Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Wholly Unacceptable Behaviour – politicalbetting.com

1356

Comments

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,776
    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Morning all.
    Polling start to the morning today from More In Common. As you were figures. We are still in the holding pattern that emerged after the May locals with minor noise moves week to week.
    None of the 'scandals' or dramas are moving the dial. The creation of the Dried Fruits will likely be the next mover, weird black swans or Trussery notwithstanding

    ➡️ REF UK 29% (nc)
    🌹 LAB 24% (nc)
    🌳 CON 19% (nc)
    🔶 LIB DEM 14% (+2)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-2)
    🟡 SNP 3% (nc)

    N = 2,084 | Dates:4 - 7/7 | Change w 30/6

    The curious incident….

    Labour might actually be relived by these polls. It seems that the welfare climbdown has not hurt them - or it has hurt them politically but not electorally (so far). Put it another way, they are already in the toilet but they’re not even further down the toilet = “phew”

    Labour will feel they can still win the next election. Tories will feel they are not dead in the water yet, LDs and Greens that progress can be protected and advanced.
    Hayward quoted in the Indy today saying he thinks Reform have topped out and that local by elections are a better or as good an indicator of where we are compared to VI polling. In which case, JL Partners get your finger out and update the Polaris model!
    It’s really hard to know. Farage has made some errors recently, and Reform are looking fissiparous

    And yet the electoral direction of the country still points firmly towards polarisation - some going hard left and green and more going hard right and ??

    I see on X that Farage is predicting that Jenrick will take over the Tories and then Jenrick will try and outflank reform by going FURTHER to the right on migration, asylum and woke

    A fascinating analysis
    You can't out Farage Farage, the Tories would be better off going for say Mel Stride if they removed Kemi and focusing solely on the economy and balancing the books and placing themselves as sensible fiscal conservatives as an alternative to both Labour and Reform.

    Badenock has proved she can't out war on woke Nigel and Jenrick couldn't out Farage on sending back the boats and immigrants either.

    If Farage lost the next GE and left the Reform leadership then Jenrick would have a better chance as leader and to scoop up Farage's supporters on the right
    Ahahahahahaha

    As someone once nearly put it, “if ‘Mel Stride’ is the answer, what in the name of God’s Holy Testicles is the question??”
    Viable party leader answers where you asked the question wrong
    Mel Stride
    Zarah Sultana
    Liz Truss
    Boris Johnson
    Iain Duncan Smith
    Mel Stride could be very credible, started a successful business (unlike Starmer and Davey) after Oxford (unlike Kemi), grammar school boy (unlike Farage) etc.

    If Kemi went he could be the Michael Howard to her IDS.

    Boris was of course the only Conservative leader to get Brexit done and beat Corbyn with an overall majority and keep Farage's party under 10%
    To what extent is Boris responsible for the Conservative Party's current death spiral? Discuss.
    When Boris resigned the Tories were polling only a few points behind Labour and Reform were a mere asterisk in the polls
    There has been an awful lot of rank Johnsonian derived water under that bridge since he fell on his sword. Downing Street was a bit like an owner returning to an Airbnb. We only realised he'd H blocked the walls after he vacated the premises.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,557
    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,877
    Stereodog said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    I read it and I genuinely thought he could have gone a lot further with the “modest proposal” satire and made it much more offensive - and funny

    It was pretty weaksauce (and he can be an excellent polemicist). The fact it caused such a stir is an indictment of the times
    Agreed, the fact that he writes that doing such a thing would be psychopathic and wrong shows it’s just weak satire. In fact he comes across as a fan of protest songs, or if not a fan as such then accepting of their role in society.

    Liddle was originally a lefty. As is so often the case

    I think I might be unique in that I was really quite right wing as a kid (partly to shock and be different) and I am really quite right wing now (because this is obviously the correct perspective)

    It’s been fun watching all my young lefty friends get closer and closer to my thinking over the decades. Then become uncomfortable when I point this out
    I've gone on the opposite journey and got more left wing as I've got older. I used to be a proper young fogey but the more I experience terrible train services, venal water companies, the corruption of the internet by tech bros etc the more I have sympathy with some left wing arguments. It's really only the left's foreign policy stance that has stopped me travelling further down the road.
    I have gone far more liberal as I have got older, which is against the expected trend. In the 60s/70s I was anti Labour, but not so anti the Tories. It was the less than liberal stance of the Tories that made me a Liberal then. Now I am equally anti both Labour and the Tories.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 15,054

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 19,442
    Cyclefree said:

    Cookie said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Given how this scandal is so utterly dwarfed by other vaster scandals, I find it hard to get exercised by it. Indeed I have suspicions of those that do. This one is so much easier to take - the villains are nasty managers - so let’s make tv dramas about it and write 5000 word essays about it and ventilate about it endlessly

    Rather than focusing on much greater and more troubling problems

    In short: this is chaff

    Talking bollocks again I see.

    I have written quite a few headers on even more serious scandals and there have also been TV dramas about them and they share with this one the same essential elements which cause them to happen, to continue and to involve cruelty to the victims.

    What I wrote here could and does apply to every other scandal. I am writing about it today because a report came out and to remind those with goldfish memories that nothing has changed. I have written in my book about Grenfell and blood contamination and many others and if I included every single scandal pointing out the depressing similarities it wouldn't be so much a book as a bloody enormous encyclopaedia - Cyclefree's Big Book of British Scandals.

    The people mentioned in the case studies are not chaff. (The last time I heard that word used so dismissively it was by an MP in a Select Committee aimed at Dr David Kelly. He committed suicide shortly after.)

    They are people like us. One of them is your age and at about the age you stopped taking drugs and turned your life around, he had a good business, a family and was looking forward to doing even better. Instead, he was wrongly convicted, had his reputation trashed, lost everything and has never been able to find employment again. He lives on charity from his family and friends. His name is Harjinder Butoy.

    Don't you fucking dare call him and everyone like him and what happened to them all "chaff".

    For shame, @Leon. For shame.
    I must admit, for reasons I find hard to understand, I have also found it hard to get too exercised about this scandal. Perhaps it is too technical, too hard to follow.
    But for that reason I am very grateful that there are others like Cyclefree who do. Because I'm exercised about it now.
    It's the casual trashing of people's reputations which really rankles. "Thou shalt not bear false witness" is one of the less fashionable commandments, but it's the biggie, really. Most people have nothing more valuable.

    Good header, anyway. I liked the attempt to broaden the scope to 'all scandals' and the thought that those in charge consider themselves virtuous because they are in charge. Never trust people whise starting point is that they are the good guys, because all sorts of dubious conclusions flow from that.
    It’s really simple. The Horizon computer system made shit up. They prosecuted people. When they found out, early on, that it was bollocks, they lied to cover it up. And kept on prosecuting people.
    That's a good summary. I have two major feelings about the scandal: exasperation at the whole awful mess, and a weariness that we've seen it all before, and no doubt we'll see it all again. Lessons will not be learnt.

    And it is important, because the next scandal and cover-up might affect me. Or you. Or perhaps even @Leon .
    @Leon - how could he be affected by a scandal? It would take something really unlikely, like being arrested for a crime he didn’t commit and being remanded for years, awaiting trial.
    Apparently it was an open secret in publishing that the Salt Path duo were full of shit. Did @Leon know or guess? I mean we can't have travel writing - an honest account of real life adventures - turned into made up fiction, now can we? How could we survive such a revelation?
    One question that was quickly brought up was "To whom were the royalties paid?".

    I was always pissed of because the chap was called Moth and there was never an explanation of the weird name, nor was it given as a nickname. Now we know why.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 39,193
    @SkyNewsBreak

    Red Bull says it has released Christian Horner from his operational duties with effect from today
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,557
    edited 9:29AM

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    I cannot argue with that point, as non sequitur as it is
  • LeonLeon Posts: 62,634

    Cyclefree said:

    Cookie said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Given how this scandal is so utterly dwarfed by other vaster scandals, I find it hard to get exercised by it. Indeed I have suspicions of those that do. This one is so much easier to take - the villains are nasty managers - so let’s make tv dramas about it and write 5000 word essays about it and ventilate about it endlessly

    Rather than focusing on much greater and more troubling problems

    In short: this is chaff

    Talking bollocks again I see.

    I have written quite a few headers on even more serious scandals and there have also been TV dramas about them and they share with this one the same essential elements which cause them to happen, to continue and to involve cruelty to the victims.

    What I wrote here could and does apply to every other scandal. I am writing about it today because a report came out and to remind those with goldfish memories that nothing has changed. I have written in my book about Grenfell and blood contamination and many others and if I included every single scandal pointing out the depressing similarities it wouldn't be so much a book as a bloody enormous encyclopaedia - Cyclefree's Big Book of British Scandals.

    The people mentioned in the case studies are not chaff. (The last time I heard that word used so dismissively it was by an MP in a Select Committee aimed at Dr David Kelly. He committed suicide shortly after.)

    They are people like us. One of them is your age and at about the age you stopped taking drugs and turned your life around, he had a good business, a family and was looking forward to doing even better. Instead, he was wrongly convicted, had his reputation trashed, lost everything and has never been able to find employment again. He lives on charity from his family and friends. His name is Harjinder Butoy.

    Don't you fucking dare call him and everyone like him and what happened to them all "chaff".

    For shame, @Leon. For shame.
    I must admit, for reasons I find hard to understand, I have also found it hard to get too exercised about this scandal. Perhaps it is too technical, too hard to follow.
    But for that reason I am very grateful that there are others like Cyclefree who do. Because I'm exercised about it now.
    It's the casual trashing of people's reputations which really rankles. "Thou shalt not bear false witness" is one of the less fashionable commandments, but it's the biggie, really. Most people have nothing more valuable.

    Good header, anyway. I liked the attempt to broaden the scope to 'all scandals' and the thought that those in charge consider themselves virtuous because they are in charge. Never trust people whise starting point is that they are the good guys, because all sorts of dubious conclusions flow from that.
    It’s really simple. The Horizon computer system made shit up. They prosecuted people. When they found out, early on, that it was bollocks, they lied to cover it up. And kept on prosecuting people.
    That's a good summary. I have two major feelings about the scandal: exasperation at the whole awful mess, and a weariness that we've seen it all before, and no doubt we'll see it all again. Lessons will not be learnt.

    And it is important, because the next scandal and cover-up might affect me. Or you. Or perhaps even @Leon .
    @Leon - how could he be affected by a scandal? It would take something really unlikely, like being arrested for a crime he didn’t commit and being remanded for years, awaiting trial.
    Apparently it was an open secret in publishing that the Salt Path duo were full of shit. Did @Leon know or guess? I mean we can't have travel writing - an honest account of real life adventures - turned into made up fiction, now can we? How could we survive such a revelation?
    One question that was quickly brought up was "To whom were the royalties paid?".

    I was always pissed of because the chap was called Moth and there was never an explanation of the weird name, nor was it given as a nickname. Now we know why.
    I’m happy to say that when I read the book I found it 1. Boring and 2. Implausible

    Et voila
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,776
    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    What part of bombing Glastonbury festival and bombing Brighton don't you object to?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,639
    edited 9:28AM

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Morning all.
    Polling start to the morning today from More In Common. As you were figures. We are still in the holding pattern that emerged after the May locals with minor noise moves week to week.
    None of the 'scandals' or dramas are moving the dial. The creation of the Dried Fruits will likely be the next mover, weird black swans or Trussery notwithstanding

    ➡️ REF UK 29% (nc)
    🌹 LAB 24% (nc)
    🌳 CON 19% (nc)
    🔶 LIB DEM 14% (+2)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-2)
    🟡 SNP 3% (nc)

    N = 2,084 | Dates:4 - 7/7 | Change w 30/6

    The curious incident….

    Labour might actually be relived by these polls. It seems that the welfare climbdown has not hurt them - or it has hurt them politically but not electorally (so far). Put it another way, they are already in the toilet but they’re not even further down the toilet = “phew”

    Labour will feel they can still win the next election. Tories will feel they are not dead in the water yet, LDs and Greens that progress can be protected and advanced.
    Hayward quoted in the Indy today saying he thinks Reform have topped out and that local by elections are a better or as good an indicator of where we are compared to VI polling. In which case, JL Partners get your finger out and update the Polaris model!
    It’s really hard to know. Farage has made some errors recently, and Reform are looking fissiparous

    And yet the electoral direction of the country still points firmly towards polarisation - some going hard left and green and more going hard right and ??

    I see on X that Farage is predicting that Jenrick will take over the Tories and then Jenrick will try and outflank reform by going FURTHER to the right on migration, asylum and woke

    A fascinating analysis
    You can't out Farage Farage, the Tories would be better off going for say Mel Stride if they removed Kemi and focusing solely on the economy and balancing the books and placing themselves as sensible fiscal conservatives as an alternative to both Labour and Reform.

