you think so many people have questions? Has she just become a cause celebre?

Yes, she's become a cause celebre.

We live in a post-truth world. People have questions about many things: vaccines, climate change, Jan 6 etc. It doesn't mean they're sensible questions!

FrancisUrquhart · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

snip.

No mention of AI or LLMs....I think first computer product update all year that hasn't.

tlg86 · July 2

bondegezou said:
FPT...

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

SonofContrarian said:
https://news.sky.com/story/more-criminal-charges-being-considered-over-baby-deaths-at-lucy-letby-hospitals-13391159

But I thought it was all one woman's fault..🥴
There is a potentially serious issue here. If Letby is innocent (I don't know either way) then going after people who didn't stop her from murdering babies is going to be wrong.

There are some on PB who remain fully convinced of her guilt - the trial was lengthy and the jury convicted.
There are others (myself included) who have concerns about the trial.

PB users, in the main, tend to be better at statistics than the general public. If you have 20 neo-natal units then there is a chance that one of them will have more deaths than the average, simply on randomness alone. And that's without considering the possibility of other factors such as sub-standard care overall, poorly trained staff, a unit struggling to cope.

I see now that prosecuters are looking at other charges. So these will cases where babies died when Letby was present that were not thought suspiciuous until now. This is dangerous - it wouldn't be the first time that a suspect has been identified and the evidence is then chosen to fit.
"If you have 20 neo-natal units then there is a chance that one of them will have more deaths than the average, simply on randomness alone." Letby had a historically long trial. The prosecution case did not go, "Look, this neo-natal unit has had more deaths than average. Here ends our case."

"And that's without considering the possibility of other factors such as sub-standard care overall, poorly trained staff, a unit struggling to cope." There were a high number of unusual and unexpected deaths. These are not the sort of deaths that occur because of poor quality care or staff. There was evidence, accepted by the defence, that some babies had been deliberately killed.

"This is dangerous - it wouldn't be the first time that a suspect has been identified and the evidence is then chosen to fit." This is conspiratorial thinking. You are dismissing new evidence on the grounds that you've already made up your mind. Surely new evidence should be welcomed if you are interested in the truth. Let that new evidence be examined.
You are misconstruing my first point. Why did suspicion start - because there were more deaths than expected/usual. See the case of the Dutch nurse who was convicted and later exhonerated in similar circumstances. Once a problem was identified, explanations were sought, and a case made against Letby. The construction of that case is complex, and the trial was complex and lengthy. Clearly the case was not just that there were more deaths.

It is also the case that the exact cases included changed over time. During the time of the the 7 babies she has been convicted of killing, 10 others died. It is not the case that the 7 that died were happy, bonny babies. They were all in need of significant levels of care.

Did the defence accept that some of the babies had been deliberately killed? I was not aware of this, and if true that is NOT the basis for the current concerns (i.e. plenty of experts believe it likely that NONE of the deaths were murder). It would also suggest that the defence was saying 'Letby wasn't the killer, someone else was" and I don't recall that.

I am dismissing no new evidence. Let it be tried in court. But I would ask this - any baby deaths that Letby may be accused of from previous institutions - what was the recorded cause of death on the Coroners report? Were any of them seen as suspicious at the time?

I have consistently said that I do not know if she is innocent or guilty. I DO think there are significant causes for concern in the conviction.
"Why did suspicion start - because there were more deaths than expected/usual." That's at best a very simplistic summary. There were more deaths, but there were also crucially unexpected deaths, babies who seemed fine suddenly deteriorating. Staff became suspicious of Letby early on, but Letby continued working at the hospital for a long period after those early suspicions. Management sought alternative explanations. Eventually the police were brought in. They then investigated, gathering evidence. It is wrong to imply that this was simply a high mortality rate, so they picked on Letby and constructed a case around that assumption. The new negligence charges appear to be precisely because some in management spent so long trying to excuse Letby, not accuse her.

Babies die in neonatal units, so of course there is a process of filtering out the suspicious cases. Obviously, all the babies on such a unit require significant care, but clinical staff have a good idea of the babies who require care but are on track for a healthy outcome and those likely to die. The judgements around each case were put before the court and the jury.

I misremembered the details. The defence accepted that Babies F and L had been poisoned with insulin, but those were two of the babies who survived and those were attempted murder charges. I don't think the defence accepted any of the murder charges were murder.

"any baby deaths that Letby may be accused of from previous institutions - what was the recorded cause of death on the Coroners report? Were any of them seen as suspicious at the time?" Harold Shipman killed about 250 patients and about 250 of them were not seen as suspicious at the time.
The defence accepted that Babies F and L had been poisoned with insulin.

I wonder if this it a legal approach and is to do with lack of expert knowledge coupled to a belief that a jury would likely accept evidence presented by experts? (Covoluted phrasing).

I work with analysis of samples all the time. I am aware of the hoops needed to go through for QC purposes and I am also aware that things can go wrong. IIRC the labs in question have produced erroneous data on insulin testing when other samples have been submitted. I cannot recall the details.

I think it an odd approach to accept that the babies were subject to an attack but that it wasn't Letby, as that would imply another killer was responsible. I would have thought challenging the insulin data would be a better approach,
Maybe they accepted that Babies F and L had been poisoned with insulin because the evidence very clearly shows that. It takes a fair amount of chutzpah to conclude that you know better than both prosecution and defence!
All evidence can be challenged, you must concede that? How many repeats, when was the equipment calibrated, is it QC passed? Where other forms of analysis considered? I'm not suggesting I know better than either, although the quality of her defence has been questioned.

We are not going to agree on this, and thats fine.
All evidence can be challenged, but you need a good reason to challenge it. Too many start with the assumption that Letby is innocent and then try to explain away all the evidence.

So, sure, you can challenge evidence and challenged it has been, but two juries have sat and listened to a multitude of evidence and come to a conclusion. Multiple appeal court judges have re-examined the case and not found any problems.
So a different question then, why do you think so many people have questions? Has she just become a cause celebre?
Yes, she's become a cause celebre.

We live in a post-truth world. People have questions about many things: vaccines, climate change, Jan 6 etc. It doesn't mean they're sensible questions!

What's curious is that it completely cuts across political alignments. It's impossible to know what someone thinks about the Letby case based on their politics.

wooliedyed · July 2

Is cricket just repeating rest matches now?

bondegezou · July 2

tlg86 said:

bondegezou said:
FPT...

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

SonofContrarian said:
https://news.sky.com/story/more-criminal-charges-being-considered-over-baby-deaths-at-lucy-letby-hospitals-13391159

But I thought it was all one woman's fault..🥴
There is a potentially serious issue here. If Letby is innocent (I don't know either way) then going after people who didn't stop her from murdering babies is going to be wrong.

There are some on PB who remain fully convinced of her guilt - the trial was lengthy and the jury convicted.
There are others (myself included) who have concerns about the trial.

PB users, in the main, tend to be better at statistics than the general public. If you have 20 neo-natal units then there is a chance that one of them will have more deaths than the average, simply on randomness alone. And that's without considering the possibility of other factors such as sub-standard care overall, poorly trained staff, a unit struggling to cope.

I see now that prosecuters are looking at other charges. So these will cases where babies died when Letby was present that were not thought suspiciuous until now. This is dangerous - it wouldn't be the first time that a suspect has been identified and the evidence is then chosen to fit.
"If you have 20 neo-natal units then there is a chance that one of them will have more deaths than the average, simply on randomness alone." Letby had a historically long trial. The prosecution case did not go, "Look, this neo-natal unit has had more deaths than average. Here ends our case."

"And that's without considering the possibility of other factors such as sub-standard care overall, poorly trained staff, a unit struggling to cope." There were a high number of unusual and unexpected deaths. These are not the sort of deaths that occur because of poor quality care or staff. There was evidence, accepted by the defence, that some babies had been deliberately killed.

"This is dangerous - it wouldn't be the first time that a suspect has been identified and the evidence is then chosen to fit." This is conspiratorial thinking. You are dismissing new evidence on the grounds that you've already made up your mind. Surely new evidence should be welcomed if you are interested in the truth. Let that new evidence be examined.
You are misconstruing my first point. Why did suspicion start - because there were more deaths than expected/usual. See the case of the Dutch nurse who was convicted and later exhonerated in similar circumstances. Once a problem was identified, explanations were sought, and a case made against Letby. The construction of that case is complex, and the trial was complex and lengthy. Clearly the case was not just that there were more deaths.

It is also the case that the exact cases included changed over time. During the time of the the 7 babies she has been convicted of killing, 10 others died. It is not the case that the 7 that died were happy, bonny babies. They were all in need of significant levels of care.

Did the defence accept that some of the babies had been deliberately killed? I was not aware of this, and if true that is NOT the basis for the current concerns (i.e. plenty of experts believe it likely that NONE of the deaths were murder). It would also suggest that the defence was saying 'Letby wasn't the killer, someone else was" and I don't recall that.

I am dismissing no new evidence. Let it be tried in court. But I would ask this - any baby deaths that Letby may be accused of from previous institutions - what was the recorded cause of death on the Coroners report? Were any of them seen as suspicious at the time?

I have consistently said that I do not know if she is innocent or guilty. I DO think there are significant causes for concern in the conviction.
"Why did suspicion start - because there were more deaths than expected/usual." That's at best a very simplistic summary. There were more deaths, but there were also crucially unexpected deaths, babies who seemed fine suddenly deteriorating. Staff became suspicious of Letby early on, but Letby continued working at the hospital for a long period after those early suspicions. Management sought alternative explanations. Eventually the police were brought in. They then investigated, gathering evidence. It is wrong to imply that this was simply a high mortality rate, so they picked on Letby and constructed a case around that assumption. The new negligence charges appear to be precisely because some in management spent so long trying to excuse Letby, not accuse her.

