Weirdly the alert sounded in our shop payment terminal as well as my phone.
I didn't get it. My smartphone is only used as a small tablet so probably the number initially associated with it was reallocated long ago. But I'd forgotten about the test even though I'd been wondering whether it would get through to it.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
He won’t be releasing his tax returns before the next general election and I expect the Maga UK crowd will be just fine with that !
It’s such a simple thing behind an anonymous account to libel that a national political figure who has never held power, is a traitor. The strange thing is that the same is so rarely said about the leaders we have actually endured so far this century. Continuous self inflicted damage to weaken our economy, armed forces and societal cohesion. Such comprehensive damage that it’s hard to conceive how you might have done a better job if you were trying.
You quickly see how silly this game becomes. If intel had good evidence that Farage was a Russian agent, don’t you think by now they might have acted against him?
You think leaders have never been called traitors? Where is this land of civilised genteel discourse in which you’ve been living for the last X years?
On the intel point, they seemed pretty shit at identifying what Savile was up to as he cosied up to royals and PMs.
It is one thing to casually use words like traitor in a pejorative sense. It is another to specify they are a foreign agent. Don’t get me wrong, it would be a superlative 24 Season 5 style plot twist. But it seemed far fetched then and even more so now.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
He won’t be releasing his tax returns before the next general election and I expect the Maga UK crowd will be just fine with that !
Personally I find the release of tax returns a bit unseemly. An unfortunate import from America.
However, Farage is extremely well-off for someone who has spent his life in “public service”.
IIRC Farage got his start commodities trading. His transition to “public service” came much later.
It's outstandingly ignorant by Gardenwalker. Just chucking ordure around hoping a bit sticks. Truly desperate.
’m not saying England qualis against vastly inferior opposition are a waste of time but the lady in front of me spent most of the second half researching kettles #engand
Again, could anyone who managed to catch the Reform conference confirm whether Reform’s putative Home Affairs policy is to “set fire to the fucking hotels full of the bastards”?
I’m just curious.
I think their policy is to not have a policy as such, but they're not going to kick anyone out of bed for saying it.
You know how these charismatic leader parties have worked throughout history; the policy is whatever the leader says it is today. And if/when it goes pearshaped, it's the fault of the liberals.
Is it because everyone relentlessly treated Rayner herself like some special-needs child, a young, underprivileged woman who they secretly suspected couldn’t read or write? If you look at the way Starmer spoke about her, it was constantly in these terms: she was a woman, and working class.
Of her actual record, of course: no hint. She was the perfect deputy prime minister for him: a politician allowed to rise to the top on personality alone. And that personality was: middle-class person’s idea of what a working-class person should be. Slobby, ribald, partying in ’Beefa — isn’t vaping on inflatables what working-class people all do? Spoiler alert: it isn’t. Most working-class people are insulted to be compared to her.
Rayner was someone from the bottom 10% who moved into the top 10% through the Labour party.
Its no wonder that Labour politicians, people who are obsessed about the top 10% and bottom 10% and very little in between, turned Rayner into their living icon.
Put the "scum" back in her box where she belongs? We need proper working class heroes like Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and Lucy Connolly.
Poshos at the top is the standard order of things, which is why nobody was bothered about the likes of Blair and Darling.
Whereas Rayner is disconcerting, having gone from bottom 10% to top 10%, entirely through the medium of the Labour party.
That appears great to Labour politicians who are obsessed about those at the top and those at the bottom.
But less so to the 80% who get the impression that Labour isn't interested in them.
There are, of course, other people who have gone from bottom 10% to top 10% - in sport, in entertainment, even in business. But these people leave a trail of visible achievement whereas Rayner was a pretty rubbish housing minister for a year.
Like I said.
She called you "scum" so you don't like her. Nonetheless I don't believe you can dismiss her achievement in becoming Deputy Prime Minister.
And don't forget, Boris got all the big calls right.
Johnson certainly got Ukraine and covid right but he was responsible, much like Rayner, for his own fall from grace
Such is politics
COVID?
Yes he invented the Oxford Zeneca vaccine but the rest?
I have questions relating to Ukraine from a decade back and prior to his last throw of the dice in 2022.
I do not expect you to give Johnson any credit, but it is widely recognised he did support Ukraine, even Ukrainians recognising it by naming a street after him, and on covid, if he had listened to Starmer we would probably be still in lockdown !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know it would be controversial, but Starmer could do an awful lot worse than to ask Boris Johnson to assist with the Ukraine negotiations, especially when it comes to mediating between the Ukranians and Americans.
Yes, he’s still absolutely loved in Ukraine for his actions at the start of the war.
I know you have a genuine personal interest, but really?
I am not entirely sure the Trump Presidency has been as optimal for Ukraine as you anticipated either. Maybe Putin's recent behaviour will turn Trump's head in the right direction eventually.
Johnson is someone known to both Trump and Zelensky, and trusted by both. I’m not sure there’s as much of a relationship between the US and Starmer’s team, given the current headlines over issues such as freedom of speeech.
I disagree with Trump’s approach to Ukraine, I could see what he was trying to do but it should have been obvious long ago that Putin was playing games and had no intention of wanting peace. Someone like Johnson could assist with a nudge or two in the right direction
I am careful not to be dismissive and I don't dispute Johnson's popularity in Ukraine, however he has never been a World statesman, despite suggesting in his book he is a Churchillian diplomat. And persuading Trump to do the right thing is possibly a big ask for even the most seasoned cat herder.
What Putin, and the bond markets, show is that the way you get Trump to do what you want is through fear.
The Canadians understood that. Sadly neither the Brits nor the EU have done, but that partly reflects the fact that Canada has its economic foot on the US throat (albeit at great cost to itself) more securely than we ever could have.
The other world player who understands his limited hand and plays it to the max is Erdogan. He’s a total arse, but he does play geopolitics well. We need to think of things we could threaten to withdraw (and intel sharing is surely one, as perhaps would be access to British military bases), like the Turks do on a regular basis.
I agree that Erdogan is a master of geopolitics, but he plays the game to advance Turkish interests. Damaging British relationships with other countries in order to advance the interests of a third country would not be the actions of a responsible Government.
I know your views of Ukraine and that its interests are not aligned with ours, but forming alliances and protecting geopolitically pivotal countries against European empires has been a significant part of British foreign policy, and very much in our own interests, since the Napoleonic wars.
It isn't that it's interests are not aligned with ours, or even that I think containing Russian ambitions with strong buffer states is a bad idea. It's that its importance within the array of security threats we face has been exploded out of all proportion because of its cause celebre status. Ever more virile statements of support for Ukraine against Russia have always earned our politicians lovely pats on the head. Opposing the ambitions of India, China, Turkey, or the Gulf States earns little but a baffled uncomprehending silence. And autonomy from the US only exists as a concept because of how much people hate Trump, and will be forgotten as soon as he leaves office.
About so many aspects of public life, including defence, we're just not at the races.
China is sucking up to Putin as is Turkey and Modi and the Saudis and UAE are hardly very anti him either, so containing Putin in Ukraine is also interlinked with containing them and especially containing China and North Korea
Weakening Putin via Ukraine is strengthening China.
Why? Putin and Xi are close allies, witness Putin's attendance at Xi's military parade last week.
If Ukraine fell that would also encourage Xi to attack Taiwan
In 2022 Ukraine defeated the Russian armed forces. It then through a long slog has more or less defeated the legacy Soviet armed forces. It is utterly unrealistic to think they can now defeat the Chinese. And I say Chinese given the money and materiel support they are providing, and even troops via its puppet proxy in North Korea.
So while what you say might not be untrue, what is your plan? To throw what probably numbers thousands of Ukrainian lives a month in a never-ending grind against a much larger enemy? But it would not be never ending would it, because eventually as the smaller country, Ukraine would have exhausted itself, and what then?
The original plan of routing the Russian army was taken off the table in autumn 2022, when they were allowed to retreat from Kherson. And we now know why. According to Bob Woodwood, the CIA increased the risk of “imminent nuclear exchange” to 50%, based upon “exquisite intelligence”. Which explains why successive US administrations and Europe at large has gulped at giving Ukraine the means to go full throttle. It’s easy to sit here and call world leaders fearty and come out with glib platitudes that Putin is just bluffing. But none of us have seen the “exquisite intelligence” nor know its source.
So it seems to me the only viable plan is something very far short of total victory for Ukraine but one that ensures national survival. The first steps to this outcome were taken last month but it will be very hard to get done, because Putin is a patient man who thinks he will live forever and is slowly winning. The maximalist defence arrangement from the West that Ukraine requires, also more or less rules out further westwards conquest for him. A very tight Meereenese Knot to untie indeed.
You are expecting the Chinese to deploy to Ukraine?
It’s rather pointless engaging with you, because you lack basic reading comprehension, yet alone foresight or original thought. Re-read what I wrote again if you are struggling. No I do not think the Chinese will deploy to Ukraine.
I did read it, thanks. "It is utterly unrealistic to think they can now defeat the Chinese. And I say Chinese given the money and materiel support they are providing, and even troops via its puppet proxy in North Korea."
Ukraine evidently *can* defeat that, as they've been doing it for many months now. Therefore I took your post to mean that China was going to go further. Which Xi will be *very* hesitant to do; and as might Kim in NK.
You might want to wonder what China's (actually, Xi's) preferred end-game in all of this is.
They aren’t defeating it, it’s a dishonest reading to say so. They are both grinding each other into the mud. And Putin is calculating that his iron fist, support from “axis” powers and much larger population will be able to withstand the grind before collapse longer than Ukraine can. Putin certainly might be wrong about this. But it’s utterly glib to believe with full confidence that he is.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
And with the current structure of Reform he can refuse to go anywhere. There is no current mechanism in Reform to remove the leader . It would be good if at some point the media would inform the public of this!
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
He won’t be releasing his tax returns before the next general election and I expect the Maga UK crowd will be just fine with that !
It’s such a simple thing behind an anonymous account to libel that a national political figure who has never held power, is a traitor. The strange thing is that the same is so rarely said about the leaders we have actually endured so far this century. Continuous self inflicted damage to weaken our economy, armed forces and societal cohesion. Such comprehensive damage that it’s hard to conceive how you might have done a better job if you were trying.
You quickly see how silly this game becomes. If intel had good evidence that Farage was a Russian agent, don’t you think by now they might have acted against him?
You think leaders have never been called traitors? Where is this land of civilised genteel discourse in which you’ve been living for the last X years?