    Badenock has proved she can't out war on woke Nigel and Jenrick couldn't out Farage on sending back the boats and immigrants either.

    If Farage lost the next GE and left the Reform leadership then Jenrick would have a better chance as leader and to scoop up Farage's supporters on the right
    Ahahahahahaha

    As someone once nearly put it, “if ‘Mel Stride’ is the answer, what in the name of God’s Holy Testicles is the question??”
    Viable party leader answers where you asked the question wrong
    Mel Stride
    Zarah Sultana
    Liz Truss
    Boris Johnson
    Iain Duncan Smith
    Mel Stride could be very credible, started a successful business (unlike Starmer and Davey) after Oxford (unlike Kemi), grammar school boy (unlike Farage) etc.

    If Kemi went he could be the Michael Howard to her IDS.

    Boris was of course the only Conservative leader to get Brexit done and beat Corbyn with an overall majority and keep Farage's party under 10%
    To what extent is Boris responsible for the Conservative Party's current death spiral? Discuss.
    When Boris resigned the Tories were polling only a few points behind Labour and Reform were a mere asterisk in the polls
    There has been an awful lot of rank Johnsonian derived water under that bridge since he fell on his sword. Downing Street was a bit like an owner returning to an Airbnb. We only realised he'd H blocked the walls after he vacated the premises.
    That's an unkind way to describe the posh interior decor he [edit] famously commissioned: comparing Mr J to a prisoner on the Dirty Protest?! Or I'm misunderstanding disastrously ...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,675
    Scott_xP said:

    @SkyNewsBreak

    Red Bull says it has released Christian Horner from his operational duties with effect from today

    That was the demand of the Verstappens.

    I hope he stays at Red Bull as they don’t want to have to boycott Mercedes.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,859
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good morning

    Many individuals should face criminal trials over this scandal, but do we think any will ?

    And on more depressing news both labour and the conservatives make solemn pledges to retain the triple lock which shows just how much serious trouble we are when neither are fit to govern when they put their popularity before doing the right thing

    Where on earth is the leader we need to take the difficult decisions, wean us off spending and borrowing, and take the country away from an inevitable debt crisis

    'Farage fails to guarantee pensions triple lock but vows to axe benefits cap'
    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nigel-farage-keir-starmer-reform-uk-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-b2758529.html

    'Tories will consider means testing pension triple-lock, Badenoch says'
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jan/16/kemi-badenoch-uk-getting-poorer

    Labour have not committed to the triple lock beyond this parliament
    https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/money/labour-issues-new-statement-future-32022276

    Only the LDs of the main UK parties are committed to permanently keeping the triple lock in full
    https://www.libdems.org.uk/news/article/default-f4d399b80ea579afb9686280d29a77d0
    You need to keep up

    Robert Jenrick on Sky this morning gave an undertaking the conservatives will keep the triple lock
    Correct me if I am wrong but I believe Kemi won the Tory leadership last year NOT Jenrick and Kemi has made clear she would means test the triple lock
    Is she going to take into account capital?????
    More to the point, how on earth can the "triple lock" part be means tested. In the first year you'd presumably end up with two sets of pensioners, one receiving 3.1% or whatever higher than the other cohort. I know there's a change for pensioners born in 1951/53 between the basic and the new state pension but that isn't means testing. It's a hellacious amount of effort for not much reward in the medium term !
    Over time it'd grow into the weirdest system tbh.
    Yes, just daft.

    Get rid of the triple lock. Simple; effective.
    Labour is polling around 15% with the demographic. What have they got to lose ?
    In three words "Winter Fuel Allowance". For all this government's mishandling of the partial removal, it is an absolute nonsense that it should be the public's biggest complaint of the Labour administration, by far, and as shown in the word cloud on this site a few days ago.
    Voters thought they were electing a Labour government, not one that removed granny's heating in winter as its first big act to raise funds while not raising tax on the wealthiest and rich and the highest earners via a wealth tax or a higher top rate of income tax at all.

    Starmer is polling lower than any Labour leader since WW2 as he is seen to be a PM for the rich and woke liberal metropolitan elite not the working class and ordinary middle class people. Hence Rayner is like a shark waiting to pounce and Reeves is dead in the water sooner rather than later and Farage has been making hay
    Badenoch is polling lower than any Conservative leader ever. We live in an unprecedented time of four plus party politics. It makes comparison to times of two party politics difficult.
    Reform now lead the polls. Labour are polling about 23%, even Foot Labour got 27% in 1983 and even Corbyn Labour got 32% in 2019 and even Ed Miliband Labour got 30% in 2015 and even Brown Labour got 29% in 2010.


    That is how much Starmer Labour are now despised, Starmer is the most unpopular Labour leader since WW2. Apart from woke rich liberal lawyers like him who actually likes him?
    The problem is 23% for Labour gives a lot more seats than 23% for the Conservatives because Labour's vote is more concentrated. A seat like East Ham will still be Labour even if nationally Labour are polling very low.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 55,527
    Chris said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good morning

    Many individuals should face criminal trials over this scandal, but do we think any will ?

    And on more depressing news both labour and the conservatives make solemn pledges to retain the triple lock which shows just how much serious trouble we are when neither are fit to govern when they put their popularity before doing the right thing

    Where on earth is the leader we need to take the difficult decisions, wean us off spending and borrowing, and take the country away from an inevitable debt crisis

    'Farage fails to guarantee pensions triple lock but vows to axe benefits cap'
    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nigel-farage-keir-starmer-reform-uk-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-b2758529.html

    'Tories will consider means testing pension triple-lock, Badenoch says'
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jan/16/kemi-badenoch-uk-getting-poorer

    Labour have not committed to the triple lock beyond this parliament
    https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/money/labour-issues-new-statement-future-32022276

    Only the LDs of the main UK parties are committed to permanently keeping the triple lock in full
    https://www.libdems.org.uk/news/article/default-f4d399b80ea579afb9686280d29a77d0
    You need to keep up

    Robert Jenrick on Sky this morning gave an undertaking the conservatives will keep the triple lock
    Correct me if I am wrong but I believe Kemi won the Tory leadership last year NOT Jenrick and Kemi has made clear she would means test the triple lock
    Is she going to take into account capital?????
    More to the point, how on earth can the "triple lock" part be means tested. In the first year you'd presumably end up with two sets of pensioners, one receiving 3.1% or whatever higher than the other cohort. I know there's a change for pensioners born in 1951/53 between the basic and the new state pension but that isn't means testing. It's a hellacious amount of effort for not much reward in the medium term !
    Over time it'd grow into the weirdest system tbh.
    Yes, just daft.

    Get rid of the triple lock. Simple; effective.
    Labour is polling around 15% with the demographic. What have they got to lose ?
    In three words "Winter Fuel Allowance". For all this government's mishandling of the partial removal, it is an absolute nonsense that it should be the public's biggest complaint of the Labour administration, by far, and as shown in the word cloud on this site a few days ago.
    Voters thought they were electing a Labour government, not one that removed granny's heating in winter as its first big act to raise funds while not raising tax on the wealthiest and rich and the highest earners via a wealth tax or a higher top rate of income tax at all.

    Starmer is polling lower than any Labour leader since WW2 as he is seen to be a PM for the rich and woke liberal metropolitan elite not the working class and ordinary middle class people. Hence Rayner is like a shark waiting to pounce and Reeves is dead in the water sooner rather than later and Farage has been making hay
    Badenoch is polling lower than any Conservative leader ever. We live in an unprecedented time of four plus party politics. It makes comparison to times of two party politics difficult.
    Why are we living in four plus party politics though? Because people feel so let down by the Tories and yes, also Labour.

    We can make the comparisons because the two main parties are each responsible for finding themselves in the position they do. It was not long ago that they were each polling 70-80% between them. What has changed? A fundamental breakdown in trust in the Tories, and a seismic sense of disappointment with Labour.
    And the biggest factor in that disappointment? That Labour tried to means test a universal benefit.

    But I suppose we can blame all politicians for not spelling out the facts of life to the voters.
    But that’s not what they did. They announced they were going to *abolish* WFA.

    The politically possible solution was to put all the old age benefits (apart from the pension) in a blender and put pops a new system which is means tested/taxable.

    Taxation is the best way to deal with “rich pensioners”
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,065
    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Morning all.
    Polling start to the morning today from More In Common. As you were figures. We are still in the holding pattern that emerged after the May locals with minor noise moves week to week.
    None of the 'scandals' or dramas are moving the dial. The creation of the Dried Fruits will likely be the next mover, weird black swans or Trussery notwithstanding

    ➡️ REF UK 29% (nc)
    🌹 LAB 24% (nc)
    🌳 CON 19% (nc)
    🔶 LIB DEM 14% (+2)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-2)
    🟡 SNP 3% (nc)

    N = 2,084 | Dates:4 - 7/7 | Change w 30/6

    The curious incident….

    Labour might actually be relived by these polls. It seems that the welfare climbdown has not hurt them - or it has hurt them politically but not electorally (so far). Put it another way, they are already in the toilet but they’re not even further down the toilet = “phew”

    Labour will feel they can still win the next election. Tories will feel they are not dead in the water yet, LDs and Greens that progress can be protected and advanced.
    Hayward quoted in the Indy today saying he thinks Reform have topped out and that local by elections are a better or as good an indicator of where we are compared to VI polling. In which case, JL Partners get your finger out and update the Polaris model!
    It’s really hard to know. Farage has made some errors recently, and Reform are looking fissiparous

    And yet the electoral direction of the country still points firmly towards polarisation - some going hard left and green and more going hard right and ??

    I see on X that Farage is predicting that Jenrick will take over the Tories and then Jenrick will try and outflank reform by going FURTHER to the right on migration, asylum and woke

    A fascinating analysis
    You can't out Farage Farage, the Tories would be better off going for say Mel Stride if they removed Kemi and focusing solely on the economy and balancing the books and placing themselves as sensible fiscal conservatives as an alternative to both Labour and Reform.

    Badenock has proved she can't out war on woke Nigel and Jenrick couldn't out Farage on sending back the boats and immigrants either.

    If Farage lost the next GE and left the Reform leadership then Jenrick would have a better chance as leader and to scoop up Farage's supporters on the right
    Ahahahahahaha

    As someone once nearly put it, “if ‘Mel Stride’ is the answer, what in the name of God’s Holy Testicles is the question??”
    Viable party leader answers where you asked the question wrong
    Mel Stride
    Zarah Sultana
    Liz Truss
    Boris Johnson
    Iain Duncan Smith
    Mel Stride could be very credible, started a successful business (unlike Starmer and Davey) after Oxford (unlike Kemi), grammar school boy (unlike Farage) etc.

    If Kemi went he could be the Michael Howard to her IDS.

    Boris was of course the only Conservative leader to get Brexit done and beat Corbyn with an overall majority and keep Farage's party under 10%
    To what extent is Boris responsible for the Conservative Party's current death spiral? Discuss.
    To be honest Truss is the real culprit here shredding any hope of a sensible transistion away from Johnson
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,610
    Cookie said:

    kle4 said:

    MACRON MUST APOLOGISE

    John Redwood
    @johnredwood
    ·
    2h
    Offering us a loan of the Bayeux embroidery reminds us of the invasion and the way so many English were forced into serfdom by the Normans. It depicts the violent deaths of English soldiers.

    https://x.com/johnredwood/status/1942807774389256453

    Trying to get people outraged or emotionally invested in the outcome of events 1000 years ago is a bold move.

    I often think society can be weirdly specific about which historic sins we are supposed to still feel guilty about on an individual level and which not, but that one may be a stretch.
    Personally, as I've said before, I'm still bitter about the Norman Conquest. But I suspect this is a niche position and those who are relaxed about it will get no less so based on the inanity of John Redwood.
    And even I don't want the French to apologise. The amount of responsibility born by the current generation of French people is exactly zero.
    The people who would need to be dealt with about the Norman Conquest aren't the French who are over there, it's the Normans who came over here and have been lording it over the subjugated people of England ever since.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 55,527
    edited 9:31AM
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good morning

    Many individuals should face criminal trials over this scandal, but do we think any will ?