Babies die in neonatal units, so of course there is a process of filtering out the suspicious cases. Obviously, all the babies on such a unit require significant care, but clinical staff have a good idea of the babies who require care but are on track for a healthy outcome and those likely to die. The judgements around each case were put before the court and the jury.

I misremembered the details. The defence accepted that Babies F and L had been poisoned with insulin, but those were two of the babies who survived and those were attempted murder charges. I don't think the defence accepted any of the murder charges were murder.

"any baby deaths that Letby may be accused of from previous institutions - what was the recorded cause of death on the Coroners report? Were any of them seen as suspicious at the time?" Harold Shipman killed about 250 patients and about 250 of them were not seen as suspicious at the time.
The defence accepted that Babies F and L had been poisoned with insulin.

I wonder if this it a legal approach and is to do with lack of expert knowledge coupled to a belief that a jury would likely accept evidence presented by experts? (Covoluted phrasing).

I work with analysis of samples all the time. I am aware of the hoops needed to go through for QC purposes and I am also aware that things can go wrong. IIRC the labs in question have produced erroneous data on insulin testing when other samples have been submitted. I cannot recall the details.

I think it an odd approach to accept that the babies were subject to an attack but that it wasn't Letby, as that would imply another killer was responsible. I would have thought challenging the insulin data would be a better approach,
Maybe they accepted that Babies F and L had been poisoned with insulin because the evidence very clearly shows that. It takes a fair amount of chutzpah to conclude that you know better than both prosecution and defence!
All evidence can be challenged, you must concede that? How many repeats, when was the equipment calibrated, is it QC passed? Where other forms of analysis considered? I'm not suggesting I know better than either, although the quality of her defence has been questioned.

We are not going to agree on this, and thats fine.
All evidence can be challenged, but you need a good reason to challenge it. Too many start with the assumption that Letby is innocent and then try to explain away all the evidence.

So, sure, you can challenge evidence and challenged it has been, but two juries have sat and listened to a multitude of evidence and come to a conclusion. Multiple appeal court judges have re-examined the case and not found any problems.
So a different question then, why do you think so many people have questions? Has she just become a cause celebre?
Yes, she's become a cause celebre.

We live in a post-truth world. People have questions about many things: vaccines, climate change, Jan 6 etc. It doesn't mean they're sensible questions!
What's curious is that it completely cuts across political alignments. It's impossible to know what someone thinks about the Letby case based on their politics.

For that, I guess we should be thankful.

rcs1000 · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

This modernized version replicates your current community design while bringing the benefits of our most flexible and future-ready theming system. With Foundation, you’ll enjoy:

A user-friendly Theme Editor for easier customization

Compatibility with the latest Vanilla features

Improved mobile responsiveness and SEO performance

We’re happy to incorporate your chosen images (banners, category icons etc) into your new theme. Please share any collateral with us within the next two weeks so we can be sure they are included. After that, we’ll move the new theme to your production site July 18th 2025.

If you have any questions or want help reviewing the changes afterwards, feel free to reach out! I will also be sending you a message directly on your dashboard to make sure you don’t miss this important update.

Best,

Kirstie

Oh.

God.

No.

RobD · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

This modernized version replicates your current community design while bringing the benefits of our most flexible and future-ready theming system. With Foundation, you’ll enjoy:

A user-friendly Theme Editor for easier customization

Compatibility with the latest Vanilla features

Improved mobile responsiveness and SEO performance

We’re happy to incorporate your chosen images (banners, category icons etc) into your new theme. Please share any collateral with us within the next two weeks so we can be sure they are included. After that, we’ll move the new theme to your production site July 18th 2025.

If you have any questions or want help reviewing the changes afterwards, feel free to reach out! I will also be sending you a message directly on your dashboard to make sure you don’t miss this important update.

Best,

Kirstie

It’s going to be crap, isn’t it?

williamglenn · July 2

https://x.com/robertjenrick/status/1940401199540482416

Rachel Reeves’s benefits bill is dead, and so is her career.

TheScreamingEagles · July 2

RobD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

This modernized version replicates your current community design while bringing the benefits of our most flexible and future-ready theming system. With Foundation, you’ll enjoy:

A user-friendly Theme Editor for easier customization

Compatibility with the latest Vanilla features

Improved mobile responsiveness and SEO performance

We’re happy to incorporate your chosen images (banners, category icons etc) into your new theme. Please share any collateral with us within the next two weeks so we can be sure they are included. After that, we’ll move the new theme to your production site July 18th 2025.

If you have any questions or want help reviewing the changes afterwards, feel free to reach out! I will also be sending you a message directly on your dashboard to make sure you don’t miss this important update.

Best,

Kirstie
It’s going to be crap, isn’t it?

Vanilla have hired Liz Truss, it is the only explanation.

squareroot2 · July 2

What a nasty piece of work Starmer is. You don't throw your chancellor to the dogs in the House of Commons.
He will be gone soon too. One just hopes that Labour will not choose Rayner.

boulay · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:

RobD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

This modernized version replicates your current community design while bringing the benefits of our most flexible and future-ready theming system. With Foundation, you’ll enjoy:

A user-friendly Theme Editor for easier customization

Compatibility with the latest Vanilla features

Improved mobile responsiveness and SEO performance

We’re happy to incorporate your chosen images (banners, category icons etc) into your new theme. Please share any collateral with us within the next two weeks so we can be sure they are included. After that, we’ll move the new theme to your production site July 18th 2025.

If you have any questions or want help reviewing the changes afterwards, feel free to reach out! I will also be sending you a message directly on your dashboard to make sure you don’t miss this important update.

Best,

Kirstie
It’s going to be crap, isn’t it?
Vanilla have hired Liz Truss, it is the only explanation.

Let’s hope they have a vacancy in accounts too.

bondegezou · July 2

David Allen Green on the recent Supreme Court decision: https://davidallengreen.com/2025/07/the-sotomayor-dissent-that-is-for-the-ages/

Northern_Al · July 2

Well, I watched all of PMQs, and didn't even notice Rachel getting upset. All seemed normal to me.
I'm off to Specsavers now.

wooliedyed · July 2

Diddy verdict incoming on all charges

wooliedyed · July 2

https://x.com/christopherhope/status/1940413347951788458?t=pSJXh0RhAMH4tq7YnlrHLw&s=19

Heres version 3 of crygate

TheScreamingEagles · July 2

Northern_Al said:
Well, I watched all of PMQs, and didn't even notice Rachel getting upset. All seemed normal to me.
I'm off to Specsavers now.

I was about to describe her as tired and emotional but remembered that is a euphemism for being drunk, which she definitely wasn't.

boulay · July 2

squareroot2 said:
What a nasty piece of work Starmer is. You don't throw your chancellor to the dogs in the House of Commons.
He will be gone soon too. One just hopes that Labour will not choose Rayner.

they couldn’t win, as much as I hate to be fair to them. If Reeves hadn’t turned up then the rumour mill would have gone into overdrive that she was on the way out so hadn’t turned up/ was busy clearing her desk.

I’m guessing Starmer didn’t walk in with her whilst she was crying and force her to sit down next to him?

If they chose Rayner I shall have to fake an American or Russian accent abroad as it will be less embarrassing than the pity for being British from foreigners.

turbotubbs · July 2

bondegezou said:
FPT...

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

bondegezou said:

turbotubbs said:

SonofContrarian said:
https://news.sky.com/story/more-criminal-charges-being-considered-over-baby-deaths-at-lucy-letby-hospitals-13391159

But I thought it was all one woman's fault..🥴
There is a potentially serious issue here. If Letby is innocent (I don't know either way) then going after people who didn't stop her from murdering babies is going to be wrong.

There are some on PB who remain fully convinced of her guilt - the trial was lengthy and the jury convicted.
There are others (myself included) who have concerns about the trial.

PB users, in the main, tend to be better at statistics than the general public. If you have 20 neo-natal units then there is a chance that one of them will have more deaths than the average, simply on randomness alone. And that's without considering the possibility of other factors such as sub-standard care overall, poorly trained staff, a unit struggling to cope.

I see now that prosecuters are looking at other charges. So these will cases where babies died when Letby was present that were not thought suspiciuous until now. This is dangerous - it wouldn't be the first time that a suspect has been identified and the evidence is then chosen to fit.
"If you have 20 neo-natal units then there is a chance that one of them will have more deaths than the average, simply on randomness alone." Letby had a historically long trial. The prosecution case did not go, "Look, this neo-natal unit has had more deaths than average. Here ends our case."

"And that's without considering the possibility of other factors such as sub-standard care overall, poorly trained staff, a unit struggling to cope." There were a high number of unusual and unexpected deaths. These are not the sort of deaths that occur because of poor quality care or staff. There was evidence, accepted by the defence, that some babies had been deliberately killed.

"This is dangerous - it wouldn't be the first time that a suspect has been identified and the evidence is then chosen to fit." This is conspiratorial thinking. You are dismissing new evidence on the grounds that you've already made up your mind. Surely new evidence should be welcomed if you are interested in the truth. Let that new evidence be examined.
You are misconstruing my first point. Why did suspicion start - because there were more deaths than expected/usual. See the case of the Dutch nurse who was convicted and later exhonerated in similar circumstances. Once a problem was identified, explanations were sought, and a case made against Letby. The construction of that case is complex, and the trial was complex and lengthy. Clearly the case was not just that there were more deaths.