On the intel point, they seemed pretty shit at identifying what Savile was up to as he cosied up to royals and PMs.
It is one thing to casually use words like traitor in a pejorative sense. It is another to specify they are a foreign agent. Don’t get me wrong, it would be a superlative 24 Season 5 style plot twist. But it seemed far fetched then and even more so now.
Again, could anyone who managed to catch the Reform conference confirm whether Reform’s putative Home Affairs policy is to “set fire to the fucking hotels full of the bastards”?
I’m just curious.
With the beatification and endorsement of St Lucy is it not obvious?
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
And with the current structure of Reform he can refuse to go anywhere. There is no current mechanism in Reform to remove the leader . It would be good if at some point the media would inform the public of this!
The way it would work, if it came to it, would be for a sufficient number of Reform MPs to leave the party. Drastic, and it may never happen, but it's the crucial check/balance that the UK system has- MPs have a mandate independent of their leader.
"Labour is dead" says Zara Sultana "Tories are dead" says Nadine Dorries
That's a lot of dead, if true. Along with many of the British virtues: moderation, unflappability, and a contempt for conmen, blowhards and toad-eaters.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
Is it because everyone relentlessly treated Rayner herself like some special-needs child, a young, underprivileged woman who they secretly suspected couldn’t read or write? If you look at the way Starmer spoke about her, it was constantly in these terms: she was a woman, and working class.
Of her actual record, of course: no hint. She was the perfect deputy prime minister for him: a politician allowed to rise to the top on personality alone. And that personality was: middle-class person’s idea of what a working-class person should be. Slobby, ribald, partying in ’Beefa — isn’t vaping on inflatables what working-class people all do? Spoiler alert: it isn’t. Most working-class people are insulted to be compared to her.
Rayner was someone from the bottom 10% who moved into the top 10% through the Labour party.
Its no wonder that Labour politicians, people who are obsessed about the top 10% and bottom 10% and very little in between, turned Rayner into their living icon.
Put the "scum" back in her box where she belongs? We need proper working class heroes like Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and Lucy Connolly.
Poshos at the top is the standard order of things, which is why nobody was bothered about the likes of Blair and Darling.
Whereas Rayner is disconcerting, having gone from bottom 10% to top 10%, entirely through the medium of the Labour party.
That appears great to Labour politicians who are obsessed about those at the top and those at the bottom.
But less so to the 80% who get the impression that Labour isn't interested in them.
There are, of course, other people who have gone from bottom 10% to top 10% - in sport, in entertainment, even in business. But these people leave a trail of visible achievement whereas Rayner was a pretty rubbish housing minister for a year.
Like I said.
She called you "scum" so you don't like her. Nonetheless I don't believe you can dismiss her achievement in becoming Deputy Prime Minister.
And don't forget, Boris got all the big calls right.
Johnson certainly got Ukraine and covid right but he was responsible, much like Rayner, for his own fall from grace
Such is politics
COVID?
Yes he invented the Oxford Zeneca vaccine but the rest?
I have questions relating to Ukraine from a decade back and prior to his last throw of the dice in 2022.
I do not expect you to give Johnson any credit, but it is widely recognised he did support Ukraine, even Ukrainians recognising it by naming a street after him, and on covid, if he had listened to Starmer we would probably be still in lockdown !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know it would be controversial, but Starmer could do an awful lot worse than to ask Boris Johnson to assist with the Ukraine negotiations, especially when it comes to mediating between the Ukranians and Americans.
Yes, he’s still absolutely loved in Ukraine for his actions at the start of the war.
I know you have a genuine personal interest, but really?
I am not entirely sure the Trump Presidency has been as optimal for Ukraine as you anticipated either. Maybe Putin's recent behaviour will turn Trump's head in the right direction eventually.
Johnson is someone known to both Trump and Zelensky, and trusted by both. I’m not sure there’s as much of a relationship between the US and Starmer’s team, given the current headlines over issues such as freedom of speeech.
I disagree with Trump’s approach to Ukraine, I could see what he was trying to do but it should have been obvious long ago that Putin was playing games and had no intention of wanting peace. Someone like Johnson could assist with a nudge or two in the right direction
I am careful not to be dismissive and I don't dispute Johnson's popularity in Ukraine, however he has never been a World statesman, despite suggesting in his book he is a Churchillian diplomat. And persuading Trump to do the right thing is possibly a big ask for even the most seasoned cat herder.
What Putin, and the bond markets, show is that the way you get Trump to do what you want is through fear.
The Canadians understood that. Sadly neither the Brits nor the EU have done, but that partly reflects the fact that Canada has its economic foot on the US throat (albeit at great cost to itself) more securely than we ever could have.
The other world player who understands his limited hand and plays it to the max is Erdogan. He’s a total arse, but he does play geopolitics well. We need to think of things we could threaten to withdraw (and intel sharing is surely one, as perhaps would be access to British military bases), like the Turks do on a regular basis.
I agree that Erdogan is a master of geopolitics, but he plays the game to advance Turkish interests. Damaging British relationships with other countries in order to advance the interests of a third country would not be the actions of a responsible Government.
I know your views of Ukraine and that its interests are not aligned with ours, but forming alliances and protecting geopolitically pivotal countries against European empires has been a significant part of British foreign policy, and very much in our own interests, since the Napoleonic wars.
It isn't that it's interests are not aligned with ours, or even that I think containing Russian ambitions with strong buffer states is a bad idea. It's that its importance within the array of security threats we face has been exploded out of all proportion because of its cause celebre status. Ever more virile statements of support for Ukraine against Russia have always earned our politicians lovely pats on the head. Opposing the ambitions of India, China, Turkey, or the Gulf States earns little but a baffled uncomprehending silence. And autonomy from the US only exists as a concept because of how much people hate Trump, and will be forgotten as soon as he leaves office.
About so many aspects of public life, including defence, we're just not at the races.
China is sucking up to Putin as is Turkey and Modi and the Saudis and UAE are hardly very anti him either, so containing Putin in Ukraine is also interlinked with containing them and especially containing China and North Korea
Weakening Putin via Ukraine is strengthening China.
Why? Putin and Xi are close allies, witness Putin's attendance at Xi's military parade last week.
If Ukraine fell that would also encourage Xi to attack Taiwan
In 2022 Ukraine defeated the Russian armed forces. It then through a long slog has more or less defeated the legacy Soviet armed forces. It is utterly unrealistic to think they can now defeat the Chinese. And I say Chinese given the money and materiel support they are providing, and even troops via its puppet proxy in North Korea.
So while what you say might not be untrue, what is your plan? To throw what probably numbers thousands of Ukrainian lives a month in a never-ending grind against a much larger enemy? But it would not be never ending would it, because eventually as the smaller country, Ukraine would have exhausted itself, and what then?
The original plan of routing the Russian army was taken off the table in autumn 2022, when they were allowed to retreat from Kherson. And we now know why. According to Bob Woodwood, the CIA increased the risk of “imminent nuclear exchange” to 50%, based upon “exquisite intelligence”. Which explains why successive US administrations and Europe at large has gulped at giving Ukraine the means to go full throttle. It’s easy to sit here and call world leaders fearty and come out with glib platitudes that Putin is just bluffing. But none of us have seen the “exquisite intelligence” nor know its source.
So it seems to me the only viable plan is something very far short of total victory for Ukraine but one that ensures national survival. The first steps to this outcome were taken last month but it will be very hard to get done, because Putin is a patient man who thinks he will live forever and is slowly winning. The maximalist defence arrangement from the West that Ukraine requires, also more or less rules out further westwards conquest for him. A very tight Meereenese Knot to untie indeed.
You are expecting the Chinese to deploy to Ukraine?
It’s rather pointless engaging with you, because you lack basic reading comprehension, yet alone foresight or original thought. Re-read what I wrote again if you are struggling. No I do not think the Chinese will deploy to Ukraine.
I did read it, thanks. "It is utterly unrealistic to think they can now defeat the Chinese. And I say Chinese given the money and materiel support they are providing, and even troops via its puppet proxy in North Korea."
Ukraine evidently *can* defeat that, as they've been doing it for many months now. Therefore I took your post to mean that China was going to go further. Which Xi will be *very* hesitant to do; and as might Kim in NK.
You might want to wonder what China's (actually, Xi's) preferred end-game in all of this is.
They aren’t defeating it, it’s a dishonest reading to say so. They are both grinding each other into the mud. And Putin is calculating that his iron fist, support from “axis” powers and much larger population will be able to withstand the grind before collapse longer than Ukraine can. Putin certainly might be wrong about this. But it’s utterly glib to believe with full confidence that he is.
I've never said with "full confidence" that Putin can withstand what he has wrought. I *hope* he doesn't; but my consistent call for us to do more shows that I don't have full confidence.
But Ukraine have defeated Russia's summer offensive *so far*, even with NK's overt help. There are rumours of a Russian autumn offensive, and we shall see how that goes, but if I were a Putinist, I would not have confidence.
I would love you to answer a question: what do you think China's (actually, Xi's) preferred end-game in all of this is?
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
He won’t be releasing his tax returns before the next general election and I expect the Maga UK crowd will be just fine with that !
It’s such a simple thing behind an anonymous account to libel that a national political figure who has never held power, is a traitor. The strange thing is that the same is so rarely said about the leaders we have actually endured so far this century. Continuous self inflicted damage to weaken our economy, armed forces and societal cohesion. Such comprehensive damage that it’s hard to conceive how you might have done a better job if you were trying.
You quickly see how silly this game becomes. If intel had good evidence that Farage was a Russian agent, don’t you think by now they might have acted against him?
I think you responded to the wrong post ! But yes in other posts I have called Farage a traitor because he wanted the US to inflict economic harm on the UK . And he’s a Putin stooge so that’s another tick in the traitor box . We’ve had admittedly some poor PMs in the past , bad decisions, poor economic management etc doesn’t make you a traitor. I loathed Bozo but would never call him a traitor .
Well as per the other conversation, there is far more nuance to the right course of action in Ukraine than most are willing to admit. Recognising so, does not make Farage a Putin stooge. It’s one thing to use the word in a joshing manner as you have, but quite another to specify without evidence or source that he is a foreign agent.
And the evidence of 2016-24 in the US is that it’s a very poor political strategy if you are trying to defeat an insurgent election candidate. Still time to come up with a strategy to beat Farage. But it needs a consistent period of utterly disciplined and effective governance in the way Max described above.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
And with the current structure of Reform he can refuse to go anywhere. There is no current mechanism in Reform to remove the leader . It would be good if at some point the media would inform the public of this!