    And on more depressing news both labour and the conservatives make solemn pledges to retain the triple lock which shows just how much serious trouble we are when neither are fit to govern when they put their popularity before doing the right thing

    Where on earth is the leader we need to take the difficult decisions, wean us off spending and borrowing, and take the country away from an inevitable debt crisis

    'Farage fails to guarantee pensions triple lock but vows to axe benefits cap'
    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nigel-farage-keir-starmer-reform-uk-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-b2758529.html

    'Tories will consider means testing pension triple-lock, Badenoch says'
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jan/16/kemi-badenoch-uk-getting-poorer

    Labour have not committed to the triple lock beyond this parliament
    https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/money/labour-issues-new-statement-future-32022276

    Only the LDs of the main UK parties are committed to permanently keeping the triple lock in full
    https://www.libdems.org.uk/news/article/default-f4d399b80ea579afb9686280d29a77d0
    You need to keep up

    Robert Jenrick on Sky this morning gave an undertaking the conservatives will keep the triple lock
    Correct me if I am wrong but I believe Kemi won the Tory leadership last year NOT Jenrick and Kemi has made clear she would means test the triple lock
    Is she going to take into account capital?????
    More to the point, how on earth can the "triple lock" part be means tested. In the first year you'd presumably end up with two sets of pensioners, one receiving 3.1% or whatever higher than the other cohort. I know there's a change for pensioners born in 1951/53 between the basic and the new state pension but that isn't means testing. It's a hellacious amount of effort for not much reward in the medium term !
    Over time it'd grow into the weirdest system tbh.
    Yes, just daft.

    Get rid of the triple lock. Simple; effective.
    Labour is polling around 15% with the demographic. What have they got to lose ?
    In three words "Winter Fuel Allowance". For all this government's mishandling of the partial removal, it is an absolute nonsense that it should be the public's biggest complaint of the Labour administration, by far, and as shown in the word cloud on this site a few days ago.
    Voters thought they were electing a Labour government, not one that removed granny's heating in winter as its first big act to raise funds while not raising tax on the wealthiest and rich and the highest earners via a wealth tax or a higher top rate of income tax at all.

    Starmer is polling lower than any Labour leader since WW2 as he is seen to be a PM for the rich and woke liberal metropolitan elite not the working class and ordinary middle class people. Hence Rayner is like a shark waiting to pounce and Reeves is dead in the water sooner rather than later and Farage has been making hay
    Badenoch is polling lower than any Conservative leader ever. We live in an unprecedented time of four plus party politics. It makes comparison to times of two party politics difficult.
    Reform now lead the polls. Labour are polling about 23%, even Foot Labour got 27% in 1983 and even Corbyn Labour got 32% in 2019 and even Ed Miliband Labour got 30% in 2015 and even Brown Labour got 29% in 2010.


    That is how much Starmer Labour are now despised, Starmer is the most unpopular Labour leader since WW2. Apart from woke rich liberal lawyers like him who actually likes him?
    The problem is 23% for Labour gives a lot more seats than 23% for the Conservatives because Labour's vote is more concentrated. A seat like East Ham will still be Labour even if nationally Labour are polling very low.
    We don’t have a four party system. Yet.

    We have the two major parties, who’ve fucked yo to the point that everyone is shopping for a new home.

    Reform is a symptom of the problem.

    Those who believe that Reform collapse will lead to a revival of The Proper Parties, are insane.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,135
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    I read it and I genuinely thought he could have gone a lot further with the “modest proposal” satire and made it much more offensive - and funny

    It was pretty weaksauce (and he can be an excellent polemicist). The fact it caused such a stir is an indictment of the times
    Agreed, the fact that he writes that doing such a thing would be psychopathic and wrong shows it’s just weak satire. In fact he comes across as a fan of protest songs, or if not a fan as such then accepting of their role in society.

    Liddle was originally a lefty. As is so often the case

    I think I might be unique in that I was really quite right wing as a kid (partly to shock and be different) and I am really quite right wing now (because this is obviously the correct perspective)

    It’s been fun watching all my young lefty friends get closer and closer to my thinking over the decades. Then become uncomfortable when I point this out
    No, William Hague, Jacob Rees Mogg and I were the same you really were in the cool crowd of rightwing youth
    Touché

    However I really WAS quite unusual in being openly right wing at UCL in the 1980s. Almost everyone else - especially if they hung out in the union bar - was left

    Indeed and piquantly the only UCL acquaintance of mine who shared my right wing views was Ricky Gervais
    Was he your dealer? It would explain a lot.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,723
    F1: didn't expect Horner to go at this juncture. Price of Verstappen staying?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 31,587
    Grave of footballer who defied Hitler restored

    The "weathered" grave of a Derby County player who defied the Nazis during the club's 1934 tour of Germany has been restored.

    British diplomats backed Hitler's officials when they ordered the Rams team to give the Nazi salute before each of their matches - but goalkeeper John "Jack" Kirby refused.

    Local historian Kal Singh Dhindsa traced Kirby's Grave to St Peter's Church in Netherseal, Derbyshire, in June last year and raised £1,500 through donations for the restoration.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g8p0pj8kwo
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,170
    edited 9:37AM

    algarkirk said:

    Taz said:

    Irony is we have many MPs and public figures queuing up to demand compensation for the WASPE women who don’t deserve a penny.

    The Waspy women thing was entirely without merit but had the politically critical quality of being easy to understand. Hence the number of MPs and others lining up behind it. And hence the fondness for issues involving calculable amounts of free money to a readily identifiable group. See also WFA and last week's benefits shambles and two child cap which have the same quality.
    Surely the WASPI issue is simple.

    I have had my retirement age pushed back several times. The changes were decades into the future and made no effect to my plans.

    Some of the WASPI women were told that instead of being able to retire and draw your pension next year, you now have to wait 6 years. That's a massive difference.

    "But the law changed in 1995" seems to be the defence, Sure. Who goes around proactively checking Hansard in case the government have changed the law against you? They started writing to the affected in 2009 about the change coming into effect the following year. Not much notice if you'd planned to retire and now couldn't.
    That is simply untrue. The claim is that they were not individually notified when the law changed. I.e. no letter, phone call etc. But it was on the news. In the papers. They have not a leg to stand on.

    No-one had the rug pulled from under them at the last minute and its ridiculous to say it was.
    I would say WASPI Women had one leg to stand on, but not two. There were two major changes in the state pension as they affected women. The 1995 Pensions Act increased women's retirement age to match men at 65. The increase would be tapered over ten years from 2010 to 2020. The 2011 Act accelerated the 65 age to 2008 and also introduced a new 66 age for both men and women starting in 2020.

    Pensions aren't always fixed for all time but they are a promise that you shouldn't break casually. If you do change your commitment you should do so equitably and give people reasonable notice so they can adjust.

    I would say the 1995 Act satisfied both those requirements, but the 2011 Act did not. Some women in effect would have to work three years extra under the 2011 legislation, with less than five years to adjust. I don't think five years is enough notice anyway but in practice it's less than that as it takes time to get letters out to everyone. The legislation was challenged and the government implicitly acknowledged it was unacceptable by capping the extra period of work at 18 months. By this point, the original notice period had been used up so the affected women had to work up to a further 18 months with no notice at all. At the very least they should have restarted the five year countdown.
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 1,074
    Leon said:

    Stereodog said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    I read it and I genuinely thought he could have gone a lot further with the “modest proposal” satire and made it much more offensive - and funny

    It was pretty weaksauce (and he can be an excellent polemicist). The fact it caused such a stir is an indictment of the times
    Agreed, the fact that he writes that doing such a thing would be psychopathic and wrong shows it’s just weak satire. In fact he comes across as a fan of protest songs, or if not a fan as such then accepting of their role in society.

    Liddle was originally a lefty. As is so often the case

    I think I might be unique in that I was really quite right wing as a kid (partly to shock and be different) and I am really quite right wing now (because this is obviously the correct perspective)

    It’s been fun watching all my young lefty friends get closer and closer to my thinking over the decades. Then become uncomfortable when I point this out
    I've gone on the opposite journey and got more left wing as I've got older. I used to be a proper young fogey but the more I experience terrible train services, venal water companies, the corruption of the internet by tech bros etc the more I have sympathy with some left wing arguments. It's really only the left's foreign policy stance that has stopped me travelling further down the road.
    The worst thing is being proved correct on something deeply depressing

    Eg I was quite fiercely anti multicultural and mass migration (esp of Islam) as far back as the 1990s. My arty left wing friends used to mock me as some kind of situationist British crypto-nazi (we still remained friends, despite)

    Now every single one is either deeply anxious or in despair about migration and asylum and multiculturalism and islamism

    I have to rein in my Told You So’s. But when I do yield and say “I told you so” they all look furtive and weird and guilty. So I don’t do it much. We drink nice wine and talk about art instead
    I have a theory that it's not so much that people get more right wing as they get older but that they yield politically from optimism to pessimism. For most people in their youths the optimism is for a brighter socialist future. In my case my optimism was that our current economic model was working out brilliantly for everyone and that we'd live in a wonderful libertarian tech utopia. There are of course people like you who remain optimistic or pessimistic all their life :) .
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 15,054

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    I cannot argue with that point, as non sequitur aa it is
    My point was that your claim that they are the "largest UK party with no elected representatives" needs contextualising. Do we know how many members they really have, or does that number come from Advance UK and could be made up or erroneous? What does membership actually mean in this case? Are they a political party (they're not registered with the Electoral Commission)? How big is big when it comes to a membership organisation?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,776

    Scott_xP said:

    @SkyNewsBreak

    Red Bull says it has released Christian Horner from his operational duties with effect from today

    That was the demand of the Verstappens.

    I hope he stays at Red Bull as they don’t want to have to boycott Mercedes.
    After all that Mr Ginger Spice did for Max over the years?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 79,091
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    I read it and I genuinely thought he could have gone a lot further with the “modest proposal” satire and made it much more offensive - and funny

    It was pretty weaksauce (and he can be an excellent polemicist). The fact it caused such a stir is an indictment of the times
    Agreed, the fact that he writes that doing such a thing would be psychopathic and wrong shows it’s just weak satire. In fact he comes across as a fan of protest songs, or if not a fan as such then accepting of their role in society.

    Liddle was originally a lefty. As is so often the case

    I think I might be unique in that I was really quite right wing as a kid (partly to shock and be different) and I am really quite right wing now (because this is obviously the correct perspective)

    It’s been fun watching all my young lefty friends get closer and closer to my thinking over the decades. Then become uncomfortable when I point this out
    No, William Hague, Jacob Rees Mogg and I were the same you really were in the cool crowd of rightwing youth
    Touché

    However I really WAS quite unusual in being openly right wing at UCL in the 1980s. Almost everyone else - especially if they hung out in the union bar - was left

    Indeed and piquantly the only UCL acquaintance of mine who shared my right wing views was Ricky Gervais
    Also a comedian.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 6,564

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    What part of bombing Glastonbury festival and bombing Brighton don't you object to?
    Maybe report A Modest Proposal to the police.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 19,442
    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cookie said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Given how this scandal is so utterly dwarfed by other vaster scandals, I find it hard to get exercised by it. Indeed I have suspicions of those that do. This one is so much easier to take - the villains are nasty managers - so let’s make tv dramas about it and write 5000 word essays about it and ventilate about it endlessly

    Rather than focusing on much greater and more troubling problems

    In short: this is chaff

    Talking bollocks again I see.

    I have written quite a few headers on even more serious scandals and there have also been TV dramas about them and they share with this one the same essential elements which cause them to happen, to continue and to involve cruelty to the victims.

    What I wrote here could and does apply to every other scandal. I am writing about it today because a report came out and to remind those with goldfish memories that nothing has changed. I have written in my book about Grenfell and blood contamination and many others and if I included every single scandal pointing out the depressing similarities it wouldn't be so much a book as a bloody enormous encyclopaedia - Cyclefree's Big Book of British Scandals.

    The people mentioned in the case studies are not chaff. (The last time I heard that word used so dismissively it was by an MP in a Select Committee aimed at Dr David Kelly. He committed suicide shortly after.)

    They are people like us. One of them is your age and at about the age you stopped taking drugs and turned your life around, he had a good business, a family and was looking forward to doing even better. Instead, he was wrongly convicted, had his reputation trashed, lost everything and has never been able to find employment again. He lives on charity from his family and friends. His name is Harjinder Butoy.

    Don't you fucking dare call him and everyone like him and what happened to them all "chaff".

    For shame, @Leon. For shame.
    I must admit, for reasons I find hard to understand, I have also found it hard to get too exercised about this scandal. Perhaps it is too technical, too hard to follow.
    But for that reason I am very grateful that there are others like Cyclefree who do. Because I'm exercised about it now.
    It's the casual trashing of people's reputations which really rankles. "Thou shalt not bear false witness" is one of the less fashionable commandments, but it's the biggie, really. Most people have nothing more valuable.