It is also the case that the exact cases included changed over time. During the time of the the 7 babies she has been convicted of killing, 10 others died. It is not the case that the 7 that died were happy, bonny babies. They were all in need of significant levels of care.

Did the defence accept that some of the babies had been deliberately killed? I was not aware of this, and if true that is NOT the basis for the current concerns (i.e. plenty of experts believe it likely that NONE of the deaths were murder). It would also suggest that the defence was saying 'Letby wasn't the killer, someone else was" and I don't recall that.

I am dismissing no new evidence. Let it be tried in court. But I would ask this - any baby deaths that Letby may be accused of from previous institutions - what was the recorded cause of death on the Coroners report? Were any of them seen as suspicious at the time?

I have consistently said that I do not know if she is innocent or guilty. I DO think there are significant causes for concern in the conviction.
"Why did suspicion start - because there were more deaths than expected/usual." That's at best a very simplistic summary. There were more deaths, but there were also crucially unexpected deaths, babies who seemed fine suddenly deteriorating. Staff became suspicious of Letby early on, but Letby continued working at the hospital for a long period after those early suspicions. Management sought alternative explanations. Eventually the police were brought in. They then investigated, gathering evidence. It is wrong to imply that this was simply a high mortality rate, so they picked on Letby and constructed a case around that assumption. The new negligence charges appear to be precisely because some in management spent so long trying to excuse Letby, not accuse her.

Babies die in neonatal units, so of course there is a process of filtering out the suspicious cases. Obviously, all the babies on such a unit require significant care, but clinical staff have a good idea of the babies who require care but are on track for a healthy outcome and those likely to die. The judgements around each case were put before the court and the jury.

I misremembered the details. The defence accepted that Babies F and L had been poisoned with insulin, but those were two of the babies who survived and those were attempted murder charges. I don't think the defence accepted any of the murder charges were murder.

"any baby deaths that Letby may be accused of from previous institutions - what was the recorded cause of death on the Coroners report? Were any of them seen as suspicious at the time?" Harold Shipman killed about 250 patients and about 250 of them were not seen as suspicious at the time.
The defence accepted that Babies F and L had been poisoned with insulin.

I wonder if this it a legal approach and is to do with lack of expert knowledge coupled to a belief that a jury would likely accept evidence presented by experts? (Covoluted phrasing).

I work with analysis of samples all the time. I am aware of the hoops needed to go through for QC purposes and I am also aware that things can go wrong. IIRC the labs in question have produced erroneous data on insulin testing when other samples have been submitted. I cannot recall the details.

I think it an odd approach to accept that the babies were subject to an attack but that it wasn't Letby, as that would imply another killer was responsible. I would have thought challenging the insulin data would be a better approach,
Maybe they accepted that Babies F and L had been poisoned with insulin because the evidence very clearly shows that. It takes a fair amount of chutzpah to conclude that you know better than both prosecution and defence!
All evidence can be challenged, you must concede that? How many repeats, when was the equipment calibrated, is it QC passed? Where other forms of analysis considered? I'm not suggesting I know better than either, although the quality of her defence has been questioned.

We are not going to agree on this, and thats fine.
All evidence can be challenged, but you need a good reason to challenge it. Too many start with the assumption that Letby is innocent and then try to explain away all the evidence.

So, sure, you can challenge evidence and challenged it has been, but two juries have sat and listened to a multitude of evidence and come to a conclusion. Multiple appeal court judges have re-examined the case and not found any problems.
So a different question then, why do you think so many people have questions? Has she just become a cause celebre?
Yes, she's become a cause celebre.

We live in a post-truth world. People have questions about many things: vaccines, climate change, Jan 6 etc. It doesn't mean they're sensible questions!

That's a fair answer, and there is always the danger of being sucked into the conspiracy world. I don't generally think I am a conspiracy theorist, but who knows.

Slackbladder · July 2

If Starmer replaces Reeves with McFadden then those 'Kier has a women issue' will keep on rumbling.

TheScreamingEagles · July 2

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

snip.
No mention of AI or LLMs....I think first computer product update all year that hasn't.

They do have an AI spam(bot) checker these days.

Which explains why we've had fewer Saturday lunchtime visitors recently.

Slackbladder · July 2

Wow Diddy didn't do some of it.

HYUFD · July 2

Reeves was on the relatively fiscally conservative, New Labour end of the Labour Party.

Given Labour backbenchers forced her to abandon welfare cuts for the mentally ill and disabled to try and get more into work and also forced her to U turn on ending WFA for average income pensioners significant further tax increases are likely from whoever replaces her as Chancellor if she does go

FrancisUrquhart · July 2

Was Starmer really trying the promises kept routine at PMQs....brass neck.

turbotubbs · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

snip.
No mention of AI or LLMs....I think first computer product update all year that hasn't.
They do have an AI spam(bot) checker these days.

Which explains why we've had fewer Saturday lunchtime visitors recently.

And the world is a more boring place. No more fastest to be banned contests. No more seeing how long before BA pilots get brought up. No more weird mentions of a certain flint knapper.

FrancisUrquhart · July 2

So Piddly Diddly guilty on some charges, not guilty on the most serious ones.

Is he not getting tried for physical assault etc? Or are there other trials to come? The allegations seem very extensive, but this trial appeared to be about 2 specific individuals.

TheScreamingEagles · July 2

For fourteen years Labour kept on saying austerity was a choice, yesterday was when those chickens came home to roost.

They seemed to forget that going into the 2010 election Alistair Darling was promising cuts more severe than Thatcher.

viewcode · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

This modernized version replicates your current community design while bringing the benefits of our most flexible and future-ready theming system. With Foundation, you’ll enjoy:

A user-friendly Theme Editor for easier customization

Compatibility with the latest Vanilla features

Improved mobile responsiveness and SEO performance

We’re happy to incorporate your chosen images (banners, category icons etc) into your new theme. Please share any collateral with us within the next two weeks so we can be sure they are included. After that, we’ll move the new theme to your production site July 18th 2025.

If you have any questions or want help reviewing the changes afterwards, feel free to reach out! I will also be sending you a message directly on your dashboard to make sure you don’t miss this important update.

Best,

Kirstie

In certain locations I cannot access PB on my tablet via www.politicalbetting.com nor via vf.politicalbetting.com due to that "checking you are human" gubbins. Is it my tablet, my browser, or the wifi provider

HYUFD · July 2

boulay said:

squareroot2 said:
What a nasty piece of work Starmer is. You don't throw your chancellor to the dogs in the House of Commons.
He will be gone soon too. One just hopes that Labour will not choose Rayner.
they couldn’t win, as much as I hate to be fair to them. If Reeves hadn’t turned up then the rumour mill would have gone into overdrive that she was on the way out so hadn’t turned up/ was busy clearing her desk.

I’m guessing Starmer didn’t walk in with her whilst she was crying and force her to sit down next to him?

If they chose Rayner I shall have to fake an American or Russian accent abroad as it will be less embarrassing than the pity for being British from foreigners.

Reeves v Farage v Badenoch would be the first time no main party leader has been educated at Oxbridge since Major v Kinnock in 1992

turbotubbs · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:
For fourteen years Labour kept on saying austerity was a choice, yesterday was when those chickens came home to roost.

Its all so easy in opposition. Even during Covid it was easy for Starmer. All he had to do was be tougher on the virus (more lockdowns!) and the scared public would know he was on their side.

And now it all needs paying for and there is no money left. Perhaps someone should have left a note in the treasury on their way out.

Fishing · July 2

Some insider gossip fwiw.

I was just talking with a friend of a friend who is a left-wing Labour MP, and his prediction is that Starmer will be forced out fairly soon, the two front-runners will be Ange (God help us) and Streeting (bad but not quite so bad). To my point that Labour doesn't usually assassinate its leaders he said he'd never seen anything like how much Starmer is loathed, and, worse, despised, right across the party.

Just one opinion, obviously.

williamglenn · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:
For fourteen years Labour kept on saying austerity was a choice, yesterday was when those chickens came home to roost.

They seemed to forget that going into the 2010 election Alistair Darling was promising cuts more severe than Thatcher.

The new line is that the Tories left them with an unsustainable benefits bill, so apparently there wasn't enough austerity.

Frank_Booth · July 2

squareroot2 said:
What a nasty piece of work Starmer is. You don't throw your chancellor to the dogs in the House of Commons.
He will be gone soon too. One just hopes that Labour will not choose Rayner.

It's not just Rayner. They have 400 MPs. I cannot think of one to replace Starmer with.

Scott_xP · July 2

viewcode said:
Is it my tablet, my browser, or the wifi provider

It's vanilla

Malmesbury · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

This modernized version replicates your current community design while bringing the benefits of our most flexible and future-ready theming system. With Foundation, you’ll enjoy:

A user-friendly Theme Editor for easier customization

Compatibility with the latest Vanilla features

Improved mobile responsiveness and SEO performance

We’re happy to incorporate your chosen images (banners, category icons etc) into your new theme. Please share any collateral with us within the next two weeks so we can be sure they are included. After that, we’ll move the new theme to your production site July 18th 2025.

If you have any questions or want help reviewing the changes afterwards, feel free to reach out! I will also be sending you a message directly on your dashboard to make sure you don’t miss this important update.

Best,

Kirstie

Hmmmmm

MarqueeMark · July 2

wooliedyed said:
https://x.com/christopherhope/status/1940413347951788458?t=pSJXh0RhAMH4tq7YnlrHLw&s=19

Heres version 3 of crygate

Misheard working - or walking?

FrancisUrquhart · July 2

I think we are throwing the tougher immigration talk out the window. Promises made, promises....