The way it would work, if it came to it, would be for a sufficient number of Reform MPs to leave the party. Drastic, and it may never happen, but it's the crucial check/balance that the UK system has- MPs have a mandate independent of their leader.
40% of the original batch of Reform MPs have already left. One more and it will be a majority.
Weirdly the alert sounded in our shop payment terminal as well as my phone.
I didn't get it. My smartphone is only used as a small tablet so probably the number initially associated with it was reallocated long ago. But I'd forgotten about the test even though I'd been wondering whether it would get through to it.
Thanks for the reminder!
I didn’t get it, although the mobile is upstairs so maybe it isn’t that loud? Or perhaps being behind the hill on the edge of the UK protected us from the signal. When I was driving away from Asheville the morning the hurricane hit, last October, I certainly got tons of alerts, for the hurricane, for floods, and for tornadoes. I was already in the hurricane but didn’t actually run into any floods or tornadoes.
Is it because everyone relentlessly treated Rayner herself like some special-needs child, a young, underprivileged woman who they secretly suspected couldn’t read or write? If you look at the way Starmer spoke about her, it was constantly in these terms: she was a woman, and working class.
Of her actual record, of course: no hint. She was the perfect deputy prime minister for him: a politician allowed to rise to the top on personality alone. And that personality was: middle-class person’s idea of what a working-class person should be. Slobby, ribald, partying in ’Beefa — isn’t vaping on inflatables what working-class people all do? Spoiler alert: it isn’t. Most working-class people are insulted to be compared to her.
Rayner was someone from the bottom 10% who moved into the top 10% through the Labour party.
Its no wonder that Labour politicians, people who are obsessed about the top 10% and bottom 10% and very little in between, turned Rayner into their living icon.
Put the "scum" back in her box where she belongs? We need proper working class heroes like Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and Lucy Connolly.
Poshos at the top is the standard order of things, which is why nobody was bothered about the likes of Blair and Darling.
Whereas Rayner is disconcerting, having gone from bottom 10% to top 10%, entirely through the medium of the Labour party.
That appears great to Labour politicians who are obsessed about those at the top and those at the bottom.
But less so to the 80% who get the impression that Labour isn't interested in them.
There are, of course, other people who have gone from bottom 10% to top 10% - in sport, in entertainment, even in business. But these people leave a trail of visible achievement whereas Rayner was a pretty rubbish housing minister for a year.
Like I said.
She called you "scum" so you don't like her. Nonetheless I don't believe you can dismiss her achievement in becoming Deputy Prime Minister.
And don't forget, Boris got all the big calls right.
Johnson certainly got Ukraine and covid right but he was responsible, much like Rayner, for his own fall from grace
Such is politics
COVID?
Yes he invented the Oxford Zeneca vaccine but the rest?
I have questions relating to Ukraine from a decade back and prior to his last throw of the dice in 2022.
I do not expect you to give Johnson any credit, but it is widely recognised he did support Ukraine, even Ukrainians recognising it by naming a street after him, and on covid, if he had listened to Starmer we would probably be still in lockdown !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know it would be controversial, but Starmer could do an awful lot worse than to ask Boris Johnson to assist with the Ukraine negotiations, especially when it comes to mediating between the Ukranians and Americans.
Yes, he’s still absolutely loved in Ukraine for his actions at the start of the war.
I know you have a genuine personal interest, but really?
I am not entirely sure the Trump Presidency has been as optimal for Ukraine as you anticipated either. Maybe Putin's recent behaviour will turn Trump's head in the right direction eventually.
Johnson is someone known to both Trump and Zelensky, and trusted by both. I’m not sure there’s as much of a relationship between the US and Starmer’s team, given the current headlines over issues such as freedom of speeech.
I disagree with Trump’s approach to Ukraine, I could see what he was trying to do but it should have been obvious long ago that Putin was playing games and had no intention of wanting peace. Someone like Johnson could assist with a nudge or two in the right direction
I am careful not to be dismissive and I don't dispute Johnson's popularity in Ukraine, however he has never been a World statesman, despite suggesting in his book he is a Churchillian diplomat. And persuading Trump to do the right thing is possibly a big ask for even the most seasoned cat herder.
What Putin, and the bond markets, show is that the way you get Trump to do what you want is through fear.
The Canadians understood that. Sadly neither the Brits nor the EU have done, but that partly reflects the fact that Canada has its economic foot on the US throat (albeit at great cost to itself) more securely than we ever could have.
The other world player who understands his limited hand and plays it to the max is Erdogan. He’s a total arse, but he does play geopolitics well. We need to think of things we could threaten to withdraw (and intel sharing is surely one, as perhaps would be access to British military bases), like the Turks do on a regular basis.
I agree that Erdogan is a master of geopolitics, but he plays the game to advance Turkish interests. Damaging British relationships with other countries in order to advance the interests of a third country would not be the actions of a responsible Government.
I know your views of Ukraine and that its interests are not aligned with ours, but forming alliances and protecting geopolitically pivotal countries against European empires has been a significant part of British foreign policy, and very much in our own interests, since the Napoleonic wars.
It isn't that it's interests are not aligned with ours, or even that I think containing Russian ambitions with strong buffer states is a bad idea. It's that its importance within the array of security threats we face has been exploded out of all proportion because of its cause celebre status. Ever more virile statements of support for Ukraine against Russia have always earned our politicians lovely pats on the head. Opposing the ambitions of India, China, Turkey, or the Gulf States earns little but a baffled uncomprehending silence. And autonomy from the US only exists as a concept because of how much people hate Trump, and will be forgotten as soon as he leaves office.
About so many aspects of public life, including defence, we're just not at the races.
China is sucking up to Putin as is Turkey and Modi and the Saudis and UAE are hardly very anti him either, so containing Putin in Ukraine is also interlinked with containing them and especially containing China and North Korea
Weakening Putin via Ukraine is strengthening China.
Why? Putin and Xi are close allies, witness Putin's attendance at Xi's military parade last week.
If Ukraine fell that would also encourage Xi to attack Taiwan
Because it makes Russia growingly dependent on China, bringing its resources under their control.
Yes, China is, to paraphrase Sir Humphrey, providing every assistance to Russia short of actual help. Buying oil at huge discounts might ease the Kremlin's cash flow but not its wealth. More cynically, China might have adopted the suspected Bidenesque position of allowing Russia to bleed out. To go full conspiracist, China might have its eyes on Siberia, much of which used to be Chinese anyway. Siberia provides oil and mineral wealth that Taiwan, for all its symbolic value, does not.
A neutralised Russia, is something on which both Europe and China can agree.
Farage is certainly getting under the skin of a lot of people but as much as I dislike him and Reform he will only be put back in his box on policy
Sending women back to Afghanistan and Iran, not made up his mind on the children, tens of billions of pounds of unfunded tax cuts, virtually nobody with any experience of government but according to him today Nadine Dorries will resolve that, will all catch up on him
I believe it is time for Starmer to ignore him, and other politicians, and make a case on immigration and the economy that is believable and more importantly achieve visable results
No amount of mud slinging is going to take him down and only gives him more publicity
I genuinely believe that in the next 3 years he and Reform will be found out, but what follows on I have no idea
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
Farage is certainly getting under the skin of a lot of people but as much as I dislike him and Reform he will only be put back in his box on policy
Sending women back to Afghanistan and Iran, not made up his mind on the children, tens of billions of pounds of unfunded tax cuts, virtually nobody with any experience of government but according to him today Nadine Dorries will resolve that, will all catch up on him
I believe it is time for Starmer to ignore him, and other politicians, and make a case on immigration and the economy that is believable and more importantly achieve visable results
No amount of mud slinging is going to take him down and only gives him more publicity
I genuinely believe that in the next 3 years he and Reform will be found out, but what follows on I have no idea
Oh Jeremy Corbyn!
I'm joking! I've had more than enough flags for one day!
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Though Farage has boasted that he plans to fill government jobs with Trump style appointments from outside Parliament. That leaves around 300 restive Reform backbenchers. All of his previous vehicles have been given with spats and splits, and he has already lost 40% of the MPs that were elected as Reform just a year ago.
I suspect that a minority Reform government will struggle to outlast a lettuce, but even a majority one might struggle to outlast a cabbage.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
Because after trying to buck the checks and balances system, Johnson was chucked out for bucking the checks and balances system.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
But he left shortly afterwards. He resigned.
No, not Boris and the ethics committee, I think he ignored it when Priti Patel was found guilty by them.
But even if it was analogous to the end of Boris, I doubt Farage would quit, or his MPs would resign as the Cons did. He is more like Trump, and the norms don’t seem to apply, however much his detractors wish they did
Is it because everyone relentlessly treated Rayner herself like some special-needs child, a young, underprivileged woman who they secretly suspected couldn’t read or write? If you look at the way Starmer spoke about her, it was constantly in these terms: she was a woman, and working class.
Of her actual record, of course: no hint. She was the perfect deputy prime minister for him: a politician allowed to rise to the top on personality alone. And that personality was: middle-class person’s idea of what a working-class person should be. Slobby, ribald, partying in ’Beefa — isn’t vaping on inflatables what working-class people all do? Spoiler alert: it isn’t. Most working-class people are insulted to be compared to her.
Rayner was someone from the bottom 10% who moved into the top 10% through the Labour party.
Its no wonder that Labour politicians, people who are obsessed about the top 10% and bottom 10% and very little in between, turned Rayner into their living icon.
Put the "scum" back in her box where she belongs? We need proper working class heroes like Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and Lucy Connolly.
Poshos at the top is the standard order of things, which is why nobody was bothered about the likes of Blair and Darling.
Whereas Rayner is disconcerting, having gone from bottom 10% to top 10%, entirely through the medium of the Labour party.
That appears great to Labour politicians who are obsessed about those at the top and those at the bottom.
But less so to the 80% who get the impression that Labour isn't interested in them.
There are, of course, other people who have gone from bottom 10% to top 10% - in sport, in entertainment, even in business. But these people leave a trail of visible achievement whereas Rayner was a pretty rubbish housing minister for a year.
Like I said.
She called you "scum" so you don't like her. Nonetheless I don't believe you can dismiss her achievement in becoming Deputy Prime Minister.
And don't forget, Boris got all the big calls right.
Johnson certainly got Ukraine and covid right but he was responsible, much like Rayner, for his own fall from grace
Such is politics
COVID?
Yes he invented the Oxford Zeneca vaccine but the rest?