    Good header, anyway. I liked the attempt to broaden the scope to 'all scandals' and the thought that those in charge consider themselves virtuous because they are in charge. Never trust people whise starting point is that they are the good guys, because all sorts of dubious conclusions flow from that.
    It’s really simple. The Horizon computer system made shit up. They prosecuted people. When they found out, early on, that it was bollocks, they lied to cover it up. And kept on prosecuting people.
    That's a good summary. I have two major feelings about the scandal: exasperation at the whole awful mess, and a weariness that we've seen it all before, and no doubt we'll see it all again. Lessons will not be learnt.

    And it is important, because the next scandal and cover-up might affect me. Or you. Or perhaps even @Leon .
    @Leon - how could he be affected by a scandal? It would take something really unlikely, like being arrested for a crime he didn’t commit and being remanded for years, awaiting trial.
    Apparently it was an open secret in publishing that the Salt Path duo were full of shit. Did @Leon know or guess? I mean we can't have travel writing - an honest account of real life adventures - turned into made up fiction, now can we? How could we survive such a revelation?
    One question that was quickly brought up was "To whom were the royalties paid?".

    I was always pissed of because the chap was called Moth and there was never an explanation of the weird name, nor was it given as a nickname. Now we know why.
    I’m happy to say that when I read the book I found it 1. Boring and 2. Implausible

    Et voila
    I enjoyed it because of the location (I've walked and visited much of it). But yes a lot of it was implausible and also a classic of 'alternative' therapy triumphing over classical medicine.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 128,768
    edited 9:40AM
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good morning

    Many individuals should face criminal trials over this scandal, but do we think any will ?

    And on more depressing news both labour and the conservatives make solemn pledges to retain the triple lock which shows just how much serious trouble we are when neither are fit to govern when they put their popularity before doing the right thing

    Where on earth is the leader we need to take the difficult decisions, wean us off spending and borrowing, and take the country away from an inevitable debt crisis

    'Farage fails to guarantee pensions triple lock but vows to axe benefits cap'
    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nigel-farage-keir-starmer-reform-uk-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-b2758529.html

    'Tories will consider means testing pension triple-lock, Badenoch says'
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jan/16/kemi-badenoch-uk-getting-poorer

    Labour have not committed to the triple lock beyond this parliament
    https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/money/labour-issues-new-statement-future-32022276

    Only the LDs of the main UK parties are committed to permanently keeping the triple lock in full
    https://www.libdems.org.uk/news/article/default-f4d399b80ea579afb9686280d29a77d0
    You need to keep up

    Robert Jenrick on Sky this morning gave an undertaking the conservatives will keep the triple lock
    Correct me if I am wrong but I believe Kemi won the Tory leadership last year NOT Jenrick and Kemi has made clear she would means test the triple lock
    Is she going to take into account capital?????
    More to the point, how on earth can the "triple lock" part be means tested. In the first year you'd presumably end up with two sets of pensioners, one receiving 3.1% or whatever higher than the other cohort. I know there's a change for pensioners born in 1951/53 between the basic and the new state pension but that isn't means testing. It's a hellacious amount of effort for not much reward in the medium term !
    Over time it'd grow into the weirdest system tbh.
    Yes, just daft.

    Get rid of the triple lock. Simple; effective.
    Labour is polling around 15% with the demographic. What have they got to lose ?
    In three words "Winter Fuel Allowance". For all this government's mishandling of the partial removal, it is an absolute nonsense that it should be the public's biggest complaint of the Labour administration, by far, and as shown in the word cloud on this site a few days ago.
    Voters thought they were electing a Labour government, not one that removed granny's heating in winter as its first big act to raise funds while not raising tax on the wealthiest and rich and the highest earners via a wealth tax or a higher top rate of income tax at all.

    Starmer is polling lower than any Labour leader since WW2 as he is seen to be a PM for the rich and woke liberal metropolitan elite not the working class and ordinary middle class people. Hence Rayner is like a shark waiting to pounce and Reeves is dead in the water sooner rather than later and Farage has been making hay
    Badenoch is polling lower than any Conservative leader ever. We live in an unprecedented time of four plus party politics. It makes comparison to times of two party politics difficult.
    Reform now lead the polls. Labour are polling about 23%, even Foot Labour got 27% in 1983 and even Corbyn Labour got 32% in 2019 and even Ed Miliband Labour got 30% in 2015 and even Brown Labour got 29% in 2010.


    That is how much Starmer Labour are now despised, Starmer is the most unpopular Labour leader since WW2. Apart from woke rich liberal lawyers like him who actually likes him?
    The problem is 23% for Labour gives a lot more seats than 23% for the Conservatives because Labour's vote is more concentrated. A seat like East Ham will still be Labour even if nationally Labour are polling very low.
    It also still gives even fewer Labour MPs than Foot got in 1983
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,675

    Scott_xP said:

    @SkyNewsBreak

    Red Bull says it has released Christian Horner from his operational duties with effect from today

    That was the demand of the Verstappens.

    I hope he stays at Red Bull as they don’t want to have to boycott Mercedes.
    After all that Mr Ginger Spice did for Max over the years?
    The Verstappens are [moderated], they’d happily stab you in the front.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,251
    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cookie said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Given how this scandal is so utterly dwarfed by other vaster scandals, I find it hard to get exercised by it. Indeed I have suspicions of those that do. This one is so much easier to take - the villains are nasty managers - so let’s make tv dramas about it and write 5000 word essays about it and ventilate about it endlessly

    Rather than focusing on much greater and more troubling problems

    In short: this is chaff

    Talking bollocks again I see.

    I have written quite a few headers on even more serious scandals and there have also been TV dramas about them and they share with this one the same essential elements which cause them to happen, to continue and to involve cruelty to the victims.

    What I wrote here could and does apply to every other scandal. I am writing about it today because a report came out and to remind those with goldfish memories that nothing has changed. I have written in my book about Grenfell and blood contamination and many others and if I included every single scandal pointing out the depressing similarities it wouldn't be so much a book as a bloody enormous encyclopaedia - Cyclefree's Big Book of British Scandals.

    The people mentioned in the case studies are not chaff. (The last time I heard that word used so dismissively it was by an MP in a Select Committee aimed at Dr David Kelly. He committed suicide shortly after.)

    They are people like us. One of them is your age and at about the age you stopped taking drugs and turned your life around, he had a good business, a family and was looking forward to doing even better. Instead, he was wrongly convicted, had his reputation trashed, lost everything and has never been able to find employment again. He lives on charity from his family and friends. His name is Harjinder Butoy.

    Don't you fucking dare call him and everyone like him and what happened to them all "chaff".

    For shame, @Leon. For shame.
    I must admit, for reasons I find hard to understand, I have also found it hard to get too exercised about this scandal. Perhaps it is too technical, too hard to follow.
    But for that reason I am very grateful that there are others like Cyclefree who do. Because I'm exercised about it now.
    It's the casual trashing of people's reputations which really rankles. "Thou shalt not bear false witness" is one of the less fashionable commandments, but it's the biggie, really. Most people have nothing more valuable.

    Good header, anyway. I liked the attempt to broaden the scope to 'all scandals' and the thought that those in charge consider themselves virtuous because they are in charge. Never trust people whise starting point is that they are the good guys, because all sorts of dubious conclusions flow from that.
    It’s really simple. The Horizon computer system made shit up. They prosecuted people. When they found out, early on, that it was bollocks, they lied to cover it up. And kept on prosecuting people.
    That's a good summary. I have two major feelings about the scandal: exasperation at the whole awful mess, and a weariness that we've seen it all before, and no doubt we'll see it all again. Lessons will not be learnt.

    And it is important, because the next scandal and cover-up might affect me. Or you. Or perhaps even @Leon .
    @Leon - how could he be affected by a scandal? It would take something really unlikely, like being arrested for a crime he didn’t commit and being remanded for years, awaiting trial.
    Apparently it was an open secret in publishing that the Salt Path duo were full of shit. Did @Leon know or guess? I mean we can't have travel writing - an honest account of real life adventures - turned into made up fiction, now can we? How could we survive such a revelation?
    One question that was quickly brought up was "To whom were the royalties paid?".

    I was always pissed of because the chap was called Moth and there was never an explanation of the weird name, nor was it given as a nickname. Now we know why.
    I’m happy to say that when I read the book I found it 1. Boring and 2. Implausible

    Et voila
    You’re only revealing this now?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,557
    edited 9:41AM

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    I cannot argue with that point, as non sequitur aa it is
    My point was that your claim that they are the "largest UK party with no elected representatives" needs contextualising. Do we know how many members they really have, or does that number come from Advance UK and could be made up or erroneous? What does membership actually mean in this case? Are they a political party (they're not registered with the Electoral Commission)? How big is big when it comes to a membership organisation?
    Ok, I see
    AFAIK, the figure is those that have paid the ten pound annual membership fee which is their current membership offer (30 quid after they hit their 30,000 membership target or next year, whichever is sooner). Habib claims he will register with EC once they hit 30,000 members (which is where its all a bit shady as I cant see them getting there) and stick 100k of his own money in. He declared they've raised £104,000 in membership and donations at the weekend.
    I don't know if he has a 'ticker' like Reform showing members/registrations
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 30,589
    "Wholly Unacceptable Behavior" scribes Cyclefree.

    We agree say Redbull, and Horny gets the sack.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,859

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good morning

    Many individuals should face criminal trials over this scandal, but do we think any will ?

    And on more depressing news both labour and the conservatives make solemn pledges to retain the triple lock which shows just how much serious trouble we are when neither are fit to govern when they put their popularity before doing the right thing

    Where on earth is the leader we need to take the difficult decisions, wean us off spending and borrowing, and take the country away from an inevitable debt crisis

    'Farage fails to guarantee pensions triple lock but vows to axe benefits cap'
    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nigel-farage-keir-starmer-reform-uk-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-b2758529.html

    'Tories will consider means testing pension triple-lock, Badenoch says'
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jan/16/kemi-badenoch-uk-getting-poorer

    Labour have not committed to the triple lock beyond this parliament
    https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/money/labour-issues-new-statement-future-32022276

    Only the LDs of the main UK parties are committed to permanently keeping the triple lock in full
    https://www.libdems.org.uk/news/article/default-f4d399b80ea579afb9686280d29a77d0
    You need to keep up

    Robert Jenrick on Sky this morning gave an undertaking the conservatives will keep the triple lock
    Correct me if I am wrong but I believe Kemi won the Tory leadership last year NOT Jenrick and Kemi has made clear she would means test the triple lock
    Is she going to take into account capital?????
    More to the point, how on earth can the "triple lock" part be means tested. In the first year you'd presumably end up with two sets of pensioners, one receiving 3.1% or whatever higher than the other cohort. I know there's a change for pensioners born in 1951/53 between the basic and the new state pension but that isn't means testing. It's a hellacious amount of effort for not much reward in the medium term !
    Over time it'd grow into the weirdest system tbh.
    Yes, just daft.

    Get rid of the triple lock. Simple; effective.
    Labour is polling around 15% with the demographic. What have they got to lose ?
    In three words "Winter Fuel Allowance". For all this government's mishandling of the partial removal, it is an absolute nonsense that it should be the public's biggest complaint of the Labour administration, by far, and as shown in the word cloud on this site a few days ago.
    Voters thought they were electing a Labour government, not one that removed granny's heating in winter as its first big act to raise funds while not raising tax on the wealthiest and rich and the highest earners via a wealth tax or a higher top rate of income tax at all.

    Starmer is polling lower than any Labour leader since WW2 as he is seen to be a PM for the rich and woke liberal metropolitan elite not the working class and ordinary middle class people. Hence Rayner is like a shark waiting to pounce and Reeves is dead in the water sooner rather than later and Farage has been making hay
    Badenoch is polling lower than any Conservative leader ever. We live in an unprecedented time of four plus party politics. It makes comparison to times of two party politics difficult.
    Reform now lead the polls. Labour are polling about 23%, even Foot Labour got 27% in 1983 and even Corbyn Labour got 32% in 2019 and even Ed Miliband Labour got 30% in 2015 and even Brown Labour got 29% in 2010.


    That is how much Starmer Labour are now despised, Starmer is the most unpopular Labour leader since WW2. Apart from woke rich liberal lawyers like him who actually likes him?
    The problem is 23% for Labour gives a lot more seats than 23% for the Conservatives because Labour's vote is more concentrated. A seat like East Ham will still be Labour even if nationally Labour are polling very low.
    We don’t have a four party system. Yet.

    We have the two major parties, who’ve fucked yo to the point that everyone is shopping for a new home.

    Reform is a symptom of the problem.

    Those who believe that Reform collapse will lead to a revival of The Proper Parties, are insane.
    I agree we've moved into an era of much higher voter volatility and unpredictability and there's a certain frisson of "fun" to be had from that.