UK visa revamp allows lower-skilled (non-graduate) office workers to come to Britain

Debt collectors, mortgage administrators and HR officers will still be able to come and work in the UK on skilled-worker visas after changes to the immigration rules that have left employers free to recruit overseas for a wide range of lower-skilled office jobs.

https://www.ft.com/content/392541c7-f775-4326-a7b5-5ba18dd57838

williamglenn · July 2

Fishing said:
Some insider gossip fwiw.

I was just talking with a friend of a friend who is a left-wing Labour MP, and his prediction is that Starmer will be forced out fairly soon, the two front-runners will be Ange (God help us) and Streeting (bad but not quite so bad). To my point that Labour doesn't usually assassinate its leaders he said he'd never seen anything like how much Starmer is loathed, and, worse, despised, right across the party.

Just one opinion, obviously.

I can't see past Rayner if Starmer goes. Streeting would be a liability and he has a lot of baggage with his history of misogynistic comments.

numbertwelve · July 2

The Mail (I know, I know) now suggesting Reeves had an argument with SKS before PMQs, then Hoyle having a go at her straight after that argument didn’t help matters.

MarqueeMark · July 2

Sorry Rachel, but...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1OVYFNUZT8&ab_channel=TheBeat

rottenborough · July 2

wooliedyed said:
https://x.com/christopherhope/status/1940413347951788458?t=pSJXh0RhAMH4tq7YnlrHLw&s=19

Heres version 3 of crygate

Erm... It's a personal matter that involves a fecking massive row with another cabinet member or senior aide?

FrancisUrquhart · July 2

Frank_Booth said:

squareroot2 said:
What a nasty piece of work Starmer is. You don't throw your chancellor to the dogs in the House of Commons.
He will be gone soon too. One just hopes that Labour will not choose Rayner.
It's not just Rayner. They have 400 MPs. I cannot think of one to replace Starmer with.

Some one to fill CoE is even harder.

rottenborough · July 2

Julian Jessop
@julianHjessop

FYI, Rachel Reeves' obvious distress at #PMQs has knocked about 1% off the value of the pound and added 5-10 basis points to the cost of UK government borrowing (10-year gilt yields have jumped 15bp today, but yields are also up 5-10bp in other countries)... 🤔

https://x.com/julianHjessop/status/1940414833012486235

tlg86 · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:
For fourteen years Labour kept on saying austerity was a choice, yesterday was when those chickens came home to roost.

They seemed to forget that going into the 2010 election Alistair Darling was promising cuts more severe than Thatcher.

Liz Truss and the Labour Party are two cheeks of the same arse.

kjh · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

This modernized version replicates your current community design while bringing the benefits of our most flexible and future-ready theming system. With Foundation, you’ll enjoy:

A user-friendly Theme Editor for easier customization

Compatibility with the latest Vanilla features

Improved mobile responsiveness and SEO performance

We’re happy to incorporate your chosen images (banners, category icons etc) into your new theme. Please share any collateral with us within the next two weeks so we can be sure they are included. After that, we’ll move the new theme to your production site July 18th 2025.

If you have any questions or want help reviewing the changes afterwards, feel free to reach out! I will also be sending you a message directly on your dashboard to make sure you don’t miss this important update.

Best,

Kirstie

I just want it to bloody work properly, which it doesn't do currently. Still, love the corporate talk.

Malmesbury · July 2

FrancisUrquhart said:
I think we are throwing the tougher immigration talk out the window. Promises made, promises....

UK visa revamp allows lower-skilled (non-graduate) office workers to come to Britain

Debt collectors, mortgage administrators and HR officers will still be able to come and work in the UK on skilled-worker visas after changes to the immigration rules that have left employers free to recruit overseas for a wide range of lower-skilled office jobs.

https://www.ft.com/content/392541c7-f775-4326-a7b5-5ba18dd57838

And yet we have frequent, detailed reports of young people finding it incredibly hard to get their first job - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2307p4jjz4o etc

williamglenn · July 2

FrancisUrquhart said:

Frank_Booth said:

squareroot2 said:
What a nasty piece of work Starmer is. You don't throw your chancellor to the dogs in the House of Commons.
He will be gone soon too. One just hopes that Labour will not choose Rayner.
It's not just Rayner. They have 400 MPs. I cannot think of one to replace Starmer with.
Some one to fill CoE is even harder.

Labour do have one heavyweight figure who has been recalled from an overseas posting once before to act as de facto Prime Minister.

tlg86 · July 2

rottenborough said:
Julian Jessop
@julianHjessop

FYI, Rachel Reeves' obvious distress at #PMQs has knocked about 1% off the value of the pound and added 5-10 basis points to the cost of UK government borrowing (10-year gilt yields have jumped 15bp today, but yields are also up 5-10bp in other countries)... 🤔

https://x.com/julianHjessop/status/1940414833012486235

It's silly, really. She's not crying over the state of the economy/public finances, is she?

DecrepiterJohnL · July 2

Fishing said:
Some insider gossip fwiw.

I was just talking with a friend of a friend who is a left-wing Labour MP, and his prediction is that Starmer will be forced out fairly soon, the two front-runners will be Ange (God help us) and Streeting (bad but not quite so bad). To my point that Labour doesn't usually assassinate its leaders he said he'd never seen anything like how much Starmer is loathed, and, worse, despised, right across the party.

Just one opinion, obviously.

Your foaf is pushing at an open door if I am right that Starmer will retire early à la Wilson.

FrancisUrquhart · July 2

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
I think we are throwing the tougher immigration talk out the window. Promises made, promises....

UK visa revamp allows lower-skilled (non-graduate) office workers to come to Britain

Debt collectors, mortgage administrators and HR officers will still be able to come and work in the UK on skilled-worker visas after changes to the immigration rules that have left employers free to recruit overseas for a wide range of lower-skilled office jobs.

https://www.ft.com/content/392541c7-f775-4326-a7b5-5ba18dd57838
And yet we have frequent, detailed reports of young people finding it incredibly hard to get their first job - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2307p4jjz4o etc

Over-qualified....

There is absolutely no need to be recruiting from abroad for f##king debt collectors and HR.

Fairliered · July 2

Slackbladder said:
Wow Diddy didn't do some of it.

Are you referring to Starmer, Reeves or Kendall?

Leon · July 2

numbertwelve said:
The Mail (I know, I know) now suggesting Reeves had an argument with SKS before PMQs, then Hoyle having a go at her straight after that argument didn’t help matters.

That sounds a bit more likely. Yer actual boss giving you a dressing down - with an implied sacking? - would be tough for everyone. Especially from a twit like Starmer

Then a bit more stress, then the v public refusal to back her = meltdown of THE IRON CHANCELLOR

It’s all so Cringe

rottenborough · July 2

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:
Julian Jessop
@julianHjessop

FYI, Rachel Reeves' obvious distress at #PMQs has knocked about 1% off the value of the pound and added 5-10 basis points to the cost of UK government borrowing (10-year gilt yields have jumped 15bp today, but yields are also up 5-10bp in other countries)... 🤔

https://x.com/julianHjessop/status/1940414833012486235
It's silly, really. She's not crying over the state of the economy/public finances, is she?

I think it is more a reaction to uncertainty. Who knows who will CoE by end of the week?

Also, as he says yields up elsewhere.

FTSE seems to be down a bit,

Fairliered · July 2

viewcode said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

This modernized version replicates your current community design while bringing the benefits of our most flexible and future-ready theming system. With Foundation, you’ll enjoy:

A user-friendly Theme Editor for easier customization

Compatibility with the latest Vanilla features

Improved mobile responsiveness and SEO performance

We’re happy to incorporate your chosen images (banners, category icons etc) into your new theme. Please share any collateral with us within the next two weeks so we can be sure they are included. After that, we’ll move the new theme to your production site July 18th 2025.

If you have any questions or want help reviewing the changes afterwards, feel free to reach out! I will also be sending you a message directly on your dashboard to make sure you don’t miss this important update.

Best,

Kirstie
In certain locations I cannot access PB on my tablet via www.politicalbetting.com nor via vf.politicalbetting.com due to that "checking you are human" gubbins. Is it my tablet, my browser, or the wifi provider

Are you sure you are human? We need to know.

wooliedyed · July 2

rottenborough said:

wooliedyed said:
https://x.com/christopherhope/status/1940413347951788458?t=pSJXh0RhAMH4tq7YnlrHLw&s=19

Heres version 3 of crygate
Erm... It's a personal matter that involves a fecking massive row with another cabinet member or senior aide?

Thats what these witnesses suggest.
'Personal matter' could mean just about anything - melting down because she cant handle the job (or a colleague told her she couldnt) is as much a personal matter as receiving bad news etc

rottenborough · July 2

What is blackly hilarious is all this political chaos is from unforced errors.

Frank_Booth · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:
For fourteen years Labour kept on saying austerity was a choice, yesterday was when those chickens came home to roost.

They seemed to forget that going into the 2010 election Alistair Darling was promising cuts more severe than Thatcher.

I maintain that the 2010 government should have taken a more Keynesian approach. Anyway not having followed the details I don't really understand why PIP was the focus of this welfare bill. Isn't the main issue a rise in people on out of work benefits?

DecrepiterJohnL · July 2

viewcode said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

This modernized version replicates your current community design while bringing the benefits of our most flexible and future-ready theming system. With Foundation, you’ll enjoy:

A user-friendly Theme Editor for easier customization

Compatibility with the latest Vanilla features

Improved mobile responsiveness and SEO performance

We’re happy to incorporate your chosen images (banners, category icons etc) into your new theme. Please share any collateral with us within the next two weeks so we can be sure they are included. After that, we’ll move the new theme to your production site July 18th 2025.