I have questions relating to Ukraine from a decade back and prior to his last throw of the dice in 2022.
I do not expect you to give Johnson any credit, but it is widely recognised he did support Ukraine, even Ukrainians recognising it by naming a street after him, and on covid, if he had listened to Starmer we would probably be still in lockdown !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know it would be controversial, but Starmer could do an awful lot worse than to ask Boris Johnson to assist with the Ukraine negotiations, especially when it comes to mediating between the Ukranians and Americans.
Yes, he’s still absolutely loved in Ukraine for his actions at the start of the war.
I know you have a genuine personal interest, but really?
I am not entirely sure the Trump Presidency has been as optimal for Ukraine as you anticipated either. Maybe Putin's recent behaviour will turn Trump's head in the right direction eventually.
Johnson is someone known to both Trump and Zelensky, and trusted by both. I’m not sure there’s as much of a relationship between the US and Starmer’s team, given the current headlines over issues such as freedom of speeech.
I disagree with Trump’s approach to Ukraine, I could see what he was trying to do but it should have been obvious long ago that Putin was playing games and had no intention of wanting peace. Someone like Johnson could assist with a nudge or two in the right direction
I am careful not to be dismissive and I don't dispute Johnson's popularity in Ukraine, however he has never been a World statesman, despite suggesting in his book he is a Churchillian diplomat. And persuading Trump to do the right thing is possibly a big ask for even the most seasoned cat herder.
What Putin, and the bond markets, show is that the way you get Trump to do what you want is through fear.
The Canadians understood that. Sadly neither the Brits nor the EU have done, but that partly reflects the fact that Canada has its economic foot on the US throat (albeit at great cost to itself) more securely than we ever could have.
The other world player who understands his limited hand and plays it to the max is Erdogan. He’s a total arse, but he does play geopolitics well. We need to think of things we could threaten to withdraw (and intel sharing is surely one, as perhaps would be access to British military bases), like the Turks do on a regular basis.
I agree that Erdogan is a master of geopolitics, but he plays the game to advance Turkish interests. Damaging British relationships with other countries in order to advance the interests of a third country would not be the actions of a responsible Government.
I know your views of Ukraine and that its interests are not aligned with ours, but forming alliances and protecting geopolitically pivotal countries against European empires has been a significant part of British foreign policy, and very much in our own interests, since the Napoleonic wars.
It isn't that it's interests are not aligned with ours, or even that I think containing Russian ambitions with strong buffer states is a bad idea. It's that its importance within the array of security threats we face has been exploded out of all proportion because of its cause celebre status. Ever more virile statements of support for Ukraine against Russia have always earned our politicians lovely pats on the head. Opposing the ambitions of India, China, Turkey, or the Gulf States earns little but a baffled uncomprehending silence. And autonomy from the US only exists as a concept because of how much people hate Trump, and will be forgotten as soon as he leaves office.
About so many aspects of public life, including defence, we're just not at the races.
China is sucking up to Putin as is Turkey and Modi and the Saudis and UAE are hardly very anti him either, so containing Putin in Ukraine is also interlinked with containing them and especially containing China and North Korea
Weakening Putin via Ukraine is strengthening China.
Why? Putin and Xi are close allies, witness Putin's attendance at Xi's military parade last week.
If Ukraine fell that would also encourage Xi to attack Taiwan
In 2022 Ukraine defeated the Russian armed forces. It then through a long slog has more or less defeated the legacy Soviet armed forces. It is utterly unrealistic to think they can now defeat the Chinese. And I say Chinese given the money and materiel support they are providing, and even troops via its puppet proxy in North Korea.
So while what you say might not be untrue, what is your plan? To throw what probably numbers thousands of Ukrainian lives a month in a never-ending grind against a much larger enemy? But it would not be never ending would it, because eventually as the smaller country, Ukraine would have exhausted itself, and what then?
The original plan of routing the Russian army was taken off the table in autumn 2022, when they were allowed to retreat from Kherson. And we now know why. According to Bob Woodwood, the CIA increased the risk of “imminent nuclear exchange” to 50%, based upon “exquisite intelligence”. Which explains why successive US administrations and Europe at large has gulped at giving Ukraine the means to go full throttle. It’s easy to sit here and call world leaders fearty and come out with glib platitudes that Putin is just bluffing. But none of us have seen the “exquisite intelligence” nor know its source.
So it seems to me the only viable plan is something very far short of total victory for Ukraine but one that ensures national survival. The first steps to this outcome were taken last month but it will be very hard to get done, because Putin is a patient man who thinks he will live forever and is slowly winning. The maximalist defence arrangement from the West that Ukraine requires, also more or less rules out further westwards conquest for him. A very tight Meereenese Knot to untie indeed.
You are expecting the Chinese to deploy to Ukraine?
It’s rather pointless engaging with you, because you lack basic reading comprehension, yet alone foresight or original thought. Re-read what I wrote again if you are struggling. No I do not think the Chinese will deploy to Ukraine.
I did read it, thanks. "It is utterly unrealistic to think they can now defeat the Chinese. And I say Chinese given the money and materiel support they are providing, and even troops via its puppet proxy in North Korea."
Ukraine evidently *can* defeat that, as they've been doing it for many months now. Therefore I took your post to mean that China was going to go further. Which Xi will be *very* hesitant to do; and as might Kim in NK.
You might want to wonder what China's (actually, Xi's) preferred end-game in all of this is.
They aren’t defeating it, it’s a dishonest reading to say so. They are both grinding each other into the mud. And Putin is calculating that his iron fist, support from “axis” powers and much larger population will be able to withstand the grind before collapse longer than Ukraine can. Putin certainly might be wrong about this. But it’s utterly glib to believe with full confidence that he is.
I've never said with "full confidence" that Putin can withstand what he has wrought. I *hope* he doesn't; but my consistent call for us to do more shows that I don't have full confidence.
But Ukraine have defeated Russia's summer offensive *so far*, even with NK's overt help. There are rumours of a Russian autumn offensive, and we shall see how that goes, but if I were a Putinist, I would not have confidence.
I would love you to answer a question: what do you think China's (actually, Xi's) preferred end-game in all of this is?
It is very hard to say. He comes from a very cautious tradition and I would be amazed if his goals included the conquest of Siberia. Even wrt Taiwan, it’s very far from clear he would be motivated to gamble on a sudden action to reclaim it ,unless he was pushed into a corner (domestic economic collapse or some external action).
That said he’s been ruthless in consolidating his domestic power. I’ve been previously very faintly acquainted with someone who at one time was flying so high they were a voting member of the National Congress that allowed the abolition of term limits but is now in a state of disappeared. There are many such examples. It’s uneducated guess work on any of our parts to try and predict Xi’s goals and actions, when those so much closer and with very much more to lose are so often failing to.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
But he left shortly afterwards. He resigned.
No, not Boris and the ethics committee, I think he ignored it when Priti Patel was found guilty by them.
But even if it was analogous to the end of Boris, I doubt Farage would quit, or his MPs would resign as the Cons did. He is more like Trump, and the norms don’t seem to apply, however much his detractors wish they did
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
But he left shortly afterwards. He resigned.
No, not Boris and the ethics committee, I think he ignored it when Priti Patel was found guilty by them.
But even if it was analogous to the end of Boris, I doubt Farage would quit, or his MPs would resign as the Cons did. He is more like Trump, and the norms don’t seem to apply, however much his detractors wish they did
Anyone interested in democracy and the rule of law should hope they apply.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
Because after trying to buck the checks and balances system, Johnson was chucked out for bucking the checks and balances system.
See my answer to Josias Jessop… and when I’ve got yourself and him interrogating me I know my best course of action.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
Because after trying to buck the checks and balances system, Johnson was chucked out for bucking the checks and balances system.
See my answer to Josias Jessop… and when I’ve got yourself and him interrogating me I know my best course of action.
See you all later!
The odd thing is that @Mexicanpete and myself don't agree on much!
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don’t know much at all about cellular mechanisms and mRNA so find it very hard to have an opinion beyond what we are told is the accepted view, which seems to be that the vaccines saved a lot of lives in the older age groups but should certainly not have been pushed out universally to children and younger adults.
But I have found it notable that more than one practicing doctor has wondered allowed to me at social events over the last couple of years whether there is a link to the mRNA vaccine tech and cancer.
We know who's had the vaccine. We know who gets cancer. You can look for any association. There is no link.
Farage is certainly getting under the skin of a lot of people but as much as I dislike him and Reform he will only be put back in his box on policy
Sending women back to Afghanistan and Iran, not made up his mind on the children, tens of billions of pounds of unfunded tax cuts, virtually nobody with any experience of government but according to him today Nadine Dorries will resolve that, will all catch up on him
I believe it is time for Starmer to ignore him, and other politicians, and make a case on immigration and the economy that is believable and more importantly achieve visable results
No amount of mud slinging is going to take him down and only gives him more publicity
I genuinely believe that in the next 3 years he and Reform will be found out, but what follows on I have no idea
Labour should just get on with governing as well as they can and seeing what the scores look like in 3 years. Farage has a clear problem with party management and has an awful lot of work to do to look remotely credibly credible versus a half competent alternative. He is winning now because his opponents are not exhibiting even that low level of competence.
Weirdly the alert sounded in our shop payment terminal as well as my phone.
I didn't get it. My smartphone is only used as a small tablet so probably the number initially associated with it was reallocated long ago. But I'd forgotten about the test even though I'd been wondering whether it would get through to it.
Thanks for the reminder!
I didn’t get it, although the mobile is upstairs so maybe it isn’t that loud? Or perhaps being behind the hill on the edge of the UK protected us from the signal. When I was driving away from Asheville the morning the hurricane hit, last October, I certainly got tons of alerts, for the hurricane, for floods, and for tornadoes. I was already in the hurricane but didn’t actually run into any floods or tornadoes.
I remember those threads. You made the right decision but it must have been touch & go.
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, brought to you from a warm, muggy island beneath the clouds:
“I have huge sympathy for Angela, but she had to go,” says one cabinet member close to the prime minister. Sir Keir had pledged a tougher standards regime and to be merciless in the removal of ministers, however mighty or popular, who transgressed. He could either stick to that pledge or start becoming a version of Boris Johnson with a neater haircut. He chose to be “Mr Rules”. There is probably a way back for her one day. In the meantime, she will have to decide whether to be a supportive presence on the backbenches or to make Sir Keir’s life even harder by becoming a sharp thorn in his side.