    I also agree the failures of successive Labour and Conservative Governments (which are more failures of inertia and inactivity than trying to do something and getting it wrong) have created an unprecedented anti-politics and anti-politician mood - the "they're all the same" syndrome.

    Where that takes us I don't know - Reform have capitalised on the anti-politician syndrome but as others have said, anyone who thinks Farage and Tice are the answer hasn't worked out the question. In addition, as the LDs found out, being NOTA only gets you so far and rather like the spider in the bowl, the climb only gets steeper the closer you believe you are to Government.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,723
    F1: Laurent Mekies might be the first man this season not to have his career ruined by being 'promoted' to Red Bull.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/articles/cn5k6y1xyl3o
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 19,442
    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    Taz said:

    Irony is we have many MPs and public figures queuing up to demand compensation for the WASPE women who don’t deserve a penny.

    The Waspy women thing was entirely without merit but had the politically critical quality of being easy to understand. Hence the number of MPs and others lining up behind it. And hence the fondness for issues involving calculable amounts of free money to a readily identifiable group. See also WFA and last week's benefits shambles and two child cap which have the same quality.
    Surely the WASPI issue is simple.

    I have had my retirement age pushed back several times. The changes were decades into the future and made no effect to my plans.

    Some of the WASPI women were told that instead of being able to retire and draw your pension next year, you now have to wait 6 years. That's a massive difference.

    "But the law changed in 1995" seems to be the defence, Sure. Who goes around proactively checking Hansard in case the government have changed the law against you? They started writing to the affected in 2009 about the change coming into effect the following year. Not much notice if you'd planned to retire and now couldn't.
    That is simply untrue. The claim is that they were not individually notified when the law changed. I.e. no letter, phone call etc. But it was on the news. In the papers. They have not a leg to stand on.

    No-one had the rug pulled from under them at the last minute and its ridiculous to say it was.
    I would say WASPI Women had one leg to stand on, but not two. There were two major changes in the state pension as they affected women. The 1995 Pensions Act increased women's retirement age to match men at 65. The increase would be tapered over ten years from 2010 to 2020. The 2011 Act accelerated the 65 age to 2008 and also introduced a new 66 age for both men and women starting in 2020.

    Pensions aren't always fixed for all time but they are a promise that you shouldn't break casually. If you do change your commitment you should do so equitably and give people reasonable notice so they can adjust.

    I would say the 1995 Act satisfied both those requirements, but the 2011 Act did not. Some women in effect would have to work three years extra under the 2011 legislation, with less than five years to adjust. I don't think five years is enough notice anyway but in practice it's less than that as it takes time to get letters out to everyone. The legislation was challenged and the government implicitly acknowledged it was unacceptable by capping the extra period of work at 18 months. By this point, the original notice period had been used up so the affected women had to work up to a further 18 months with no notice at all. At the very least they should have restarted the five year countdown.
    How much difference would the 18 months have made to their overall pension? The argument always seems to be them claiming for having to work longer, not the financial loss to their pension.

    It was a long overdue correction and frankly that they even make the claim betrays them as sexist. Equal rights, as long as it favours women.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,251
    viewcode said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    I read it and I genuinely thought he could have gone a lot further with the “modest proposal” satire and made it much more offensive - and funny

    It was pretty weaksauce (and he can be an excellent polemicist). The fact it caused such a stir is an indictment of the times
    Agreed, the fact that he writes that doing such a thing would be psychopathic and wrong shows it’s just weak satire. In fact he comes across as a fan of protest songs, or if not a fan as such then accepting of their role in society.

    Liddle was originally a lefty. As is so often the case

    I think I might be unique in that I was really quite right wing as a kid (partly to shock and be different) and I am really quite right wing now (because this is obviously the correct perspective)

    It’s been fun watching all my young lefty friends get closer and closer to my thinking over the decades. Then become uncomfortable when I point this out
    No, William Hague, Jacob Rees Mogg and I were the same you really were in the cool crowd of rightwing youth
    Touché

    However I really WAS quite unusual in being openly right wing at UCL in the 1980s. Almost everyone else - especially if they hung out in the union bar - was left

    Indeed and piquantly the only UCL acquaintance of mine who shared my right wing views was Ricky Gervais
    Was he your dealer? It would explain a lot.
    I think it was common ground on fashion and makeup as well the righty stuff that bonded them.


  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 19,442

    Grave of footballer who defied Hitler restored

    The "weathered" grave of a Derby County player who defied the Nazis during the club's 1934 tour of Germany has been restored.

    British diplomats backed Hitler's officials when they ordered the Rams team to give the Nazi salute before each of their matches - but goalkeeper John "Jack" Kirby refused.

    Local historian Kal Singh Dhindsa traced Kirby's Grave to St Peter's Church in Netherseal, Derbyshire, in June last year and raised £1,500 through donations for the restoration.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g8p0pj8kwo

    I mean defying Hitler by refusing to give a Nazi salute in, checks notes, 1934? Wow, the bravery.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,859
    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good morning

    Many individuals should face criminal trials over this scandal, but do we think any will ?

    And on more depressing news both labour and the conservatives make solemn pledges to retain the triple lock which shows just how much serious trouble we are when neither are fit to govern when they put their popularity before doing the right thing

    Where on earth is the leader we need to take the difficult decisions, wean us off spending and borrowing, and take the country away from an inevitable debt crisis

    'Farage fails to guarantee pensions triple lock but vows to axe benefits cap'
    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nigel-farage-keir-starmer-reform-uk-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-b2758529.html

    'Tories will consider means testing pension triple-lock, Badenoch says'
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jan/16/kemi-badenoch-uk-getting-poorer

    Labour have not committed to the triple lock beyond this parliament
    https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/money/labour-issues-new-statement-future-32022276

    Only the LDs of the main UK parties are committed to permanently keeping the triple lock in full
    https://www.libdems.org.uk/news/article/default-f4d399b80ea579afb9686280d29a77d0
    You need to keep up

    Robert Jenrick on Sky this morning gave an undertaking the conservatives will keep the triple lock
    Correct me if I am wrong but I believe Kemi won the Tory leadership last year NOT Jenrick and Kemi has made clear she would means test the triple lock
    Is she going to take into account capital?????
    More to the point, how on earth can the "triple lock" part be means tested. In the first year you'd presumably end up with two sets of pensioners, one receiving 3.1% or whatever higher than the other cohort. I know there's a change for pensioners born in 1951/53 between the basic and the new state pension but that isn't means testing. It's a hellacious amount of effort for not much reward in the medium term !
    Over time it'd grow into the weirdest system tbh.
    Yes, just daft.

    Get rid of the triple lock. Simple; effective.
    Labour is polling around 15% with the demographic. What have they got to lose ?
    In three words "Winter Fuel Allowance". For all this government's mishandling of the partial removal, it is an absolute nonsense that it should be the public's biggest complaint of the Labour administration, by far, and as shown in the word cloud on this site a few days ago.
    Voters thought they were electing a Labour government, not one that removed granny's heating in winter as its first big act to raise funds while not raising tax on the wealthiest and rich and the highest earners via a wealth tax or a higher top rate of income tax at all.

    Starmer is polling lower than any Labour leader since WW2 as he is seen to be a PM for the rich and woke liberal metropolitan elite not the working class and ordinary middle class people. Hence Rayner is like a shark waiting to pounce and Reeves is dead in the water sooner rather than later and Farage has been making hay
    Badenoch is polling lower than any Conservative leader ever. We live in an unprecedented time of four plus party politics. It makes comparison to times of two party politics difficult.
    Reform now lead the polls. Labour are polling about 23%, even Foot Labour got 27% in 1983 and even Corbyn Labour got 32% in 2019 and even Ed Miliband Labour got 30% in 2015 and even Brown Labour got 29% in 2010.


    That is how much Starmer Labour are now despised, Starmer is the most unpopular Labour leader since WW2. Apart from woke rich liberal lawyers like him who actually likes him?
    The problem is 23% for Labour gives a lot more seats than 23% for the Conservatives because Labour's vote is more concentrated. A seat like East Ham will still be Labour even if nationally Labour are polling very low.
    It also still gives even fewer Labour MPs than Foot got in 1983
    Yes and the fewest Conservative MPs ever so it's a real chase to the bottom, isn't it?

    On a more serious note and just so we're clear, you would be happy for the Conservative Party to provide Confidence & Supply (nothing more) to a future minority Reform Government but would be prepared to join other opposition parties in voting down legislation put forward by that Government which you don't support?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,675
    edited 9:51AM

    "Wholly Unacceptable Behavior" scribes Cyclefree.

    We agree say Redbull, and Horny gets the sack.

    To be fair to Christian Horner, he was only following the advice from his wife’s seminal debut single.

    If you wanna be my lover, you gotta get with my friends.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 79,091
    Say what you like about our defence procurement, at least we didn't buy the Boeing tanker.

    Boom On (another) KC-46 Tanker Just Broke Off During F-22 Refueling Mission
    https://www.twz.com/air/kc-46-tankers-boom-just-broke-off-during-f-22-refueling-mission
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,251

    Grave of footballer who defied Hitler restored

    The "weathered" grave of a Derby County player who defied the Nazis during the club's 1934 tour of Germany has been restored.

    British diplomats backed Hitler's officials when they ordered the Rams team to give the Nazi salute before each of their matches - but goalkeeper John "Jack" Kirby refused.

    Local historian Kal Singh Dhindsa traced Kirby's Grave to St Peter's Church in Netherseal, Derbyshire, in June last year and raised £1,500 through donations for the restoration.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g8p0pj8kwo

    I mean defying Hitler by refusing to give a Nazi salute in, checks notes, 1934? Wow, the bravery.
    I would imagine the bravery came in kicking against the pricks in the diplomat corps and likely the footballing establishment in those conformist times. If only our own, dear royal family had been as discriminating.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 15,577

    Cookie said:

    kle4 said:

    MACRON MUST APOLOGISE

    John Redwood
    @johnredwood
    ·
    2h
    Offering us a loan of the Bayeux embroidery reminds us of the invasion and the way so many English were forced into serfdom by the Normans. It depicts the violent deaths of English soldiers.

    https://x.com/johnredwood/status/1942807774389256453

    Trying to get people outraged or emotionally invested in the outcome of events 1000 years ago is a bold move.

    I often think society can be weirdly specific about which historic sins we are supposed to still feel guilty about on an individual level and which not, but that one may be a stretch.
    Personally, as I've said before, I'm still bitter about the Norman Conquest. But I suspect this is a niche position and those who are relaxed about it will get no less so based on the inanity of John Redwood.
    And even I don't want the French to apologise. The amount of responsibility born by the current generation of French people is exactly zero.
    The people who would need to be dealt with about the Norman Conquest aren't the French who are over there, it's the Normans who came over here and have been lording it over the subjugated people of England ever since.
    Exactly.

    To be fair to Redwood, he isn't calling for an apology - that is tud being mischievous.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 128,768
    edited 9:53AM
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good morning

    Many individuals should face criminal trials over this scandal, but do we think any will ?

    And on more depressing news both labour and the conservatives make solemn pledges to retain the triple lock which shows just how much serious trouble we are when neither are fit to govern when they put their popularity before doing the right thing

    Where on earth is the leader we need to take the difficult decisions, wean us off spending and borrowing, and take the country away from an inevitable debt crisis

    'Farage fails to guarantee pensions triple lock but vows to axe benefits cap'
    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nigel-farage-keir-starmer-reform-uk-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-b2758529.html

    'Tories will consider means testing pension triple-lock, Badenoch says'
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/jan/16/kemi-badenoch-uk-getting-poorer

    Labour have not committed to the triple lock beyond this parliament
    https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/money/labour-issues-new-statement-future-32022276

    Only the LDs of the main UK parties are committed to permanently keeping the triple lock in full
    https://www.libdems.org.uk/news/article/default-f4d399b80ea579afb9686280d29a77d0
    You need to keep up

    Robert Jenrick on Sky this morning gave an undertaking the conservatives will keep the triple lock
    Correct me if I am wrong but I believe Kemi won the Tory leadership last year NOT Jenrick and Kemi has made clear she would means test the triple lock
    Is she going to take into account capital?????
    More to the point, how on earth can the "triple lock" part be means tested. In the first year you'd presumably end up with two sets of pensioners, one receiving 3.1% or whatever higher than the other cohort. I know there's a change for pensioners born in 1951/53 between the basic and the new state pension but that isn't means testing. It's a hellacious amount of effort for not much reward in the medium term !
    Over time it'd grow into the weirdest system tbh.
    Yes, just daft.