If you have any questions or want help reviewing the changes afterwards, feel free to reach out! I will also be sending you a message directly on your dashboard to make sure you don’t miss this important update.

Best,

Kirstie
In certain locations I cannot access PB on my tablet via www.politicalbetting.com nor via vf.politicalbetting.com due to that "checking you are human" gubbins. Is it my tablet, my browser, or the wifi provider

Human-checking is, I think, Cloudflare, the CDN in front of Vanilla.

Accessing vf.politicalbetting.com goes via Cloudflare. For www, I still see an expired certificate at least some of the time.

turbotubbs · July 2

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
I think we are throwing the tougher immigration talk out the window. Promises made, promises....

UK visa revamp allows lower-skilled (non-graduate) office workers to come to Britain

Debt collectors, mortgage administrators and HR officers will still be able to come and work in the UK on skilled-worker visas after changes to the immigration rules that have left employers free to recruit overseas for a wide range of lower-skilled office jobs.

https://www.ft.com/content/392541c7-f775-4326-a7b5-5ba18dd57838
And yet we have frequent, detailed reports of young people finding it incredibly hard to get their first job - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2307p4jjz4o etc

I have sympathy for a warehouse job turning down a graduate. We have a technician post that has had more people in the role that I've had hot dinners. Too often we go for graduates 'as the best candidate' and are horrified that (a) they are bored in the role and (b) find a better job in the first 6-9 months. I'd imagine Aldi were thinking similar.

FrancisUrquhart · July 2

I Hate the WOKE Left More Than the Far Right – Jonathan Pie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewZYEOQINdI

Putting the clickbait title to one side, I think Pie is finished. Tom Walker sounds like he has decided he doesn't feel comfortable having the character really blast politics of the left other than on "woke" (but seems bored / scared of backlash).

He hasn't even done a video out the benefits cuts.

rottenborough · July 2

Simon Finkelstein
@Finksi
·
24m
Unconventional view: the gilt movements strengthen the Chancellor's position, at least in the short-term. She can make the case that there is a clear and tangible cost of totally losing discipline with the public finances...

turbotubbs · July 2

Frank_Booth said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
For fourteen years Labour kept on saying austerity was a choice, yesterday was when those chickens came home to roost.

They seemed to forget that going into the 2010 election Alistair Darling was promising cuts more severe than Thatcher.
I maintain that the 2010 government should have taken a more Keynesian approach. Anyway not having followed the details I don't really understand why PIP was the focus of this welfare bill. Isn't the main issue a rise in people on out of work benefits?

There seems a sharp divergence between the UK and other comparable countries in the rates of those needing PIP. That ought to be a start point. Are our people sicker? Is it easier to fiddle our system? Do we have more fiddlers in general?

As ever Radio 5 abounded with stories of those claiming PIP and using the money for Caribbean holidays and the like. Anecdotes, not data. And yet.

wooliedyed · July 2

rottenborough said:
Simon Finkelstein
@Finksi
·
24m
Unconventional view: the gilt movements strengthen the Chancellor's position, at least in the short-term. She can make the case that there is a clear and tangible cost of totally losing discipline with the public finances...

But they cant u turn on the u turns.......

IanB2 · July 2

Fishing said:
Some insider gossip fwiw.

I was just talking with a friend of a friend who is a left-wing Labour MP, and his prediction is that Starmer will be forced out fairly soon, the two front-runners will be Ange (God help us) and Streeting (bad but not quite so bad). To my point that Labour doesn't usually assassinate its leaders he said he'd never seen anything like how much Starmer is loathed, and, worse, despised, right across the party.

Just one opinion, obviously.

Do they really want questions about their mandate so soon after a fragile election win?

FrancisUrquhart · July 2

Leon said:

numbertwelve said:
The Mail (I know, I know) now suggesting Reeves had an argument with SKS before PMQs, then Hoyle having a go at her straight after that argument didn’t help matters.
That sounds a bit more likely. Yer actual boss giving you a dressing down - with an implied sacking? - would be tough for everyone. Especially from a twit like Starmer

Then a bit more stress, then the v public refusal to back her = meltdown of THE IRON CHANCELLOR

It’s all so Cringe

We will be getting the briefing about "bullying" behaviour shortly.

Selebian · July 2

MarqueeMark said:

wooliedyed said:
https://x.com/christopherhope/status/1940413347951788458?t=pSJXh0RhAMH4tq7YnlrHLw&s=19

Heres version 3 of crygate
Misheard working - or walking?

There are a number of interpretations for 'working out of Downing Street':

Working in Downing Street (is 'out' an Americanism?)
Actually working out[side] of Downing Street, i.e. somewhere else, like home
Working out [in] Downing Street - doing a fitness routine to get it all out of her system and aid mental health - maybe a Starmer-alike punch bag?

FrancisUrquhart · July 2

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
I think we are throwing the tougher immigration talk out the window. Promises made, promises....

UK visa revamp allows lower-skilled (non-graduate) office workers to come to Britain

Debt collectors, mortgage administrators and HR officers will still be able to come and work in the UK on skilled-worker visas after changes to the immigration rules that have left employers free to recruit overseas for a wide range of lower-skilled office jobs.

https://www.ft.com/content/392541c7-f775-4326-a7b5-5ba18dd57838
And yet we have frequent, detailed reports of young people finding it incredibly hard to get their first job - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2307p4jjz4o etc
I have sympathy for a warehouse job turning down a graduate. We have a technician post that has had more people in the role that I've had hot dinners. Too often we go for graduates 'as the best candidate' and are horrified that (a) they are bored in the role and (b) find a better job in the first 6-9 months. I'd imagine Aldi were thinking similar.

Its also lack of any relevant work experience. Lots of employers want people with experience, but how do you get experience when you need experience to get experience.

I have been hearing from friends who have kids that quite a few middle class striver types are pushing their offspring into the degree apprenticeship routes.

viewcode · July 2

Fairliered said:

viewcode said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

This modernized version replicates your current community design while bringing the benefits of our most flexible and future-ready theming system. With Foundation, you’ll enjoy:

A user-friendly Theme Editor for easier customization

Compatibility with the latest Vanilla features

Improved mobile responsiveness and SEO performance

We’re happy to incorporate your chosen images (banners, category icons etc) into your new theme. Please share any collateral with us within the next two weeks so we can be sure they are included. After that, we’ll move the new theme to your production site July 18th 2025.

If you have any questions or want help reviewing the changes afterwards, feel free to reach out! I will also be sending you a message directly on your dashboard to make sure you don’t miss this important update.

Best,

Kirstie
In certain locations I cannot access PB on my tablet via www.politicalbetting.com nor via vf.politicalbetting.com due to that "checking you are human" gubbins. Is it my tablet, my browser, or the wifi provider
Are you sure you are human? We need to know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VrLQXR7mKU

rottenborough · July 2

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬
· 17m
The gilt move - especially at the long end - is big and bad.
No sugar coating it.
That said, the thing about the Truss debacle is that we saw these sort of moves day after day.
Too early to say if this is a wobble or a bigger problem.

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬

Worth noting: the gilt move really kicked off on speculation that Reeves could be replaced.
‘Reeves being replaced’ in this case meaning ‘a loosening of the fiscal rules’.

So there you have the first problem.
Cut spending - PLP won’t wear it.
Increase borrowing - the gilt market pushes back.
You’re left with, raise taxes - break a manifesto pledge.
Option 3 likely the least painful.

wooliedyed · July 2

Anne Marie Morris formerly MP in Newton Abbott has joined Reform

Leon · July 2

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
I think we are throwing the tougher immigration talk out the window. Promises made, promises....

UK visa revamp allows lower-skilled (non-graduate) office workers to come to Britain

Debt collectors, mortgage administrators and HR officers will still be able to come and work in the UK on skilled-worker visas after changes to the immigration rules that have left employers free to recruit overseas for a wide range of lower-skilled office jobs.

https://www.ft.com/content/392541c7-f775-4326-a7b5-5ba18dd57838
And yet we have frequent, detailed reports of young people finding it incredibly hard to get their first job - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2307p4jjz4o etc
I have sympathy for a warehouse job turning down a graduate. We have a technician post that has had more people in the role that I've had hot dinners. Too often we go for graduates 'as the best candidate' and are horrified that (a) they are bored in the role and (b) find a better job in the first 6-9 months. I'd imagine Aldi were thinking similar.

Look at what/where she studied

“She has a degree in accounting and finance from the University of Salford and a masters in management from Manchester Metropolitan University”

Iffy book keeping roles at mediocre universities. People like her, and those skills, are first in the firing line, now. I doubt she will ever get a nice white collar job as she once hoped

This will soon apply to tens of millions of jobs and degrees. She’s saddled herself with all that student debt for nothing. Most universities are doomed

I feel very sorry for her and her generation. The best advice any parent can give an 18 year old child, now, is Give up on uni and get a trade, or, if you are really cerebral: go to a truly good university, a redbrick or better, and study what you love

At the very least you will enjoy your university years

Foss · July 2

wooliedyed said:
Anne Marie Morris formerly MP in Newton Abbott has joined Reform

The YouGov MRP currently has Newton Abbott as a Ref gain.

viewcode · July 2

FrancisUrquhart said:
I Hate the WOKE Left More Than the Far Right – Jonathan Pie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewZYEOQINdI

Putting the clickbait title to one side, I think Pie is finished. Tom Walker sounds like he has decided he doesn't feel comfortable having the character really blast politics of the left other than on "woke" (but seems bored / scared of backlash).

He hasn't even done a video out the benefits cuts.

He's 36. He badly needs moisturiser.