Many in the party’s ranks will see her as the victim of the hound dogs of the rightwing media. Some will seethe that Sir Keir has let Labour’s enemies take the scalp of a figure they admire. The glee her resignation has ignited among Labour’s foes – Nigel Farage brought forward his conference speech to have an instant gloat – is in part because she could make emotional connections with voters in a way few of the cabinet can.
On top of which, there is the potential for the contest for the vacant deputy leadership to become an unedifying spectacle that inflicts further harm to the battered reputation of the government.
Reshuffles are rarely enough by themselves to revive the fortunes of a flagging government, but Number 10 is evidently hoping that this will look like a decisive response that softens the sting of the Rayner resignation. One source of alarm for allies of Sir Keir is that the electorate of activists and trades unionists are much less likely to have an appetite for a Starmer loyalist than a yearning for someone to his left. The candidates will therefore tailor their messages accordingly.
These and other troublesome questions are already rumbling away just below the surface of the Labour party. In the worst case scenario for the prime minister, the contest becomes a competition to identify where he has gone most wrong, a referendum on welfare, fiscal and foreign policy, and a proxy vote of confidence in him. Loyalist ministers are right to worry about the threat that it brings all the anxieties about the government’s direction to a furious boil.
My "likes" ratio is in the toilet today. I have a plan!
Boris Johnson is without doubt the United Kingdom's greatest Prime Minister and should be returned to Downing Street this afternoon to sort out the mess everyone else has created.
I think I have a winning strategy.
I have you a like and a troll because that’s exactly what you deserve…
It was a joke That's two trolls in one post. It didn't deserve a like or a troll so take your like back.
Anyway I thought private accounts were no longer allowed so you can troll me for dobbing you in on this post.
Do I have a private account? I have no idea and I don’t really care one way or the other.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
Because after trying to buck the checks and balances system, Johnson was chucked out for bucking the checks and balances system.
See my answer to Josias Jessop… and when I’ve got yourself and him interrogating me I know my best course of action.
See you all later!
The odd thing is that @Mexicanpete and myself don't agree on much!
Perhaps he could simply have flagged me today like everyone else has done rather than take his bat and ball home.
I suspect calling out Farage when the time comes will have much the same result.
My "likes" ratio is in the toilet today. I have a plan!
Boris Johnson is without doubt the United Kingdom's greatest Prime Minister and should be returned to Downing Street this afternoon to sort out the mess everyone else has created.
I think I have a winning strategy.
I have you a like and a troll because that’s exactly what you deserve…
It was a joke That's two trolls in one post. It didn't deserve a like or a troll so take your like back.
Anyway I thought private accounts were no longer allowed so you can troll me for dobbing you in on this post.
Well I do care that you flagged me. If only I knew how to flag you!
"Labour is dead" says Zara Sultana "Tories are dead" says Nadine Dorries
That's a lot of dead, if true. Along with many of the British virtues: moderation, unflappability, and a contempt for conmen, blowhards and toad-eaters.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
Because after trying to buck the checks and balances system, Johnson was chucked out for bucking the checks and balances system.
See my answer to Josias Jessop… and when I’ve got yourself and him interrogating me I know my best course of action.
See you all later!
The odd thing is that @Mexicanpete and myself don't agree on much!
Perhaps he could simply have flagged me today like everyone else has done rather than take his bat and ball home.
I suspect calling out Farage when the time comes will have much the same result.
I haven't flagged you, nor would I because I do not use the flag button
Indeed in the years on this forum I haven't even thought of using it
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
Because after trying to buck the checks and balances system, Johnson was chucked out for bucking the checks and balances system.
See my answer to Josias Jessop… and when I’ve got yourself and him interrogating me I know my best course of action.
See you all later!
The odd thing is that @Mexicanpete and myself don't agree on much!
Perhaps he could simply have flagged me today like everyone else has done rather than take his bat and ball home.
I suspect calling out Farage when the time comes will have much the same result.
I haven't flagged you, nor would I because I do not use the flag button
Indeed in the years on this forum I haven't even thought of using it
I've never intended to use the flag button but my finger often catches it whilst scrolling.
Today’s Sunday Rawnsley, brought to you from a warm, muggy island beneath the clouds:
“I have huge sympathy for Angela, but she had to go,” says one cabinet member close to the prime minister. Sir Keir had pledged a tougher standards regime and to be merciless in the removal of ministers, however mighty or popular, who transgressed. He could either stick to that pledge or start becoming a version of Boris Johnson with a neater haircut. He chose to be “Mr Rules”. There is probably a way back for her one day. In the meantime, she will have to decide whether to be a supportive presence on the backbenches or to make Sir Keir’s life even harder by becoming a sharp thorn in his side.
Many in the party’s ranks will see her as the victim of the hound dogs of the rightwing media. Some will seethe that Sir Keir has let Labour’s enemies take the scalp of a figure they admire. The glee her resignation has ignited among Labour’s foes – Nigel Farage brought forward his conference speech to have an instant gloat – is in part because she could make emotional connections with voters in a way few of the cabinet can.
On top of which, there is the potential for the contest for the vacant deputy leadership to become an unedifying spectacle that inflicts further harm to the battered reputation of the government.
Reshuffles are rarely enough by themselves to revive the fortunes of a flagging government, but Number 10 is evidently hoping that this will look like a decisive response that softens the sting of the Rayner resignation. One source of alarm for allies of Sir Keir is that the electorate of activists and trades unionists are much less likely to have an appetite for a Starmer loyalist than a yearning for someone to his left. The candidates will therefore tailor their messages accordingly.
These and other troublesome questions are already rumbling away just below the surface of the Labour party. In the worst case scenario for the prime minister, the contest becomes a competition to identify where he has gone most wrong, a referendum on welfare, fiscal and foreign policy, and a proxy vote of confidence in him. Loyalist ministers are right to worry about the threat that it brings all the anxieties about the government’s direction to a furious boil.
Mr Rawnsley seems not to have noticed that all the anxieties about the government’s direction have already been brought to a furious boil by the voters.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don’t know much at all about cellular mechanisms and mRNA so find it very hard to have an opinion beyond what we are told is the accepted view, which seems to be that the vaccines saved a lot of lives in the older age groups but should certainly not have been pushed out universally to children and younger adults.
But I have found it notable that more than one practicing doctor has wondered allowed to me at social events over the last couple of years whether there is a link to the mRNA vaccine tech and cancer.
We know who's had the vaccine. We know who gets cancer. You can look for any association. There is no link.
vaccines saved a lot of lives in the older age groups but should certainly not have been pushed out universally to children and younger adults.
Rather, below about the age of 40, on an individual level the risk-benefit analysis was pretty marginal (and unfavourable as you got younger). However the benefits to society were significant (herd effect).
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
Because after trying to buck the checks and balances system, Johnson was chucked out for bucking the checks and balances system.
See my answer to Josias Jessop… and when I’ve got yourself and him interrogating me I know my best course of action.
See you all later!
The odd thing is that @Mexicanpete and myself don't agree on much!
Perhaps he could simply have flagged me today like everyone else has done rather than take his bat and ball home.
I suspect calling out Farage when the time comes will have much the same result.
I haven't flagged you, nor would I because I do not use the flag button
Indeed in the years on this forum I haven't even thought of using it
I've never intended to use the flag button but my finger often catches it whilst scrolling.
I doubt you have. The double click safeguard is almost foolproof. An accidental flag brings up a "troll" bar. If you ignore that the flag doesn't register. So in order to flag, the flagger would have to press the safeguard "troll" bar as well as the first tap.
Where did Farage’s girlfriend, Laure Ferrari, get enough money to buy an £850k flat outright?
When Farage met her she was a waitress, and she has spent such career as she’s had in the not-overly-remunerative world of think tanks, such as the Eurosceptic IDDE, where she diverted £400k of EU grant to UKIP in 2017.
Farage’s finances are extremely irregular.
Probably why he didn’t call for Rayner to be sacked because of her tax affairs, and doesn’t do so for anyone else. The difference is he’s not going to be sacked if it turns out he has ducked & dived
Surely when he becomes a Minister he will be measured on exactly the same metrics as Rayner. If he breaks the Ministerial code for irregularities on the flat purchase (I am sure he hasn't- sniggle) we would all demand his resignation. N'est pas?
Depends who ‘we’ is. I doubt Reform voters care, and the rest of his MPs would be unlikely to demand it either. Other parties may do, but I reckon he’d ignore them.
Sorry. "We" the voters.
I don’t think there is a collective ‘we’ that would
If checks and balances are ignored "we" have anarchy and/or Dictatorship.
I doubt it would have been anarchy or a dictatorship had Angela Rayner stayed in post. Why would there? Boris ignored the ethics committee and there wasn’t
Because after trying to buck the checks and balances system, Johnson was chucked out for bucking the checks and balances system.
See my answer to Josias Jessop… and when I’ve got yourself and him interrogating me I know my best course of action.
See you all later!
The odd thing is that @Mexicanpete and myself don't agree on much!
Perhaps he could simply have flagged me today like everyone else has done rather than take his bat and ball home.
I suspect calling out Farage when the time comes will have much the same result.
I haven't flagged you, nor would I because I do not use the flag button
Indeed in the years on this forum I haven't even thought of using it
I've never intended to use the flag button but my finger often catches it whilst scrolling.
I doubt you have. The double click safeguard is almost foolproof. An accidental flag brings up a "troll" bar. If you ignore that the flag doesn't register. So in order to flag, the flagger would have to press the safeguard "troll" bar as well as the first tap.
"Labour is dead" says Zara Sultana "Tories are dead" says Nadine Dorries
That's a lot of dead, if true. Along with many of the British virtues: moderation, unflappability, and a contempt for conmen, blowhards and toad-eaters.
If that happens it'll be entirely the fault of the politicians we've had over the last 20 years who haven't kept many of their promises.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don’t know much at all about cellular mechanisms and mRNA so find it very hard to have an opinion beyond what we are told is the accepted view, which seems to be that the vaccines saved a lot of lives in the older age groups but should certainly not have been pushed out universally to children and younger adults.
But I have found it notable that more than one practicing doctor has wondered allowed to me at social events over the last couple of years whether there is a link to the mRNA vaccine tech and cancer.
We know who's had the vaccine. We know who gets cancer. You can look for any association. There is no link.
vaccines saved a lot of lives in the older age groups but should certainly not have been pushed out universally to children and younger adults.