    Get rid of the triple lock. Simple; effective.
    Labour is polling around 15% with the demographic. What have they got to lose ?
    In three words "Winter Fuel Allowance". For all this government's mishandling of the partial removal, it is an absolute nonsense that it should be the public's biggest complaint of the Labour administration, by far, and as shown in the word cloud on this site a few days ago.
    Voters thought they were electing a Labour government, not one that removed granny's heating in winter as its first big act to raise funds while not raising tax on the wealthiest and rich and the highest earners via a wealth tax or a higher top rate of income tax at all.

    Starmer is polling lower than any Labour leader since WW2 as he is seen to be a PM for the rich and woke liberal metropolitan elite not the working class and ordinary middle class people. Hence Rayner is like a shark waiting to pounce and Reeves is dead in the water sooner rather than later and Farage has been making hay
    Badenoch is polling lower than any Conservative leader ever. We live in an unprecedented time of four plus party politics. It makes comparison to times of two party politics difficult.
    Reform now lead the polls. Labour are polling about 23%, even Foot Labour got 27% in 1983 and even Corbyn Labour got 32% in 2019 and even Ed Miliband Labour got 30% in 2015 and even Brown Labour got 29% in 2010.


    That is how much Starmer Labour are now despised, Starmer is the most unpopular Labour leader since WW2. Apart from woke rich liberal lawyers like him who actually likes him?
    The problem is 23% for Labour gives a lot more seats than 23% for the Conservatives because Labour's vote is more concentrated. A seat like East Ham will still be Labour even if nationally Labour are polling very low.
    It also still gives even fewer Labour MPs than Foot got in 1983
    Yes and the fewest Conservative MPs ever so it's a real chase to the bottom, isn't it?

    On a more serious note and just so we're clear, you would be happy for the Conservative Party to provide Confidence & Supply (nothing more) to a future minority Reform Government but would be prepared to join other opposition parties in voting down legislation put forward by that Government which you don't support?
    For now, it is not impossible if the Tories replace Badenoch in a GE of Farage v Cleverly/Stride v Starmer Labour could come third.

    What I decide is irrelevant but any Tory leader who gave confidence and supply to a minority government, Reform or Labour would decide on each bill on its merits
  • CookieCookie Posts: 15,577

    Cyclefree said:

    Cookie said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    Given how this scandal is so utterly dwarfed by other vaster scandals, I find it hard to get exercised by it. Indeed I have suspicions of those that do. This one is so much easier to take - the villains are nasty managers - so let’s make tv dramas about it and write 5000 word essays about it and ventilate about it endlessly

    Rather than focusing on much greater and more troubling problems

    In short: this is chaff

    Talking bollocks again I see.

    I have written quite a few headers on even more serious scandals and there have also been TV dramas about them and they share with this one the same essential elements which cause them to happen, to continue and to involve cruelty to the victims.

    What I wrote here could and does apply to every other scandal. I am writing about it today because a report came out and to remind those with goldfish memories that nothing has changed. I have written in my book about Grenfell and blood contamination and many others and if I included every single scandal pointing out the depressing similarities it wouldn't be so much a book as a bloody enormous encyclopaedia - Cyclefree's Big Book of British Scandals.

    The people mentioned in the case studies are not chaff. (The last time I heard that word used so dismissively it was by an MP in a Select Committee aimed at Dr David Kelly. He committed suicide shortly after.)

    They are people like us. One of them is your age and at about the age you stopped taking drugs and turned your life around, he had a good business, a family and was looking forward to doing even better. Instead, he was wrongly convicted, had his reputation trashed, lost everything and has never been able to find employment again. He lives on charity from his family and friends. His name is Harjinder Butoy.

    Don't you fucking dare call him and everyone like him and what happened to them all "chaff".

    For shame, @Leon. For shame.
    I must admit, for reasons I find hard to understand, I have also found it hard to get too exercised about this scandal. Perhaps it is too technical, too hard to follow.
    But for that reason I am very grateful that there are others like Cyclefree who do. Because I'm exercised about it now.
    It's the casual trashing of people's reputations which really rankles. "Thou shalt not bear false witness" is one of the less fashionable commandments, but it's the biggie, really. Most people have nothing more valuable.

    Good header, anyway. I liked the attempt to broaden the scope to 'all scandals' and the thought that those in charge consider themselves virtuous because they are in charge. Never trust people whise starting point is that they are the good guys, because all sorts of dubious conclusions flow from that.
    It’s really simple. The Horizon computer system made shit up. They prosecuted people. When they found out, early on, that it was bollocks, they lied to cover it up. And kept on prosecuting people.
    That's a good summary. I have two major feelings about the scandal: exasperation at the whole awful mess, and a weariness that we've seen it all before, and no doubt we'll see it all again. Lessons will not be learnt.

    And it is important, because the next scandal and cover-up might affect me. Or you. Or perhaps even @Leon .
    @Leon - how could he be affected by a scandal? It would take something really unlikely, like being arrested for a crime he didn’t commit and being remanded for years, awaiting trial.
    Apparently it was an open secret in publishing that the Salt Path duo were full of shit. Did @Leon know or guess? I mean we can't have travel writing - an honest account of real life adventures - turned into made up fiction, now can we? How could we survive such a revelation?
    One question that was quickly brought up was "To whom were the royalties paid?".

    I was always pissed of because the chap was called Moth and there was never an explanation of the weird name, nor was it given as a nickname. Now we know why.
    Yes, I couldn't get past that. When they got to Minehead and that still hadn't been addressed, I gave up.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,776

    Scott_xP said:

    @SkyNewsBreak

    Red Bull says it has released Christian Horner from his operational duties with effect from today

    That was the demand of the Verstappens.

    I hope he stays at Red Bull as they don’t want to have to boycott Mercedes.
    After all that Mr Ginger Spice did for Max over the years?
    The Verstappens are [moderated], they’d happily stab you in the front.
    Although I don't believe that was on the charge sheet...

    https://thesportsrush.com/f1-news-2x-champion-max-verstappens-father-jos-verstappen-was-once-arrested-for-attempted-murder-for-driving-a-car-at-his-ex-girlfriend/
  • GarethoftheVale2GarethoftheVale2 Posts: 2,344
    @Cyclefree - sorry to hear about your illness and glad you are still able to write PB headers.

    For me, the key is a lack of accountability and that no-one is held responsible for anything any more.

    A lot rests on potential police prosecutions. If public sector workers at the Post Office are convicted in relation to this then it would send a huge message.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,170

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    Taz said:

    Irony is we have many MPs and public figures queuing up to demand compensation for the WASPE women who don’t deserve a penny.

    The Waspy women thing was entirely without merit but had the politically critical quality of being easy to understand. Hence the number of MPs and others lining up behind it. And hence the fondness for issues involving calculable amounts of free money to a readily identifiable group. See also WFA and last week's benefits shambles and two child cap which have the same quality.
    Surely the WASPI issue is simple.

    I have had my retirement age pushed back several times. The changes were decades into the future and made no effect to my plans.

    Some of the WASPI women were told that instead of being able to retire and draw your pension next year, you now have to wait 6 years. That's a massive difference.

    "But the law changed in 1995" seems to be the defence, Sure. Who goes around proactively checking Hansard in case the government have changed the law against you? They started writing to the affected in 2009 about the change coming into effect the following year. Not much notice if you'd planned to retire and now couldn't.
    That is simply untrue. The claim is that they were not individually notified when the law changed. I.e. no letter, phone call etc. But it was on the news. In the papers. They have not a leg to stand on.

    No-one had the rug pulled from under them at the last minute and its ridiculous to say it was.
    I would say WASPI Women had one leg to stand on, but not two. There were two major changes in the state pension as they affected women. The 1995 Pensions Act increased women's retirement age to match men at 65. The increase would be tapered over ten years from 2010 to 2020. The 2011 Act accelerated the 65 age to 2008 and also introduced a new 66 age for both men and women starting in 2020.

    Pensions aren't always fixed for all time but they are a promise that you shouldn't break casually. If you do change your commitment you should do so equitably and give people reasonable notice so they can adjust.

    I would say the 1995 Act satisfied both those requirements, but the 2011 Act did not. Some women in effect would have to work three years extra under the 2011 legislation, with less than five years to adjust. I don't think five years is enough notice anyway but in practice it's less than that as it takes time to get letters out to everyone. The legislation was challenged and the government implicitly acknowledged it was unacceptable by capping the extra period of work at 18 months. By this point, the original notice period had been used up so the affected women had to work up to a further 18 months with no notice at all. At the very least they should have restarted the five year countdown.
    How much difference would the 18 months have made to their overall pension? The argument always seems to be them claiming for having to work longer, not the financial loss to their pension.

    It was a long overdue correction and frankly that they even make the claim betrays them as sexist. Equal rights, as long as it favours women.
    For all the approbation against WASPI Women, the fact is, the government screwed up. The WASPI claim was drawn way too broad but nevertheless they have a very legitimate narrower grievance.

    The government should have let the original tapered increase run to 2020 for women's retirement age at 65 and then introduce the new 66 age for men in 2020 and women in 2022, or both in 2022. Then there wouldn't have been a problem.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,776
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    I read it and I genuinely thought he could have gone a lot further with the “modest proposal” satire and made it much more offensive - and funny

    It was pretty weaksauce (and he can be an excellent polemicist). The fact it caused such a stir is an indictment of the times
    Agreed, the fact that he writes that doing such a thing would be psychopathic and wrong shows it’s just weak satire. In fact he comes across as a fan of protest songs, or if not a fan as such then accepting of their role in society.

    Liddle was originally a lefty. As is so often the case

    I think I might be unique in that I was really quite right wing as a kid (partly to shock and be different) and I am really quite right wing now (because this is obviously the correct perspective)

    It’s been fun watching all my young lefty friends get closer and closer to my thinking over the decades. Then become uncomfortable when I point this out
    No, William Hague, Jacob Rees Mogg and I were the same you really were in the cool crowd of rightwing youth
    Touché

    However I really WAS quite unusual in being openly right wing at UCL in the 1980s. Almost everyone else - especially if they hung out in the union bar - was left

    Indeed and piquantly the only UCL acquaintance of mine who shared my right wing views was Ricky Gervais
    Are you sure you've ever been to the UCL union bar? My recollection (circa '84, 85 and '86) is it was a hotbed of quiet middle class Conservatism.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 79,091
    Life is just about to get massively harder for UK pharmaceutical manufacturing.

    Pharma reshoring just got real

    Trump announced 200% tariffs on imported pharmaceuticals… but there’s a catch:

    Companies have ~12–18 months to bring drug manufacturing back to the U.S. or face steep penalties.

    This is Chips Act logic, now applied to life sciences.

    https://x.com/BowTiedBiotech/status/1942652715781480602

    Do we have any exemption for this ?
    It appears not, yet.
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jul/09/australian-government-urgently-seeking-more-detail-after-trump-flags-200-tariffs-on-foreign-pharmaceuticals
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 19,442
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    Taz said:

    Irony is we have many MPs and public figures queuing up to demand compensation for the WASPE women who don’t deserve a penny.

    The Waspy women thing was entirely without merit but had the politically critical quality of being easy to understand. Hence the number of MPs and others lining up behind it. And hence the fondness for issues involving calculable amounts of free money to a readily identifiable group. See also WFA and last week's benefits shambles and two child cap which have the same quality.
    Surely the WASPI issue is simple.

    I have had my retirement age pushed back several times. The changes were decades into the future and made no effect to my plans.

    Some of the WASPI women were told that instead of being able to retire and draw your pension next year, you now have to wait 6 years. That's a massive difference.

    "But the law changed in 1995" seems to be the defence, Sure. Who goes around proactively checking Hansard in case the government have changed the law against you? They started writing to the affected in 2009 about the change coming into effect the following year. Not much notice if you'd planned to retire and now couldn't.
    That is simply untrue. The claim is that they were not individually notified when the law changed. I.e. no letter, phone call etc. But it was on the news. In the papers. They have not a leg to stand on.

    No-one had the rug pulled from under them at the last minute and its ridiculous to say it was.
    I would say WASPI Women had one leg to stand on, but not two. There were two major changes in the state pension as they affected women. The 1995 Pensions Act increased women's retirement age to match men at 65. The increase would be tapered over ten years from 2010 to 2020. The 2011 Act accelerated the 65 age to 2008 and also introduced a new 66 age for both men and women starting in 2020.

    Pensions aren't always fixed for all time but they are a promise that you shouldn't break casually. If you do change your commitment you should do so equitably and give people reasonable notice so they can adjust.

    I would say the 1995 Act satisfied both those requirements, but the 2011 Act did not. Some women in effect would have to work three years extra under the 2011 legislation, with less than five years to adjust. I don't think five years is enough notice anyway but in practice it's less than that as it takes time to get letters out to everyone. The legislation was challenged and the government implicitly acknowledged it was unacceptable by capping the extra period of work at 18 months. By this point, the original notice period had been used up so the affected women had to work up to a further 18 months with no notice at all. At the very least they should have restarted the five year countdown.
    How much difference would the 18 months have made to their overall pension? The argument always seems to be them claiming for having to work longer, not the financial loss to their pension.