FrancisUrquhart · July 2

Come on, own up, which one of you was it?

A pensioner drove a mobility scooter down a three-lane A-road at night after “following his satnav”.

The man was filmed travelling slowly along the edge of the 70mph A13 near Dagenham, east London, on Monday evening as passing lorries and cars slowed to avoid him. He was pulled over by a fire engine and questioned by police before being escorted on to local roads. One onlooker said the man was “following his satnav” in dashcam footage capturing his dangerous excursion.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/02/pensioner-drives-scooter-down-a-road-dagenham/

rottenborough · July 2

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
I think we are throwing the tougher immigration talk out the window. Promises made, promises....

UK visa revamp allows lower-skilled (non-graduate) office workers to come to Britain

Debt collectors, mortgage administrators and HR officers will still be able to come and work in the UK on skilled-worker visas after changes to the immigration rules that have left employers free to recruit overseas for a wide range of lower-skilled office jobs.

https://www.ft.com/content/392541c7-f775-4326-a7b5-5ba18dd57838
And yet we have frequent, detailed reports of young people finding it incredibly hard to get their first job - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2307p4jjz4o etc
I have sympathy for a warehouse job turning down a graduate. We have a technician post that has had more people in the role that I've had hot dinners. Too often we go for graduates 'as the best candidate' and are horrified that (a) they are bored in the role and (b) find a better job in the first 6-9 months. I'd imagine Aldi were thinking similar.
Look at what/where she studied

“She has a degree in accounting and finance from the University of Salford and a masters in management from Manchester Metropolitan University”

Iffy book keeping roles at mediocre universities. People like her, and those skills, are first in the firing line, now. I doubt she will ever get a nice white collar job as she once hoped

This will soon apply to tens of millions of jobs and degrees. She’s saddled herself with all that student debt for nothing. Most universities are doomed

I feel very sorry for her and her generation. The best advice any parent can give an 18 year old child, now, is Give up on uni and get a trade, or, if you are really cerebral go to a truly good university, a redbrick and up, and study what you love

At the very least you will enjoy your university years

It's worse than that since the debt will never be paid back and at some point that black hole is going to be become relevant to the public finances.

rottenborough · July 2

Selebian said:

MarqueeMark said:

wooliedyed said:
https://x.com/christopherhope/status/1940413347951788458?t=pSJXh0RhAMH4tq7YnlrHLw&s=19

Heres version 3 of crygate
Misheard working - or walking?
There are a number of interpretations for 'working out of Downing Street':
Working in Downing Street (is 'out' an Americanism?)

Actually working out[side] of Downing Street, i.e. somewhere else, like home

Working out [in] Downing Street - doing a fitness routine to get it all out of her system and aid mental health - maybe a Starmer-alike punch bag?

As the political class are obsessed by West Wing then it is likely 1)

MaxPB · July 2

TheScreamingEagles said:
I’ve had this update from Vanilla

Exciting news — we’re upgrading your community to Higher Logic Vanilla’s new Foundation theme!

This modernized version replicates your current community design while bringing the benefits of our most flexible and future-ready theming system. With Foundation, you’ll enjoy:

A user-friendly Theme Editor for easier customization

Compatibility with the latest Vanilla features

Improved mobile responsiveness and SEO performance

We’re happy to incorporate your chosen images (banners, category icons etc) into your new theme. Please share any collateral with us within the next two weeks so we can be sure they are included. After that, we’ll move the new theme to your production site July 18th 2025.

If you have any questions or want help reviewing the changes afterwards, feel free to reach out! I will also be sending you a message directly on your dashboard to make sure you don’t miss this important update.

Best,

Kirstie

Question - are the comments flat or threaded? I remember this being an issue every time Robert has tried to upgrade.

dr_spyn · July 2

When folk hadde laughen at this nys cas.

When folk had laughed at this foolish business.

wooliedyed · July 2

rottenborough said:

Selebian said:

MarqueeMark said:

wooliedyed said:
https://x.com/christopherhope/status/1940413347951788458?t=pSJXh0RhAMH4tq7YnlrHLw&s=19

Heres version 3 of crygate
Misheard working - or walking?
There are a number of interpretations for 'working out of Downing Street':
Working in Downing Street (is 'out' an Americanism?)

Actually working out[side] of Downing Street, i.e. somewhere else, like home

Working out [in] Downing Street - doing a fitness routine to get it all out of her system and aid mental health - maybe a Starmer-alike punch bag?

As the political class are obsessed by West Wing then it is likely 1)

Id assumed it meant 1. 'Business as usual' placeholder

Dopermean · July 2

viewcode said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
I Hate the WOKE Left More Than the Far Right – Jonathan Pie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewZYEOQINdI

Putting the clickbait title to one side, I think Pie is finished. Tom Walker sounds like he has decided he doesn't feel comfortable having the character really blast politics of the left other than on "woke" (but seems bored / scared of backlash).

He hasn't even done a video out the benefits cuts.
He's 36. He badly needs moisturiser.

If he was 47 could he cancel the moisturiser?

IanB2 · July 2

Foss said:

wooliedyed said:
Anne Marie Morris formerly MP in Newton Abbott has joined Reform
The YouGov MRP currently has Newton Abbott as a Ref gain.

It was the MRP that persuaded our Heathener, who lives there, that it was a hot Labour prospect, despite anyone who knew anything about politics seeing it was an obvious potential LibDem gain, as indeed it proved to be

Big_G_NorthWales · July 2

FrancisUrquhart said:
Come on, own up, which one of you was it?

A pensioner drove a mobility scooter down a three-lane A-road at night after “following his satnav”.

The man was filmed travelling slowly along the edge of the 70mph A13 near Dagenham, east London, on Monday evening as passing lorries and cars slowed to avoid him. He was pulled over by a fire engine and questioned by police before being escorted on to local roads. One onlooker said the man was “following his satnav” in dashcam footage capturing his dangerous excursion.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/02/pensioner-drives-scooter-down-a-road-dagenham/

It wasn't me because I have never been near Dagenham and do not have a mobility scooter

I am a pensioner though who may soon need a mobility scooter

OldKingCole · July 2

rottenborough said:

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬
· 17m
The gilt move - especially at the long end - is big and bad.
No sugar coating it.
That said, the thing about the Truss debacle is that we saw these sort of moves day after day.
Too early to say if this is a wobble or a bigger problem.

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬

Worth noting: the gilt move really kicked off on speculation that Reeves could be replaced.
‘Reeves being replaced’ in this case meaning ‘a loosening of the fiscal rules’.

So there you have the first problem.
Cut spending - PLP won’t wear it.
Increase borrowing - the gilt market pushes back.
You’re left with, raise taxes - break a manifesto pledge.
Option 3 likely the least painful.

Depends on which taxes are raised. IIRC Starmer and Reeves have always said that they wouldn't raise taxes of 'working people"! Hence, en passant, the inheritance tax on rural landlords.
But what about people who don't work? As well the rural landlords the are other landlords, investors, speculators on the Stock Exchange and Metal (etc) Exchanges.
Inheritance tax might be a goer, too, although that doesn't bring in money quickly enough.

HYUFD · July 2

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
I think we are throwing the tougher immigration talk out the window. Promises made, promises....

UK visa revamp allows lower-skilled (non-graduate) office workers to come to Britain

Debt collectors, mortgage administrators and HR officers will still be able to come and work in the UK on skilled-worker visas after changes to the immigration rules that have left employers free to recruit overseas for a wide range of lower-skilled office jobs.

https://www.ft.com/content/392541c7-f775-4326-a7b5-5ba18dd57838
And yet we have frequent, detailed reports of young people finding it incredibly hard to get their first job - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2307p4jjz4o etc
I have sympathy for a warehouse job turning down a graduate. We have a technician post that has had more people in the role that I've had hot dinners. Too often we go for graduates 'as the best candidate' and are horrified that (a) they are bored in the role and (b) find a better job in the first 6-9 months. I'd imagine Aldi were thinking similar.
Look at what/where she studied

“She has a degree in accounting and finance from the University of Salford and a masters in management from Manchester Metropolitan University”

Iffy book keeping roles at mediocre universities. People like her, and those skills, are first in the firing line, now. I doubt she will ever get a nice white collar job as she once hoped

This will soon apply to tens of millions of jobs and degrees. She’s saddled herself with all that student debt for nothing. Most universities are doomed

I feel very sorry for her and her generation. The best advice any parent can give an 18 year old child, now, is Give up on uni and get a trade, or, if you are really cerebral: go to a truly good university, a redbrick or better, and study what you love

At the very least you will enjoy your university years

And if more people study for a trade wages will go down for plumbers and electricians in turn as there will be less demand for their skills as more supply

MaxPB · July 2

Frank_Booth said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
For fourteen years Labour kept on saying austerity was a choice, yesterday was when those chickens came home to roost.

They seemed to forget that going into the 2010 election Alistair Darling was promising cuts more severe than Thatcher.
I maintain that the 2010 government should have taken a more Keynesian approach. Anyway not having followed the details I don't really understand why PIP was the focus of this welfare bill. Isn't the main issue a rise in people on out of work benefits?

5 in 6 people who receive PIP don't work. It is predominantly an out of work benefit despite nominally being classed as an in-work benefit. The issue is spurious claims and the government cuts didn't really address that issue and instead just cut it for everyone regardless of whether they actually should be getting it or not.

Again Labour already have a solution, they did it ruthlessly on 2001-2007 by targeting companies with bonuses on how many people they could kick off incapacity benefits which led to much tougher individual assessments and a tendency to refuse rather than accept and for appeals to also tend to rejection than acceptance. Labour successfully pushed over a million people off incapacity benefits and back into work with that approach and while there were some unfortunate edge cases, overall it was the single most successful policy that they had.