Rather, below about the age of 40, on an individual level the risk-benefit analysis was pretty marginal (and unfavourable as you got younger). However the benefits to society were significant (herd effect).
“Certainly not” is way too strong
There's also the point that the personal benefits of vaccines for younger cohorts were different at different times: is COVID rampant, with hospitals full and paxlovid still on the horizon? At which point, if vaccines were available, I suspect they would have been a net positive for almost everyone.
Alternatively, are we in a world where almost everyone has had Covid, and therefore viral shedding is likely to be more modest, where paxlovid is widely available, and where there is plenty of hospital capacity. That's a very different situation.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Yes, that's very much the strategy. A bit like the Tories in 2005 "are you thinking what we're thinking?" Only much darker.
A Dutch salute to the conspiracy theorists, but deniability to the media.
MAGA style "dictator on day one" is to be kept under cover, at least for now.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Free Speech, innit.
It won't get directly reported by unsympathetic journos though, as they were banned.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Free Speech, innit.
It won't get directly reported by unsympathetic journos though, as they were banned.
Remember: many of those who screech "freedom of speech!" are actually crying: "Control of speech!"
Mainly control of anyone's speech aside from their own. Because their speech matters; yours does not.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Yes, that's very much the strategy. A bit like the Tories in 2005 "are you thinking what we're thinking?" Only much darker.
A Dutch salute to the conspiracy theorists, but deniability to the media.
MAGA style "dictator on day one" is to be kept under cover, at least for now.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Free Speech, innit.
It won't get directly reported by unsympathetic journos though, as they were banned.
As much as I found the topic of the particular speech unpleasant, wasn't the whole thing broadcast live? Banned or not, they can still report on it.
"Labour is dead" says Zara Sultana "Tories are dead" says Nadine Dorries
That's a lot of dead, if true. Along with many of the British virtues: moderation, unflappability, and a contempt for conmen, blowhards and toad-eaters.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Yes, that's very much the strategy. A bit like the Tories in 2005 "are you thinking what we're thinking?" Only much darker.
A Dutch salute to the conspiracy theorists, but deniability to the media.
MAGA style "dictator on day one" is to be kept under cover, at least for now.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Yes, that's very much the strategy. A bit like the Tories in 2005 "are you thinking what we're thinking?" Only much darker.
A Dutch salute to the conspiracy theorists, but deniability to the media.
MAGA style "dictator on day one" is to be kept under cover, at least for now.
How does this correspond to 2005?
That was the Tory campaign slogan in 2005.
Yes. And what are you reading into it wrt the current situation?
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Or turn it into a positive even.
"We don't censor anybody here. We believe in free speech. Unlike Keir Starmer who locks people up for speaking their mind we encourage it."
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Yes, that's very much the strategy. A bit like the Tories in 2005 "are you thinking what we're thinking?" Only much darker.
A Dutch salute to the conspiracy theorists, but deniability to the media.
MAGA style "dictator on day one" is to be kept under cover, at least for now.
How does this correspond to 2005?
That was the Tory campaign slogan in 2005.
Yes. And what are you reading into it wrt the current situation?
That Reform are happy to have conspiracy theorists on side (thanks to Social Media these are 15%+ of the electorate) by platforming these people, but maintaining plausible deniability when called out on it.
"Labour is dead" says Zara Sultana "Tories are dead" says Nadine Dorries
That's a lot of dead, if true. Along with many of the British virtues: moderation, unflappability, and a contempt for conmen, blowhards and toad-eaters.
Christine Keeler applies, perhaps.
Do you mean Mandy Rice-Davies?
Fun fact, Christine Keeler shared a peter with Wes Streeting's granny. (Translation: they were in HMP Holloway together.)
There were 890 people arrested at a demonstration against the ban on the group Palestine Action in London on Saturday, the Metropolitan Police say.
The majority of the arrests were for supporting a proscribed group under the Terrorism Act, while police said 17 were also arrested for assaults on police officers "after the protest turned violent".
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Yes, that's very much the strategy. A bit like the Tories in 2005 "are you thinking what we're thinking?" Only much darker.
A Dutch salute to the conspiracy theorists, but deniability to the media.
MAGA style "dictator on day one" is to be kept under cover, at least for now.
How does this correspond to 2005?
That was the Tory campaign slogan in 2005.
Yes. And what are you reading into it wrt the current situation?
That Reform are happy to have conspiracy theorists on side (thanks to Social Media these are 15%+ of the electorate) by platforming these people, but maintaining plausible deniability when called out on it.
You see a cunning plan. I reckon it is simply that Nigel Farage has spent too much time in America and has forgotten Reform followers are not MAGA.
There were 890 people arrested at a demonstration against the ban on the group Palestine Action in London on Saturday, the Metropolitan Police say.
The majority of the arrests were for supporting a proscribed group under the Terrorism Act, while police said 17 were also arrested for assaults on police officers "after the protest turned violent".
Now if Farage wants to bang on about curtailment of free speech regarding Palestine Action I'm right behind him. Although I suspect that is the wrong kind of free speech.
"Labour is dead" says Zara Sultana "Tories are dead" says Nadine Dorries
That's a lot of dead, if true. Along with many of the British virtues: moderation, unflappability, and a contempt for conmen, blowhards and toad-eaters.
Christine Keeler applies, perhaps.
Do you mean Mandy Rice-Davies?
Fun fact, Christine Keeler shared a peter with Wes Streeting's granny. (Translation: they were in HMP Holloway together.)
I'm sure Christine Keeler said something that fits, too.
"Labour is dead" says Zara Sultana "Tories are dead" says Nadine Dorries
That's a lot of dead, if true. Along with many of the British virtues: moderation, unflappability, and a contempt for conmen, blowhards and toad-eaters.
Christine Keeler applies, perhaps.
Do you mean Mandy Rice-Davies?
Fun fact, Christine Keeler shared a peter with Wes Streeting's granny. (Translation: they were in HMP Holloway together.)
I'm sure Christine Keeler said something that fits, too.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Yes, that's very much the strategy. A bit like the Tories in 2005 "are you thinking what we're thinking?" Only much darker.
A Dutch salute to the conspiracy theorists, but deniability to the media.
MAGA style "dictator on day one" is to be kept under cover, at least for now.
How does this correspond to 2005?
That was the Tory campaign slogan in 2005.
Yes. And what are you reading into it wrt the current situation?
That Reform are happy to have conspiracy theorists on side (thanks to Social Media these are 15%+ of the electorate) by platforming these people, but maintaining plausible deniability when called out on it.
Here's a report from the time (which makes an interesting comparison with today by the way).
'Driving out of the Sainsbury's car park with the weekly groceries, you now pass a large and prominent political billboard. "Are you thinking what we're thinking?" it asks. Then it explains: "It's not racist to impose limits on immigration."
It is only a single Conservative poster. And the election is probably still 58 days away. A lot can happen between now and then. But that billboard makes me uncomfortable. What is this country really thinking? [...]'
Edit: and of course immigration *was* limited at the time, surely.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Yes, that's very much the strategy. A bit like the Tories in 2005 "are you thinking what we're thinking?" Only much darker.
A Dutch salute to the conspiracy theorists, but deniability to the media.
MAGA style "dictator on day one" is to be kept under cover, at least for now.
How does this correspond to 2005?
That was the Tory campaign slogan in 2005.
Yes. And what are you reading into it wrt the current situation?
That Reform are happy to have conspiracy theorists on side (thanks to Social Media these are 15%+ of the electorate) by platforming these people, but maintaining plausible deniability when called out on it.
Here's a report from the time (which makes an interesting comparison with today by the way).
'Driving out of the Sainsbury's car park with the weekly groceries, you now pass a large and prominent political billboard. "Are you thinking what we're thinking?" it asks. Then it explains: "It's not racist to impose limits on immigration."
It is only a single Conservative poster. And the election is probably still 58 days away. A lot can happen between now and then. But that billboard makes me uncomfortable. What is this country really thinking? [...]'
Edit: and of course immigration *was* limited at the time, surely.
At the risk of returning to the well, FoM was unlimited. Unless you count the population of the bloc as a limit.
Though, of course, the Tories were not proposing to limit that.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Yes, that's very much the strategy. A bit like the Tories in 2005 "are you thinking what we're thinking?" Only much darker.
A Dutch salute to the conspiracy theorists, but deniability to the media.
MAGA style "dictator on day one" is to be kept under cover, at least for now.
How does this correspond to 2005?
That was the Tory campaign slogan in 2005.
Yes. And what are you reading into it wrt the current situation?
That Reform are happy to have conspiracy theorists on side (thanks to Social Media these are 15%+ of the electorate) by platforming these people, but maintaining plausible deniability when called out on it.
You see a cunning plan. I reckon it is simply that Nigel Farage has spent too much time in America and has forgotten Reform followers are not MAGA.
Yes, that could be true too.
All party leaders need to strike a balance that keeps together MPs, activists and voters, all of which have divergent interests, to get them singing off the same hymn sheet is what leadership is about.
Farage has particular difficulty because the 3 have very divergent desires. The MPs (and financial backers) want low taxes, no environmental or consumer protections and no rights for employees. The activists want anti-climate science, anti-vaxxing, and no darkies, particularly Muslim ones, the voters want stable communities with well paid blue collar jobs and welfare state.
Farage may well keep them together long enough to get elected, but the probability of outlasting a lettuce as PM is very dependent on his skills in people management. That is an area that he has consistently been very poor at.
Is it because everyone relentlessly treated Rayner herself like some special-needs child, a young, underprivileged woman who they secretly suspected couldn’t read or write? If you look at the way Starmer spoke about her, it was constantly in these terms: she was a woman, and working class.
Of her actual record, of course: no hint. She was the perfect deputy prime minister for him: a politician allowed to rise to the top on personality alone. And that personality was: middle-class person’s idea of what a working-class person should be. Slobby, ribald, partying in ’Beefa — isn’t vaping on inflatables what working-class people all do? Spoiler alert: it isn’t. Most working-class people are insulted to be compared to her.
Rayner was someone from the bottom 10% who moved into the top 10% through the Labour party.
Its no wonder that Labour politicians, people who are obsessed about the top 10% and bottom 10% and very little in between, turned Rayner into their living icon.
Put the "scum" back in her box where she belongs? We need proper working class heroes like Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and Lucy Connolly.
Poshos at the top is the standard order of things, which is why nobody was bothered about the likes of Blair and Darling.
Whereas Rayner is disconcerting, having gone from bottom 10% to top 10%, entirely through the medium of the Labour party.