    It was a long overdue correction and frankly that they even make the claim betrays them as sexist. Equal rights, as long as it favours women.
    For all the approbation against WASPI Women, the fact is, the government screwed up. The WASPI claim was drawn way too broad but nevertheless they have a very legitimate narrower grievance.

    The government should have let the original tapered increase run to 2020 for women's retirement age at 65 and then introduce the new 66 age for men in 2020 and women in 2022, or both in 2022. Then there wouldn't have been a problem.
    I don't believe that this is true. Peoples circumstances change all the time. There was ample time to plan. This is about sexism, at heart. Women live longer than men and were being allowed to retire earlier. That was changed, and not over night. Sure some changes may have been brought forward but so what? The way they talk its as if on their leaving do they were suddenly told to work 5 more years, which is a fiction.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,557
    3rd reading of the Welfare bill today. The awkward squad still voting against - Trickett, Burton and co but there are some amendments accepted that might provoke significant rebellion of Labour MPs.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 6,564
    Nigelb said:

    Life is just about to get massively harder for UK pharmaceutical manufacturing.

    Pharma reshoring just got real

    Trump announced 200% tariffs on imported pharmaceuticals… but there’s a catch:

    Companies have ~12–18 months to bring drug manufacturing back to the U.S. or face steep penalties.

    This is Chips Act logic, now applied to life sciences.

    https://x.com/BowTiedBiotech/status/1942652715781480602

    Do we have any exemption for this ?
    It appears not, yet.
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jul/09/australian-government-urgently-seeking-more-detail-after-trump-flags-200-tariffs-on-foreign-pharmaceuticals

    More importantly, do Ireland?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,132

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    Are Advance UK for the birds?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,370

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    Wot? You are ignoring Angela and Maria Eagle.

    And Jodie Gosling.

    One Swallow. And a couple of Martins. Two Reeves (which are female Ruff). Plus a Woodcock.

    Oh, and a Peacock
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,170
    edited 10:08AM
    .

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    algarkirk said:

    Taz said:

    Irony is we have many MPs and public figures queuing up to demand compensation for the WASPE women who don’t deserve a penny.

    The Waspy women thing was entirely without merit but had the politically critical quality of being easy to understand. Hence the number of MPs and others lining up behind it. And hence the fondness for issues involving calculable amounts of free money to a readily identifiable group. See also WFA and last week's benefits shambles and two child cap which have the same quality.
    Surely the WASPI issue is simple.

    I have had my retirement age pushed back several times. The changes were decades into the future and made no effect to my plans.

    Some of the WASPI women were told that instead of being able to retire and draw your pension next year, you now have to wait 6 years. That's a massive difference.

    "But the law changed in 1995" seems to be the defence, Sure. Who goes around proactively checking Hansard in case the government have changed the law against you? They started writing to the affected in 2009 about the change coming into effect the following year. Not much notice if you'd planned to retire and now couldn't.
    That is simply untrue. The claim is that they were not individually notified when the law changed. I.e. no letter, phone call etc. But it was on the news. In the papers. They have not a leg to stand on.

    No-one had the rug pulled from under them at the last minute and its ridiculous to say it was.
    I would say WASPI Women had one leg to stand on, but not two. There were two major changes in the state pension as they affected women. The 1995 Pensions Act increased women's retirement age to match men at 65. The increase would be tapered over ten years from 2010 to 2020. The 2011 Act accelerated the 65 age to 2008 and also introduced a new 66 age for both men and women starting in 2020.

    Pensions aren't always fixed for all time but they are a promise that you shouldn't break casually. If you do change your commitment you should do so equitably and give people reasonable notice so they can adjust.

    I would say the 1995 Act satisfied both those requirements, but the 2011 Act did not. Some women in effect would have to work three years extra under the 2011 legislation, with less than five years to adjust. I don't think five years is enough notice anyway but in practice it's less than that as it takes time to get letters out to everyone. The legislation was challenged and the government implicitly acknowledged it was unacceptable by capping the extra period of work at 18 months. By this point, the original notice period had been used up so the affected women had to work up to a further 18 months with no notice at all. At the very least they should have restarted the five year countdown.
    How much difference would the 18 months have made to their overall pension? The argument always seems to be them claiming for having to work longer, not the financial loss to their pension.

    It was a long overdue correction and frankly that they even make the claim betrays them as sexist. Equal rights, as long as it favours women.
    For all the approbation against WASPI Women, the fact is, the government screwed up. The WASPI claim was drawn way too broad but nevertheless they have a very legitimate narrower grievance.

    The government should have let the original tapered increase run to 2020 for women's retirement age at 65 and then introduce the new 66 age for men in 2020 and women in 2022, or both in 2022. Then there wouldn't have been a problem.
    I don't believe that this is true. Peoples circumstances change all the time. There was ample time to plan. This is about sexism, at heart. Women live longer than men and were being allowed to retire earlier. That was changed, and not over night. Sure some changes may have been brought forward but so what? The way they talk its as if on their leaving do they were suddenly told to work 5 more years, which is a fiction.
    There you and I differ. This at heart is about not breaking your commitments and if you have to, do so equitably and with reasonable notice.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,743
    Nigelb said:

    Life is just about to get massively harder for UK pharmaceutical manufacturing.

    Pharma reshoring just got real

    Trump announced 200% tariffs on imported pharmaceuticals… but there’s a catch:

    Companies have ~12–18 months to bring drug manufacturing back to the U.S. or face steep penalties.

    This is Chips Act logic, now applied to life sciences.

    https://x.com/BowTiedBiotech/status/1942652715781480602

    Do we have any exemption for this ?
    It appears not, yet.
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jul/09/australian-government-urgently-seeking-more-detail-after-trump-flags-200-tariffs-on-foreign-pharmaceuticals

    Because US drug prices just aren't high enough.
    12-18 months is very little time to adjust, these are huge investments and Trump may cave.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,712

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    Wot? You are ignoring Angela and Maria Eagle.

    And Jodie Gosling.

    One Swallow. And a couple of Martins. Two Reeves (which are female Ruff). Plus a Woodcock.

    Oh, and a Peacock
    And a lot of tits of various colours...
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,172
    Interesting (near for one) Ashfield experiences from the last 18 hours.

    A new tribe is arriving, and I don't know what to call them. Last night I met a young man (20s) out walking his rabbit - presumably house rabbit - within 10 minutes walk of my house. I've never seen that before. I wonder what Lee Anderson would say if he were in character - probably something like "Bluddy rabbits should be jugged for supper, not walked".

    And this morning on the Blackwell Trail a couple who had come from Alfreton Station and were cycling to Lincoln via Teversal, Mansfield, Newark, Ruxford following GPS. About 45 miles, and most of it off road or on minor roads.

    An example of where separated cycling infra could go without much work. A number of our local villages are linked by off road half-decent (usually shale or similar) multiuser rail trails, but they tend suddenly to turn to mud at the Nottinghamshire border, because Notts CC are crapulous at this.

    The Blackwell Trail is the wrong leg for them (should be the Silverhill Trail), so they will get through the Notts bit with several anti-wheelchair barriers, and find themselves at the bottom of a half mile hill. In Derbyshire there is one horrible barrier, right next to the sign that says many types of user welcome. My piccie for the day:



    I have a piccie of the rabbit + owner, but I can't put it online of course.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,688
    rkrkrk said:

    Nigelb said:

    Life is just about to get massively harder for UK pharmaceutical manufacturing.

    Pharma reshoring just got real

    Trump announced 200% tariffs on imported pharmaceuticals… but there’s a catch:

    Companies have ~12–18 months to bring drug manufacturing back to the U.S. or face steep penalties.

    This is Chips Act logic, now applied to life sciences.

    https://x.com/BowTiedBiotech/status/1942652715781480602

    Do we have any exemption for this ?
    It appears not, yet.
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jul/09/australian-government-urgently-seeking-more-detail-after-trump-flags-200-tariffs-on-foreign-pharmaceuticals

    Because US drug prices just aren't high enough.
    12-18 months is very little time to adjust, these are huge investments and Trump may cave.
    TACO
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,476
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    I read it and I genuinely thought he could have gone a lot further with the “modest proposal” satire and made it much more offensive - and funny

    It was pretty weaksauce (and he can be an excellent polemicist). The fact it caused such a stir is an indictment of the times
    Agreed, the fact that he writes that doing such a thing would be psychopathic and wrong shows it’s just weak satire. In fact he comes across as a fan of protest songs, or if not a fan as such then accepting of their role in society.

    Liddle was originally a lefty. As is so often the case

    I think I might be unique in that I was really quite right wing as a kid (partly to shock and be different) and I am really quite right wing now (because this is obviously the correct perspective)

    It’s been fun watching all my young lefty friends get closer and closer to my thinking over the decades. Then become uncomfortable when I point this out
    No, William Hague, Jacob Rees Mogg and I were the same you really were in the cool crowd of rightwing youth
    Touché

    However I really WAS quite unusual in being openly right wing at UCL in the 1980s. Almost everyone else - especially if they hung out in the union bar - was left

    Indeed and piquantly the only UCL acquaintance of mine who shared my right wing views was Ricky Gervais
    When I was there the two bars in the UCL Union on third and second floors were probably more right wing as were largely full of the Rowers on the 3rd and other sports teams, mainly rugby and hockey on the 2nd. The ground floor was more a coffee place so I had absolutely no need to go in there.

    Even the UL Union bars weren’t particularly political. If you wanted rabid leftism then of course a dip into the SOAS Union bar would give you enough for a lifetime.

    The LSE bars were a lot more lefty than the UCL ones for sure.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,557
    Resident Doctors striking July 25 to 30
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,476

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    What part of bombing Glastonbury festival and bombing Brighton don't you object to?
    John Betjeman must be mighty relieved the citizens of Slough are too late to report him to the police. As for Shakespeare’s call to kill all lawyers, gadzooks.

    Again, read the article and you will see that he says that such a call to bomb places is wrong and psychopathic and is made for dramatic effect.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,065

    Resident Doctors striking July 25 to 30


    Resident doctors in England will go on strike later this month in their long-running dispute over pay, the BMA has announced.

    The union says they will stage a full walk out from 7am on Friday 25 July until 7am on Wednesday 30 July.

    The announcement comes after 90% of resident doctors who are members of the BMA voted in favour of strike action - but turnout was down to 55%.

    In a statement, BMA resident doctors committee co-chairs Dr Melissa Ryan and Dr Ross Nieuwoudt said:  "We met [Health Secretary] Wes Streeting yesterday and made every attempt to avoid strike action by opening negotiations for pay restoration.

    "Unfortunately, the government has stated that it will not negotiate on pay, wanting to focus on non-pay elements without suggesting what these might be.

    "Without a credible offer to keep us on the path to restore our pay, we have no choice but to call strikes."

    They called on Streeting to "seriously come to the table in the next two weeks" to avert the strikes.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,091

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    Wot? You are ignoring Angela and Maria Eagle.

    And Jodie Gosling.

    One Swallow. And a couple of Martins. Two Reeves (which are female Ruff). Plus a Woodcock.

    Oh, and a Peacock
    And a lot of tits of various colours...
    Tsk. Everyone knows most tits are blue.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,712
    IanB2 said:

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    Wot? You are ignoring Angela and Maria Eagle.

    And Jodie Gosling.

    One Swallow. And a couple of Martins. Two Reeves (which are female Ruff). Plus a Woodcock.

    Oh, and a Peacock
    And a lot of tits of various colours...
    Tsk. Everyone knows most tits are blue.
    Various shades of blue.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,557
    The hypothetical of all hypotheticals from YouGov
    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1942888215423091037?s=19
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,062

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    What part of bombing Glastonbury festival and bombing Brighton don't you object to?
    I don't object to any part of it.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,776
    boulay said:

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    What part of bombing Glastonbury festival and bombing Brighton don't you object to?
    John Betjeman must be mighty relieved the citizens of Slough are too late to report him to the police. As for Shakespeare’s call to kill all lawyers, gadzooks.

    Again, read the article and you will see that he says that such a call to bomb places is wrong and psychopathic and is made for dramatic effect.
    What I don't understand about you right wingers is offensive material that attacks people you don't like is satire yet unacceptable commentary about, for example, the IDF or milkshakes thrown at Nigel Farage should be (possibly justifiably) punished with a custodial sentence. Likewise jostling Starmer whilst LOTO was just the rough and tumble of politics, writing something offensive about Trump's bone spurs on the other hand get one thrown out of the US.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,091

    IanB2 said:

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    Wot? You are ignoring Angela and Maria Eagle.