OldKingCole · July 2

Big_G_NorthWales said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
Come on, own up, which one of you was it?

A pensioner drove a mobility scooter down a three-lane A-road at night after “following his satnav”.

The man was filmed travelling slowly along the edge of the 70mph A13 near Dagenham, east London, on Monday evening as passing lorries and cars slowed to avoid him. He was pulled over by a fire engine and questioned by police before being escorted on to local roads. One onlooker said the man was “following his satnav” in dashcam footage capturing his dangerous excursion.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/02/pensioner-drives-scooter-down-a-road-dagenham/
It wasn't me because I have never been near Dagenham and do not have a mobility scooter

I am a pensioner though who may soon need a mobility scooter

I'm a pensioner who does, but I haven't near Dagenham for ages.

There are at least two types of such scooters, one of which can be used on roads and one is supposed to on pavements only. Sadly, local pavements are so badly maintained and uneven that it's safer on the roads!

IanB2 · July 2

OldKingCole said:

rottenborough said:

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬
· 17m
The gilt move - especially at the long end - is big and bad.
No sugar coating it.
That said, the thing about the Truss debacle is that we saw these sort of moves day after day.
Too early to say if this is a wobble or a bigger problem.

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬

Worth noting: the gilt move really kicked off on speculation that Reeves could be replaced.
‘Reeves being replaced’ in this case meaning ‘a loosening of the fiscal rules’.

So there you have the first problem.
Cut spending - PLP won’t wear it.
Increase borrowing - the gilt market pushes back.
You’re left with, raise taxes - break a manifesto pledge.
Option 3 likely the least painful.
Depends on which taxes are raised. IIRC Starmer and Reeves have always said that they wouldn't raise taxes of 'working people"! Hence, en passant, the inheritance tax on rural landlords.
But what about people who don't work? As well the rural landlords the are other landlords, investors, speculators on the Stock Exchange and Metal (etc) Exchanges.
Inheritance tax might be a goer, too, although that doesn't bring in money quickly enough.

They will freeze tax allowances, freeze the WFA threshold, and maybe row back the annual cash ISA limit

Big_G_NorthWales · July 2

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
I think we are throwing the tougher immigration talk out the window. Promises made, promises....

UK visa revamp allows lower-skilled (non-graduate) office workers to come to Britain

Debt collectors, mortgage administrators and HR officers will still be able to come and work in the UK on skilled-worker visas after changes to the immigration rules that have left employers free to recruit overseas for a wide range of lower-skilled office jobs.

https://www.ft.com/content/392541c7-f775-4326-a7b5-5ba18dd57838
And yet we have frequent, detailed reports of young people finding it incredibly hard to get their first job - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2307p4jjz4o etc
I have sympathy for a warehouse job turning down a graduate. We have a technician post that has had more people in the role that I've had hot dinners. Too often we go for graduates 'as the best candidate' and are horrified that (a) they are bored in the role and (b) find a better job in the first 6-9 months. I'd imagine Aldi were thinking similar.
Look at what/where she studied

“She has a degree in accounting and finance from the University of Salford and a masters in management from Manchester Metropolitan University”

Iffy book keeping roles at mediocre universities. People like her, and those skills, are first in the firing line, now. I doubt she will ever get a nice white collar job as she once hoped

This will soon apply to tens of millions of jobs and degrees. She’s saddled herself with all that student debt for nothing. Most universities are doomed

I feel very sorry for her and her generation. The best advice any parent can give an 18 year old child, now, is Give up on uni and get a trade, or, if you are really cerebral: go to a truly good university, a redbrick or better, and study what you love

At the very least you will enjoy your university years
And if more people study for a trade wages will go down for plumbers and electricians in turn as there will be less demand for their skills as more supply

The demand for builders, plumbers, electricians, roofers, etc is off the scale and £450 per day is not unusual

I doubt we will have enough for decades to meet the demand, and I would encourage all young people to get a trade, start a business, and earn lots without having student debt round their neck

University is not the pathway to success you seem to think it is

wooliedyed · July 2

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

rottenborough said:

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬
· 17m
The gilt move - especially at the long end - is big and bad.
No sugar coating it.
That said, the thing about the Truss debacle is that we saw these sort of moves day after day.
Too early to say if this is a wobble or a bigger problem.

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬

Worth noting: the gilt move really kicked off on speculation that Reeves could be replaced.
‘Reeves being replaced’ in this case meaning ‘a loosening of the fiscal rules’.

So there you have the first problem.
Cut spending - PLP won’t wear it.
Increase borrowing - the gilt market pushes back.
You’re left with, raise taxes - break a manifesto pledge.
Option 3 likely the least painful.
Depends on which taxes are raised. IIRC Starmer and Reeves have always said that they wouldn't raise taxes of 'working people"! Hence, en passant, the inheritance tax on rural landlords.
But what about people who don't work? As well the rural landlords the are other landlords, investors, speculators on the Stock Exchange and Metal (etc) Exchanges.
Inheritance tax might be a goer, too, although that doesn't bring in money quickly enough.
They will freeze tax allowances, freeze the WFA threshold, and maybe row back the annual cash ISA limit

If Reeves is still in post then the assumption is on Cash Isas she will announce a cut to 5k a year limit in the Mansion House speech in 2 weeks time.
Freezing personal allowances almost certain and a big rise in fuel duty i think is likely

OldKingCole · July 2

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

rottenborough said:

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬
· 17m
The gilt move - especially at the long end - is big and bad.
No sugar coating it.
That said, the thing about the Truss debacle is that we saw these sort of moves day after day.
Too early to say if this is a wobble or a bigger problem.

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬

Worth noting: the gilt move really kicked off on speculation that Reeves could be replaced.
‘Reeves being replaced’ in this case meaning ‘a loosening of the fiscal rules’.

So there you have the first problem.
Cut spending - PLP won’t wear it.
Increase borrowing - the gilt market pushes back.
You’re left with, raise taxes - break a manifesto pledge.
Option 3 likely the least painful.
Depends on which taxes are raised. IIRC Starmer and Reeves have always said that they wouldn't raise taxes of 'working people"! Hence, en passant, the inheritance tax on rural landlords.
But what about people who don't work? As well the rural landlords the are other landlords, investors, speculators on the Stock Exchange and Metal (etc) Exchanges.
Inheritance tax might be a goer, too, although that doesn't bring in money quickly enough.
They will freeze tax allowances, freeze the WFA threshold, and maybe row back the annual cash ISA limit

As a pensioner, I wouldn't object.

O/t topic, what's happened to the edit button. One used to get a few minutes to correct obvious errors; seems to only be there sometimes nowadays.

numbertwelve · July 2

I’m not quite sure where the government go from here. Feels very febrile.

You have a chancellor whose future is looking increasingly unsustainable, openly weeping in the Commons while her boss fails to publicly back her.

You have a work and pensions secretary completely AWOL today whose flagship bill was gutted at the eleventh hour.

Then you have a PM who just doesn’t know which way he’s facing, and is all over the place in terms of his political positioning.

And then the news from the markets - which isn’t helpful.

Surely, surely something is going to give here. You can’t have senior members of the government in a state of such crisis. Someone’s going to have to get a grip on it, surely. Can Reeves really carry on like this? To be honest, if I were her I’d probably be quitting at this point and blaming a lack of support.

Big_G_NorthWales · July 2

wooliedyed said:

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

rottenborough said:

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬
· 17m
The gilt move - especially at the long end - is big and bad.
No sugar coating it.
That said, the thing about the Truss debacle is that we saw these sort of moves day after day.
Too early to say if this is a wobble or a bigger problem.

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬

Worth noting: the gilt move really kicked off on speculation that Reeves could be replaced.
‘Reeves being replaced’ in this case meaning ‘a loosening of the fiscal rules’.

So there you have the first problem.
Cut spending - PLP won’t wear it.
Increase borrowing - the gilt market pushes back.
You’re left with, raise taxes - break a manifesto pledge.
Option 3 likely the least painful.
Depends on which taxes are raised. IIRC Starmer and Reeves have always said that they wouldn't raise taxes of 'working people"! Hence, en passant, the inheritance tax on rural landlords.
But what about people who don't work? As well the rural landlords the are other landlords, investors, speculators on the Stock Exchange and Metal (etc) Exchanges.
Inheritance tax might be a goer, too, although that doesn't bring in money quickly enough.
They will freeze tax allowances, freeze the WFA threshold, and maybe row back the annual cash ISA limit
If Reeves is still in post then the assumption is on Cash Isas she will announce a cut to 5k a year limit in the Mansion House speech in 2 weeks time.
Freezing personal allowances almost certain and a big rise in fuel duty i think is likely

Whether she survives today or not, she has been seriously damaged and Starmer just made it worse for her

He has no empathy and does appear to have a woman problem, ask Rosie Duffield

Frank_Booth · July 2

Great X post by a Gulf Arab. I get the sense this isn't the kind of view on the Middle East conflict you'd see very often on the BBC or Sky (Humanitarian porn) News.

https://x.com/AimenDean/status/1939278518979821890

Let me make something absolutely clear.

I am not a Zionist - not in any way, shape, or form. I am an Arab. My roots are in Bahrain, I was born in Saudi Arabia, and I live in the UAE. My family spans generations across all three countries. On top of that, I am also a British citizen - a nationality I hold with honor, especially given my years working alongside UK security forces. It was a privilege, and an eye-opening chapter of my life.

So no, I don’t carry any Zionist affiliation.