That appears great to Labour politicians who are obsessed about those at the top and those at the bottom.
But less so to the 80% who get the impression that Labour isn't interested in them.
There are, of course, other people who have gone from bottom 10% to top 10% - in sport, in entertainment, even in business. But these people leave a trail of visible achievement whereas Rayner was a pretty rubbish housing minister for a year.
Like I said.
She called you "scum" so you don't like her. Nonetheless I don't believe you can dismiss her achievement in becoming Deputy Prime Minister.
And don't forget, Boris got all the big calls right.
Johnson certainly got Ukraine and covid right but he was responsible, much like Rayner, for his own fall from grace
Such is politics
Johnson got Covid right for everyone else but not for himself. Having had it, you'd have thought he'd have been more careful.
He got the PPE fast lane right for the friends and family of Ministers, and Dido Harding was deservedly rewarded for her contribution.
And you might want to look at the 'companies' that Labour MPs were calling about them not using. Some of which were (ahem) interesting.
We needed PPE. We could either get PPE quickly or efficiently. There was zero chance of quickly *and* efficiently.
One reason for the panic was the oft-lauded Jeremy Hunt had failed to stockpile PPE as recommended.
IIRC the 'stockpile' that was recommended was a tiny fraction of the actual need. It would have helped a little, but the same problems would have persisted.
(Is there data for this somewhere?)
TBF the figure that got through to the final draft of the report. For all we know, it might have been watered down from the prima facie sums to stop shocking the horses even more.
Edit: but another way of doing it would be to consider how long the shelf life is vs consumption rate, and at least hold enough to be consumed within the shelf life. I seem to recall that even that sort of cycling was not implemented in normal times - can't recall why.
The problem with stockpiling PPE is that “modern practises” is to use biodegradable plastics in disposable gowns etc.
The French tried using slightly time expired stuff - it literally fell apart.
So you have fairly short life spans - which means that rotating a stockpile for a COVID like event is impractical. You won’t be normally using enough from the stockpile to stop most of it rotting.
So you have 3 choices
1) small stockpile 2) large stockpile and bin vast quantities every day. 3) move to reusable materials.
In addition, many of these “biodegradable” plastics leave a residue of microscopic plastic in the environment which is a big issue.
The answer, it seems to me, is (3). The objection are
1) We don’t do that 2) it’s uncomfortable 3) cleaning is an issue
1) is farcical.
2) is answered by the huge improvements in recent years - I’ve use welding stuff (some welding gives off extremely toxic fumes) that is a *pleasure* to wear in hot weather. It includes belt mounted forced air which goes through a filter - you have personal air conditioning. The visors have built in anti fogging, and the dams/seals can be 3D printed to fit various face structures. Some units include microphone/speaker systems to aid communication - no muffled voices.
3) is answered by jumps in materials technology - stuff that can resist powerful cleaning chemicals - just drop it in a garbage bin full of stuff, let it soak for a few minutes, then wash it off with a pressure washer (or similar)
It’s worth wondering what will happen if we hit a real airborne disease. The existing patchwork of masks, visors and plastic gowns is full of gaps….
England seal biggest winning margin in ODI history
Cricket's a funny old game, though?
In the first ODI, we looked wretched and South Africa were clearly superior. In the second, the teams were pretty level and it was a close finish and today we were superb and the Saffers were awful.
I'd rather bet on an all-weather seller at Lingfield in January - much more predictable.
"Labour is dead" says Zara Sultana "Tories are dead" says Nadine Dorries
That's a lot of dead, if true. Along with many of the British virtues: moderation, unflappability, and a contempt for conmen, blowhards and toad-eaters.
Christine Keeler applies, perhaps.
Do you mean Mandy Rice-Davies?
Fun fact, Christine Keeler shared a peter with Wes Streeting's granny. (Translation: they were in HMP Holloway together.)
I'm sure Christine Keeler said something that fits, too.
There were 890 people arrested at a demonstration against the ban on the group Palestine Action in London on Saturday, the Metropolitan Police say.
The majority of the arrests were for supporting a proscribed group under the Terrorism Act, while police said 17 were also arrested for assaults on police officers "after the protest turned violent".
I think there is some talk of the accused refusing the bail conditions and therefore clogging up remand with thousands of pensioners.
The excuse Government ministers are now giving for the arrests that there is something that they are unable to disclose to us something that makes supporting Palestine Action a genuinely awful terrorist activity. Now, there might be something some members of the core group have planned to do, like killing a soldier or burning a synagogue, but how the hell are these protestors supposed to know that?
There are going to be loads of pensioners coming up in front of a judge who - for the first time - finally find out the nature of the group they are supporting as the CPS/Crown Office makes a case behind closed doors. Surely there is something for the defence there? Or worse - ministers have simply made this up and there is no real underlying reason for it, and they are just trying to scare people into not protesting with these vague allusions.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
WTF did they expect by putting a vax denier on stage at their conference? Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Yes, that's very much the strategy. A bit like the Tories in 2005 "are you thinking what we're thinking?" Only much darker.
A Dutch salute to the conspiracy theorists, but deniability to the media.
MAGA style "dictator on day one" is to be kept under cover, at least for now.
How does this correspond to 2005?
That was the Tory campaign slogan in 2005.
Yes. And what are you reading into it wrt the current situation?
That Reform are happy to have conspiracy theorists on side (thanks to Social Media these are 15%+ of the electorate) by platforming these people, but maintaining plausible deniability when called out on it.
You see a cunning plan. I reckon it is simply that Nigel Farage has spent too much time in America and has forgotten Reform followers are not MAGA.
Yes, that could be true too.
All party leaders need to strike a balance that keeps together MPs, activists and voters, all of which have divergent interests, to get them singing off the same hymn sheet is what leadership is about.
Farage has particular difficulty because the 3 have very divergent desires. The MPs (and financial backers) want low taxes, no environmental or consumer protections and no rights for employees. The activists want anti-climate science, anti-vaxxing, and no darkies, particularly Muslim ones, the voters want stable communities with well paid blue collar jobs and welfare state.
Farage may well keep them together long enough to get elected, but the probability of outlasting a lettuce as PM is very dependent on his skills in people management. That is an area that he has consistently been very poor at.
Every party winning an election has to assemble a coalition and very often these coalitions contain divergent elements or rather, as you say, groups with different and even contradictory aims who see the party as a vehicle to obtaining these aims.
That's probably true of most parties most of the time.
I mentioned the divergenvce between the Reform leadership and its voter base in advance of the 2024 election and the truth is immigration is the only glue binding the party together. Yes, you could argue there is a broad socially conservative concensus as well (though I'm not convinced) and certainly on economics (tax and spending) there is a clear split between the Thatcherite leadership and those supporters who come from the "old Labour" background and who want money spent on and in the WWC communities rather than on asylum seekers (for example).
The implosion of the 2019 Conservative coalition showed what can happen to a seemingly unstoppable voting bloc when the Government can't or won't deliver.
Sadly I was not able to catch much of the Reform conference footage.
Was it established whether it is official policy that vaccines gave the King and Princess of Wales cancer?
I don't think it is. They put Dr Assem Malhotra on the platform. Here's his speech (the Telegraph have the whole thing recorded live). 15 mniutes long.
Is it because everyone relentlessly treated Rayner herself like some special-needs child, a young, underprivileged woman who they secretly suspected couldn’t read or write? If you look at the way Starmer spoke about her, it was constantly in these terms: she was a woman, and working class.
Of her actual record, of course: no hint. She was the perfect deputy prime minister for him: a politician allowed to rise to the top on personality alone. And that personality was: middle-class person’s idea of what a working-class person should be. Slobby, ribald, partying in ’Beefa — isn’t vaping on inflatables what working-class people all do? Spoiler alert: it isn’t. Most working-class people are insulted to be compared to her.
Rayner was someone from the bottom 10% who moved into the top 10% through the Labour party.
Its no wonder that Labour politicians, people who are obsessed about the top 10% and bottom 10% and very little in between, turned Rayner into their living icon.
Put the "scum" back in her box where she belongs? We need proper working class heroes like Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and Lucy Connolly.
Poshos at the top is the standard order of things, which is why nobody was bothered about the likes of Blair and Darling.
Whereas Rayner is disconcerting, having gone from bottom 10% to top 10%, entirely through the medium of the Labour party.
That appears great to Labour politicians who are obsessed about those at the top and those at the bottom.
But less so to the 80% who get the impression that Labour isn't interested in them.
There are, of course, other people who have gone from bottom 10% to top 10% - in sport, in entertainment, even in business. But these people leave a trail of visible achievement whereas Rayner was a pretty rubbish housing minister for a year.
Like I said.
She called you "scum" so you don't like her. Nonetheless I don't believe you can dismiss her achievement in becoming Deputy Prime Minister.
And don't forget, Boris got all the big calls right.
Johnson certainly got Ukraine and covid right but he was responsible, much like Rayner, for his own fall from grace
Such is politics
Johnson got Covid right for everyone else but not for himself. Having had it, you'd have thought he'd have been more careful.
He got the PPE fast lane right for the friends and family of Ministers, and Dido Harding was deservedly rewarded for her contribution.
And you might want to look at the 'companies' that Labour MPs were calling about them not using. Some of which were (ahem) interesting.
We needed PPE. We could either get PPE quickly or efficiently. There was zero chance of quickly *and* efficiently.
One reason for the panic was the oft-lauded Jeremy Hunt had failed to stockpile PPE as recommended.
IIRC the 'stockpile' that was recommended was a tiny fraction of the actual need. It would have helped a little, but the same problems would have persisted.
(Is there data for this somewhere?)
TBF the figure that got through to the final draft of the report. For all we know, it might have been watered down from the prima facie sums to stop shocking the horses even more.
Edit: but another way of doing it would be to consider how long the shelf life is vs consumption rate, and at least hold enough to be consumed within the shelf life. I seem to recall that even that sort of cycling was not implemented in normal times - can't recall why.
The problem with stockpiling PPE is that “modern practises” is to use biodegradable plastics in disposable gowns etc.
The French tried using slightly time expired stuff - it literally fell apart.
So you have fairly short life spans - which means that rotating a stockpile for a COVID like event is impractical. You won’t be normally using enough from the stockpile to stop most of it rotting.
So you have 3 choices
1) small stockpile 2) large stockpile and bin vast quantities every day. 3) move to reusable materials.
In addition, many of these “biodegradable” plastics leave a residue of microscopic plastic in the environment which is a big issue.