    And Jodie Gosling.

    One Swallow. And a couple of Martins. Two Reeves (which are female Ruff). Plus a Woodcock.

    Oh, and a Peacock
    And a lot of tits of various colours...
    Tsk. Everyone knows most tits are blue.
    Various shades of blue.
    True. Anyhow I'm now sitting at the bottom of the largest puffin colony outside Iceland, on a glorious day, me and the dog watching all puffins buzzing back and forth, forever busy
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 20,670
    My partner is not taking part in the strike
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 30,589

    The hypothetical of all hypotheticals from YouGov
    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1942888215423091037?s=19

    Jezbollah rides again
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,891

    My partner is not taking part in the strike

    Scab.

    /joke.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 46,086

    The hypothetical of all hypotheticals from YouGov
    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1942888215423091037?s=19

    "How likely are you to consider voting for ..."

    This seems a needlessly cumbersome formulation.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,557
    kinabalu said:

    The hypothetical of all hypotheticals from YouGov
    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1942888215423091037?s=19

    "How likely are you to consider voting for ..."

    This seems a needlessly cumbersome formulation.
    Its a bit naff
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 79,091
    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Life is just about to get massively harder for UK pharmaceutical manufacturing.

    Pharma reshoring just got real

    Trump announced 200% tariffs on imported pharmaceuticals… but there’s a catch:

    Companies have ~12–18 months to bring drug manufacturing back to the U.S. or face steep penalties.

    This is Chips Act logic, now applied to life sciences.

    https://x.com/BowTiedBiotech/status/1942652715781480602

    Do we have any exemption for this ?
    It appears not, yet.
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jul/09/australian-government-urgently-seeking-more-detail-after-trump-flags-200-tariffs-on-foreign-pharmaceuticals

    More importantly, do Ireland?
    That's their problem.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 30,589
    18% of Brits say they would consider a vote for Jezbollah?

    How many Americans would consider a vote for the America Party? Especially if it is led by MechaHitler?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,172

    Resident Doctors striking July 25 to 30


    Resident doctors in England will go on strike later this month in their long-running dispute over pay, the BMA has announced.

    The union says they will stage a full walk out from 7am on Friday 25 July until 7am on Wednesday 30 July.

    The announcement comes after 90% of resident doctors who are members of the BMA voted in favour of strike action - but turnout was down to 55%.

    In a statement, BMA resident doctors committee co-chairs Dr Melissa Ryan and Dr Ross Nieuwoudt said:  "We met [Health Secretary] Wes Streeting yesterday and made every attempt to avoid strike action by opening negotiations for pay restoration.

    "Unfortunately, the government has stated that it will not negotiate on pay, wanting to focus on non-pay elements without suggesting what these might be.

    "Without a credible offer to keep us on the path to restore our pay, we have no choice but to call strikes."

    They called on Streeting to "seriously come to the table in the next two weeks" to avert the strikes.
    How far are BMA painted into their corner on this?

    Are they still claiming an uplift based on RPI not CPI?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 79,091

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    Wot? You are ignoring Angela and Maria Eagle.

    And Jodie Gosling.

    One Swallow. And a couple of Martins. Two Reeves (which are female Ruff). Plus a Woodcock.

    Oh, and a Peacock
    Don't forget Robin Swann. (UUP)
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,370

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    Wot? You are ignoring Angela and Maria Eagle.

    And Jodie Gosling.

    One Swallow. And a couple of Martins. Two Reeves (which are female Ruff). Plus a Woodcock.

    Oh, and a Peacock
    And a lot of tits of various colours...
    Plenty of cocks too.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,476

    boulay said:

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    What part of bombing Glastonbury festival and bombing Brighton don't you object to?
    John Betjeman must be mighty relieved the citizens of Slough are too late to report him to the police. As for Shakespeare’s call to kill all lawyers, gadzooks.

    Again, read the article and you will see that he says that such a call to bomb places is wrong and psychopathic and is made for dramatic effect.
    What I don't understand about you right wingers is offensive material that attacks people you don't like is satire yet unacceptable commentary about, for example, the IDF or milkshakes thrown at Nigel Farage should be (possibly justifiably) punished with a custodial sentence. Likewise jostling Starmer whilst LOTO was just the rough and tumble of politics, writing something offensive about Trump's bone spurs on the other hand get one thrown out of the US.
    What I don’t understand about you left wingers is that you make shit up that you wish was true to make you feel a bit better about life.

    Show me where I demanded custodial sentences for the IDF chants (the closest I got was highlighting that the problem the authorities have is that having jailed that lady re the riots tweets they probably have to take action against BV but I think both would be wrong) and never said anything about Jo Brand, it’s enough a punishment for her that she is her.

    Again, which of us “right wingers” are thinking like you suggested re Starmer, PMQs, Bone Spurs?

    Are you perhaps making up things because you are a being a bit stupid and have no argument so resorting to flinging shit around to deflect how wrong you are about the Rod Liddle piece?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,370
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    Wot? You are ignoring Angela and Maria Eagle.

    And Jodie Gosling.

    One Swallow. And a couple of Martins. Two Reeves (which are female Ruff). Plus a Woodcock.

    Oh, and a Peacock
    And a lot of tits of various colours...
    Tsk. Everyone knows most tits are blue.
    Various shades of blue.
    True. Anyhow I'm now sitting at the bottom of the largest puffin colony outside Iceland, on a glorious day, me and the dog watching all puffins buzzing back and forth, forever busy
    Puffins are indeed wonderful.

    Just bear in mind if you ever get close, they have razor-sharp feet.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,712

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    Wot? You are ignoring Angela and Maria Eagle.

    And Jodie Gosling.

    One Swallow. And a couple of Martins. Two Reeves (which are female Ruff). Plus a Woodcock.

    Oh, and a Peacock
    And a lot of tits of various colours...
    Plenty of cocks too.
    Of various colours?..
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,065
    Sky reporting Red Bull sack Christian Horner
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,132

    18% of Brits say they would consider a vote for Jezbollah?

    How many Americans would consider a vote for the America Party? Especially if it is led by MechaHitler?

    Is MechaHitler vs MechaStalin the future of politics?
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,712
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    Wot? You are ignoring Angela and Maria Eagle.

    And Jodie Gosling.

    One Swallow. And a couple of Martins. Two Reeves (which are female Ruff). Plus a Woodcock.

    Oh, and a Peacock
    And a lot of tits of various colours...
    Tsk. Everyone knows most tits are blue.
    Various shades of blue.
    True. Anyhow I'm now sitting at the bottom of the largest puffin colony outside Iceland, on a glorious day, me and the dog watching all puffins buzzing back and forth, forever busy
    Marvellous, I envy you.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,091

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Tommy R has 'light touch' endorsed Advance UK which might push their membership up a bit with his followers (they sit at a bit over 10,000, largest UK party with no elected representatives)

    The RSPB has 1.2 million members and no elected representatives.
    Wot? You are ignoring Angela and Maria Eagle.

    And Jodie Gosling.

    One Swallow. And a couple of Martins. Two Reeves (which are female Ruff). Plus a Woodcock.

    Oh, and a Peacock
    And a lot of tits of various colours...
    Tsk. Everyone knows most tits are blue.
    Various shades of blue.
    True. Anyhow I'm now sitting at the bottom of the largest puffin colony outside Iceland, on a glorious day, me and the dog watching all puffins buzzing back and forth, forever busy
    Puffins are indeed wonderful.

    Just bear in mind if you ever get close, they have razor-sharp feet.
    Something to bear in mind.

    Being protected, they're mostly binocular distance, but every now and again one flies overhead. They seem to have a faster wing flap than other birds and you can hear them coming so we can duck if necessary...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 79,091

    18% of Brits say they would consider a vote for Jezbollah?

    How many Americans would consider a vote for the America Party? Especially if it is led by MechaHitler?

    Is MechaHitler vs MechaStalin the future of politics?
    No, just a minor Warhammer side plot.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 31,587
    edited 10:47AM
    deleted
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 46,086

    boulay said:

    boulay said:

    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    After R** L*****'s disgusting piece last week I don't believe we are allowed to mention S***tator ever again.
    If you think it was “disgusting” then you clearly haven’t read it and just seen the headline. Alternatively you might want to quit PB because there are infinitely more offensive things written here most days to trouble such a fragile temperament. But I think you didn’t actually read it.
    What part of bombing Glastonbury festival and bombing Brighton don't you object to?
    John Betjeman must be mighty relieved the citizens of Slough are too late to report him to the police. As for Shakespeare’s call to kill all lawyers, gadzooks.

    Again, read the article and you will see that he says that such a call to bomb places is wrong and psychopathic and is made for dramatic effect.
    What I don't understand about you right wingers is offensive material that attacks people you don't like is satire yet unacceptable commentary about, for example, the IDF or milkshakes thrown at Nigel Farage should be (possibly justifiably) punished with a custodial sentence. Likewise jostling Starmer whilst LOTO was just the rough and tumble of politics, writing something offensive about Trump's bone spurs on the other hand get one thrown out of the US.
    Liddle is a longtime purveyor of "ooo, I'm politically incorrect, me" hackery. It's not an especially challenging genre but he has tbf got the hang of it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,082

    kle4 said:

    MACRON MUST APOLOGISE

    John Redwood
    @johnredwood
    ·
    2h
    Offering us a loan of the Bayeux embroidery reminds us of the invasion and the way so many English were forced into serfdom by the Normans. It depicts the violent deaths of English soldiers.

    https://x.com/johnredwood/status/1942807774389256453

    Trying to get people outraged or emotionally invested in the outcome of events 1000 years ago is a bold move.

    I often think society can be weirdly specific about which historic sins we are supposed to still feel guilty about on an individual level and which not, but that one may be a stretch.
    You have been whooshed by John Redwood. He is using the Norman Conquest ironically. Redwood is using this parallel to say Britain should not pay reparations to the descendants of, well, you get the picture.
    Fair enough, and he's right.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,082

    18% of Brits say they would consider a vote for Jezbollah?

    How many Americans would consider a vote for the America Party? Especially if it is led by MechaHitler?

    Less, but only due to the stronger two party system vs our sort of 2.5 party one.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 1,244
    FPT having googled Balmain trainers I reckon TSE's lunch companion could have been donated them by someone who'd broken both legs.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,736
    Little Chris Horner
    Sat in the corner,
    Annoying his spice girl wife
    He played with his phone,
    When suddenly Max and Josh told him
    "F Off, you're gone"
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,172
    Eabhal said:

    A scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry is exactly what this summer is missing. Looking forward to the weekend BBQ and watching England tear itself apart.

    Rest is History specials, a Reform rally at Hastings, Spectator in turmoil. In. My. Veins.

    Why would there be a scandal over the Bayeux Tapestry? Have I missed something?

    Do they object to the Sutton Hoo helmet being lent to France?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 52,091
    kle4 said:

    18% of Brits say they would consider a vote for Jezbollah?

    How many Americans would consider a vote for the America Party? Especially if it is led by MechaHitler?

    Less, but only due to the stronger two party system vs our sort of 2.5 party one.
    It would take an earthquake to break the US two party system and need a charismatic figurehead. Musk of course, aside from not being particularly charismatic, can't stand, and who else is there? Money alone won't get them anywhere and I assume he's either trolling or threatening a spoiler operation on the GOP?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,610
    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Life is just about to get massively harder for UK pharmaceutical manufacturing.

    Pharma reshoring just got real

    Trump announced 200% tariffs on imported pharmaceuticals… but there’s a catch:

    Companies have ~12–18 months to bring drug manufacturing back to the U.S. or face steep penalties.

    This is Chips Act logic, now applied to life sciences.

    https://x.com/BowTiedBiotech/status/1942652715781480602

    Do we have any exemption for this ?
    It appears not, yet.
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jul/09/australian-government-urgently-seeking-more-detail-after-trump-flags-200-tariffs-on-foreign-pharmaceuticals

    More importantly, do Ireland?
    The people I know in the Irish pharmaceutical industry are quite relaxed by it.

    In the short term, if the US imposes tariffs then the US will have to pay them - there's not the spare capacity in the US to substitute for imports.

    In the long term, the US is not a majority of the market, and there's no certainty on these tariffs being in place for the long haul. There is some work being done on preparing to put in place smaller plants in the US to serve the US market alone, but no company is thinking of making major future investments to relocate pharma manufacturing to the US in response.

    Maybe this is complacency and/or denial. We will see.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 12,557
    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1942896468743893021?s=19

    Starmers PM job satisfaction figures have moved well below Labour's voting intention. Shields buckling, captain
Sign In or Register to comment.