But let me now ask the question I rarely hear answered honestly:
Why should I support groups like Hamas, the PFLP, or other Palestinian factions that have long embraced terrorism - even when their targets have been us, the Gulf Arabs?

Let’s look at reality:
•Israel has never fired a single bullet at any GCC country — not at Saudi Arabia, not at Bahrain, not at Kuwait, not at the UAE, not even at Qatar or Oman. Not even a BB gun.
•Meanwhile, Palestinian terrorist groups have assassinated our diplomats, hijacked our planes, bombed our embassies, and worked hand-in-hand with our enemies — even as we offered them political, financial, and moral support for decades.
•And now? Hamas and its allies have fully aligned with the Ayatollahs of Iran, our true existential enemy - the same regime that has plotted coups in Bahrain, that has flooded the region with missiles and militias, and that has openly declared its intent to topple our governments and destroy our societies.

Let’s remember - it wasn’t Israel that launched thousands of drones and ballistic missiles on Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
It was Iran.
Through the Houthis.
With Hezbollah operatives.
With Hamas blessings.
And with Iranian weapons.

So why should I betray my own people, my own security, my own dignity - to support a group that would see us fall, just to serve Tehran’s ambitions?

No, I am not a Zionist.
But the Zionists are NOT my enemy.
My enemies are in Tehran, in Beirut, in Sana’a, and - yes - among those Palestinian factions who turned against the very hands that once fed them.

This is not about being trendy or emotional. This is about loyalty, logic, and survival.

MaxPB · July 2

wooliedyed said:

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

rottenborough said:

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬
· 17m
The gilt move - especially at the long end - is big and bad.
No sugar coating it.
That said, the thing about the Truss debacle is that we saw these sort of moves day after day.
Too early to say if this is a wobble or a bigger problem.

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬

Worth noting: the gilt move really kicked off on speculation that Reeves could be replaced.
‘Reeves being replaced’ in this case meaning ‘a loosening of the fiscal rules’.

So there you have the first problem.
Cut spending - PLP won’t wear it.
Increase borrowing - the gilt market pushes back.
You’re left with, raise taxes - break a manifesto pledge.
Option 3 likely the least painful.
Depends on which taxes are raised. IIRC Starmer and Reeves have always said that they wouldn't raise taxes of 'working people"! Hence, en passant, the inheritance tax on rural landlords.
But what about people who don't work? As well the rural landlords the are other landlords, investors, speculators on the Stock Exchange and Metal (etc) Exchanges.
Inheritance tax might be a goer, too, although that doesn't bring in money quickly enough.
They will freeze tax allowances, freeze the WFA threshold, and maybe row back the annual cash ISA limit
If Reeves is still in post then the assumption is on Cash Isas she will announce a cut to 5k a year limit in the Mansion House speech in 2 weeks time.
Freezing personal allowances almost certain and a big rise in fuel duty i think is likely

Two extra year freeze on thresholds is all but guaranteed now. Maybe 5p on fuel duty, but it's the most politically sensitive tax to raise because it directly hurts millions of people who will immediately see it in their petrol bills every week, and with the advent of EVs and PHEVs it doesn't raise as much as it used to.

FrancisUrquhart · July 2

Downing Street has said Rachel Reeves will stay in post and has not offered her resignation, after the chancellor was seen in tears at prime minister’s questions.

viewcode · July 2

Dopermean said:

viewcode said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
I Hate the WOKE Left More Than the Far Right – Jonathan Pie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewZYEOQINdI

Putting the clickbait title to one side, I think Pie is finished. Tom Walker sounds like he has decided he doesn't feel comfortable having the character really blast politics of the left other than on "woke" (but seems bored / scared of backlash).

He hasn't even done a video out the benefits cuts.
He's 36. He badly needs moisturiser.
If he was 47 could he cancel the moisturiser?

Ah, good point. As previously stated I listen to videos not watch them, and so missed the point that the person interviewing him was 36, not Tom Walker (born 1978). Stupid moi.

numbertwelve · July 2

wooliedyed said:

IanB2 said:

OldKingCole said:

rottenborough said:

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬
· 17m
The gilt move - especially at the long end - is big and bad.
No sugar coating it.
That said, the thing about the Truss debacle is that we saw these sort of moves day after day.
Too early to say if this is a wobble or a bigger problem.

‪Duncan Weldon‬
‪@duncanweldon.bsky.social‬

Worth noting: the gilt move really kicked off on speculation that Reeves could be replaced.
‘Reeves being replaced’ in this case meaning ‘a loosening of the fiscal rules’.

So there you have the first problem.
Cut spending - PLP won’t wear it.
Increase borrowing - the gilt market pushes back.
You’re left with, raise taxes - break a manifesto pledge.
Option 3 likely the least painful.
Depends on which taxes are raised. IIRC Starmer and Reeves have always said that they wouldn't raise taxes of 'working people"! Hence, en passant, the inheritance tax on rural landlords.
But what about people who don't work? As well the rural landlords the are other landlords, investors, speculators on the Stock Exchange and Metal (etc) Exchanges.
Inheritance tax might be a goer, too, although that doesn't bring in money quickly enough.
They will freeze tax allowances, freeze the WFA threshold, and maybe row back the annual cash ISA limit
If Reeves is still in post then the assumption is on Cash Isas she will announce a cut to 5k a year limit in the Mansion House speech in 2 weeks time.
Freezing personal allowances almost certain and a big rise in fuel duty i think is likely

I think the ISA policy is broadly OK, but it’s another one that’s going to get people grumpy. Particularly pensioners who use the allowance to build more “safe” savings pots.

Gallowgate · July 2

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
I think we are throwing the tougher immigration talk out the window. Promises made, promises....

UK visa revamp allows lower-skilled (non-graduate) office workers to come to Britain

Debt collectors, mortgage administrators and HR officers will still be able to come and work in the UK on skilled-worker visas after changes to the immigration rules that have left employers free to recruit overseas for a wide range of lower-skilled office jobs.

https://www.ft.com/content/392541c7-f775-4326-a7b5-5ba18dd57838
And yet we have frequent, detailed reports of young people finding it incredibly hard to get their first job - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2307p4jjz4o etc
I have sympathy for a warehouse job turning down a graduate. We have a technician post that has had more people in the role that I've had hot dinners. Too often we go for graduates 'as the best candidate' and are horrified that (a) they are bored in the role and (b) find a better job in the first 6-9 months. I'd imagine Aldi were thinking similar.
Look at what/where she studied

“She has a degree in accounting and finance from the University of Salford and a masters in management from Manchester Metropolitan University”

Iffy book keeping roles at mediocre universities. People like her, and those skills, are first in the firing line, now. I doubt she will ever get a nice white collar job as she once hoped

This will soon apply to tens of millions of jobs and degrees. She’s saddled herself with all that student debt for nothing. Most universities are doomed

I feel very sorry for her and her generation. The best advice any parent can give an 18 year old child, now, is Give up on uni and get a trade, or, if you are really cerebral: go to a truly good university, a redbrick or better, and study what you love

At the very least you will enjoy your university years
And if more people study for a trade wages will go down for plumbers and electricians in turn as there will be less demand for their skills as more supply
The demand for builders, plumbers, electricians, roofers, etc is off the scale and £450 per day is not unusual

I doubt we will have enough for decades to meet the demand, and I would encourage all young people to get a trade, start a business, and earn lots without having student debt round their neck

University is not the pathway to success you seem to think it is

You’ll easily pay £450 per hour for a commercial solicitor these days.

HYUFD · July 2

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:
I think we are throwing the tougher immigration talk out the window. Promises made, promises....

UK visa revamp allows lower-skilled (non-graduate) office workers to come to Britain

Debt collectors, mortgage administrators and HR officers will still be able to come and work in the UK on skilled-worker visas after changes to the immigration rules that have left employers free to recruit overseas for a wide range of lower-skilled office jobs.

https://www.ft.com/content/392541c7-f775-4326-a7b5-5ba18dd57838
And yet we have frequent, detailed reports of young people finding it incredibly hard to get their first job - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2307p4jjz4o etc
I have sympathy for a warehouse job turning down a graduate. We have a technician post that has had more people in the role that I've had hot dinners. Too often we go for graduates 'as the best candidate' and are horrified that (a) they are bored in the role and (b) find a better job in the first 6-9 months. I'd imagine Aldi were thinking similar.
Look at what/where she studied

“She has a degree in accounting and finance from the University of Salford and a masters in management from Manchester Metropolitan University”

Iffy book keeping roles at mediocre universities. People like her, and those skills, are first in the firing line, now. I doubt she will ever get a nice white collar job as she once hoped

This will soon apply to tens of millions of jobs and degrees. She’s saddled herself with all that student debt for nothing. Most universities are doomed

I feel very sorry for her and her generation. The best advice any parent can give an 18 year old child, now, is Give up on uni and get a trade, or, if you are really cerebral: go to a truly good university, a redbrick or better, and study what you love

At the very least you will enjoy your university years
And if more people study for a trade wages will go down for plumbers and electricians in turn as there will be less demand for their skills as more supply
The demand for builders, plumbers, electricians, roofers, etc is off the scale and £450 per day is not unusual

I doubt we will have enough for decades to meet the demand, and I would encourage all young people to get a trade, start a business, and earn lots without having student debt round their neck

University is not the pathway to success you seem to think it is

For now, if ten times the current number train as builders, plumbers, electricians etc the law of supply and demand means those wages would soon collapse.

If you want to be a doctor, lawyer, senior civil servant, cabinet minister or teacher or academic yes go to university, I never said it would be worth it for everyone else beyond love of subject

Political authority is a lot like virginity, once it is gone it is very difficult to get back

Comments