The answer, it seems to me, is (3). The objection are
1) We don’t do that 2) it’s uncomfortable 3) cleaning is an issue
1) is farcical.
2) is answered by the huge improvements in recent years - I’ve use welding stuff (some welding gives off extremely toxic fumes) that is a *pleasure* to wear in hot weather. It includes belt mounted forced air which goes through a filter - you have personal air conditioning. The visors have built in anti fogging, and the dams/seals can be 3D printed to fit various face structures. Some units include microphone/speaker systems to aid communication - no muffled voices.
3) is answered by jumps in materials technology - stuff that can resist powerful cleaning chemicals - just drop it in a garbage bin full of stuff, let it soak for a few minutes, then wash it off with a pressure washer (or similar)
It’s worth wondering what will happen if we hit a real airborne disease. The existing patchwork of masks, visors and plastic gowns is full of gaps….
Cross infections massively reduced as a result of the shift to single use hospital products, your suggestion is a massive backwards step
"Labour is dead" says Zara Sultana "Tories are dead" says Nadine Dorries
That's a lot of dead, if true. Along with many of the British virtues: moderation, unflappability, and a contempt for conmen, blowhards and toad-eaters.
Christine Keeler applies, perhaps.
Do you mean Mandy Rice-Davies?
Fun fact, Christine Keeler shared a peter with Wes Streeting's granny. (Translation: they were in HMP Holloway together.)
I'm sure Christine Keeler said something that fits, too.
"My, my Yevgeny that's a monster".
LOL. Actually John Poulson was reputed to have a huge majority.
There were 890 people arrested at a demonstration against the ban on the group Palestine Action in London on Saturday, the Metropolitan Police say.
The majority of the arrests were for supporting a proscribed group under the Terrorism Act, while police said 17 were also arrested for assaults on police officers "after the protest turned violent".
I think there is some talk of the accused refusing the bail conditions and therefore clogging up remand with thousands of pensioners.
The excuse Government ministers are now giving for the arrests that there is something that they are unable to disclose to us something that makes supporting Palestine Action a genuinely awful terrorist activity. Now, there might be something some members of the core group have planned to do, like killing a soldier or burning a synagogue, but how the hell are these protestors supposed to know that?
There are going to be loads of pensioners coming up in front of a judge who - for the first time - finally find out the nature of the group they are supporting as the CPS/Crown Office makes a case behind closed doors. Surely there is something for the defence there? Or worse - ministers have simply made this up and there is no real underlying reason for it, and they are just trying to scare people into not protesting with these vague allusions.
I don't actually get what they are protesting about. It's not Palestine/Gaza per se, because you can protest about that just fine, every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Is it free speech? I bet none of them cared a fig for Connolly. Is it government overstepping the mark? I can understand if people don't trust the government. The Southport case had huge issues with that. I also sense that even if it does come out that P A were planning a 'genuine' act a lot of this mob wouldn't care, just as many reformers are in love with Connolly.
Is it because everyone relentlessly treated Rayner herself like some special-needs child, a young, underprivileged woman who they secretly suspected couldn’t read or write? If you look at the way Starmer spoke about her, it was constantly in these terms: she was a woman, and working class.
Of her actual record, of course: no hint. She was the perfect deputy prime minister for him: a politician allowed to rise to the top on personality alone. And that personality was: middle-class person’s idea of what a working-class person should be. Slobby, ribald, partying in ’Beefa — isn’t vaping on inflatables what working-class people all do? Spoiler alert: it isn’t. Most working-class people are insulted to be compared to her.
Rayner was someone from the bottom 10% who moved into the top 10% through the Labour party.
Its no wonder that Labour politicians, people who are obsessed about the top 10% and bottom 10% and very little in between, turned Rayner into their living icon.
Put the "scum" back in her box where she belongs? We need proper working class heroes like Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and Lucy Connolly.
Poshos at the top is the standard order of things, which is why nobody was bothered about the likes of Blair and Darling.
Whereas Rayner is disconcerting, having gone from bottom 10% to top 10%, entirely through the medium of the Labour party.
That appears great to Labour politicians who are obsessed about those at the top and those at the bottom.
But less so to the 80% who get the impression that Labour isn't interested in them.
There are, of course, other people who have gone from bottom 10% to top 10% - in sport, in entertainment, even in business. But these people leave a trail of visible achievement whereas Rayner was a pretty rubbish housing minister for a year.
Like I said.
She called you "scum" so you don't like her. Nonetheless I don't believe you can dismiss her achievement in becoming Deputy Prime Minister.
And don't forget, Boris got all the big calls right.
Johnson certainly got Ukraine and covid right but he was responsible, much like Rayner, for his own fall from grace
Such is politics
Johnson got Covid right for everyone else but not for himself. Having had it, you'd have thought he'd have been more careful.
He got the PPE fast lane right for the friends and family of Ministers, and Dido Harding was deservedly rewarded for her contribution.
And you might want to look at the 'companies' that Labour MPs were calling about them not using. Some of which were (ahem) interesting.
We needed PPE. We could either get PPE quickly or efficiently. There was zero chance of quickly *and* efficiently.
One reason for the panic was the oft-lauded Jeremy Hunt had failed to stockpile PPE as recommended.
IIRC the 'stockpile' that was recommended was a tiny fraction of the actual need. It would have helped a little, but the same problems would have persisted.
(Is there data for this somewhere?)
TBF the figure that got through to the final draft of the report. For all we know, it might have been watered down from the prima facie sums to stop shocking the horses even more.
Edit: but another way of doing it would be to consider how long the shelf life is vs consumption rate, and at least hold enough to be consumed within the shelf life. I seem to recall that even that sort of cycling was not implemented in normal times - can't recall why.
The problem with stockpiling PPE is that “modern practises” is to use biodegradable plastics in disposable gowns etc.
The French tried using slightly time expired stuff - it literally fell apart.
So you have fairly short life spans - which means that rotating a stockpile for a COVID like event is impractical. You won’t be normally using enough from the stockpile to stop most of it rotting.
So you have 3 choices
1) small stockpile 2) large stockpile and bin vast quantities every day. 3) move to reusable materials.
In addition, many of these “biodegradable” plastics leave a residue of microscopic plastic in the environment which is a big issue.
The answer, it seems to me, is (3). The objection are
1) We don’t do that 2) it’s uncomfortable 3) cleaning is an issue
1) is farcical.
2) is answered by the huge improvements in recent years - I’ve use welding stuff (some welding gives off extremely toxic fumes) that is a *pleasure* to wear in hot weather. It includes belt mounted forced air which goes through a filter - you have personal air conditioning. The visors have built in anti fogging, and the dams/seals can be 3D printed to fit various face structures. Some units include microphone/speaker systems to aid communication - no muffled voices.
3) is answered by jumps in materials technology - stuff that can resist powerful cleaning chemicals - just drop it in a garbage bin full of stuff, let it soak for a few minutes, then wash it off with a pressure washer (or similar)
It’s worth wondering what will happen if we hit a real airborne disease. The existing patchwork of masks, visors and plastic gowns is full of gaps….
Cross infections massively reduced as a result of the shift to single use hospital products, your suggestion is a massive backwards step
We are not talking about devices such a syringes that are hard to clean. Immersion in a vat of chemicals will destroy everything - even prions, with the right chemicals. It should be noted that many items in hospitals are not one use - consider surgeons tools. Which go inside the patient.
The alternative is not to enough PPE, for the next worldwide infection.
There were 890 people arrested at a demonstration against the ban on the group Palestine Action in London on Saturday, the Metropolitan Police say.
The majority of the arrests were for supporting a proscribed group under the Terrorism Act, while police said 17 were also arrested for assaults on police officers "after the protest turned violent".
I think there is some talk of the accused refusing the bail conditions and therefore clogging up remand with thousands of pensioners.
The excuse Government ministers are now giving for the arrests that there is something that they are unable to disclose to us something that makes supporting Palestine Action a genuinely awful terrorist activity. Now, there might be something some members of the core group have planned to do, like killing a soldier or burning a synagogue, but how the hell are these protestors supposed to know that?
There are going to be loads of pensioners coming up in front of a judge who - for the first time - finally find out the nature of the group they are supporting as the CPS/Crown Office makes a case behind closed doors. Surely there is something for the defence there? Or worse - ministers have simply made this up and there is no real underlying reason for it, and they are just trying to scare people into not protesting with these vague allusions.
I don't actually get what they are protesting about. It's not Palestine/Gaza per se, because you can protest about that just fine, every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Is it free speech? I bet none of them cared a fig for Connolly. Is it government overstepping the mark? I can understand if people don't trust the government. The Southport case had huge issues with that. I also sense that even if it does come out that P A were planning a 'genuine' act a lot of this mob wouldn't care, just as many reformers are in love with Connolly.
You don’t know if anyone “cared a fig” about Connolly because, as you admit yourself, you don’t “get it”.
There were 890 people arrested at a demonstration against the ban on the group Palestine Action in London on Saturday, the Metropolitan Police say.
The majority of the arrests were for supporting a proscribed group under the Terrorism Act, while police said 17 were also arrested for assaults on police officers "after the protest turned violent".
I think there is some talk of the accused refusing the bail conditions and therefore clogging up remand with thousands of pensioners.
The excuse Government ministers are now giving for the arrests that there is something that they are unable to disclose to us something that makes supporting Palestine Action a genuinely awful terrorist activity. Now, there might be something some members of the core group have planned to do, like killing a soldier or burning a synagogue, but how the hell are these protestors supposed to know that?
There are going to be loads of pensioners coming up in front of a judge who - for the first time - finally find out the nature of the group they are supporting as the CPS/Crown Office makes a case behind closed doors. Surely there is something for the defence there? Or worse - ministers have simply made this up and there is no real underlying reason for it, and they are just trying to scare people into not protesting with these vague allusions.
I don't actually get what they are protesting about. It's not Palestine/Gaza per se, because you can protest about that just fine, every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Is it free speech? I bet none of them cared a fig for Connolly. Is it government overstepping the mark? I can understand if people don't trust the government. The Southport case had huge issues with that. I also sense that even if it does come out that P A were planning a 'genuine' act a lot of this mob wouldn't care, just as many reformers are in love with Connolly.
You don’t know if anyone “cared a fig” about Connolly because, as you admit yourself, you don’t “get it”.
What's your point? I genuinely don't understand if it's the Gaza angle, and this just misplaced or the free speech. No, I have no idea of their opinion about Connolly but I am drawing an inference.
Comments
Thanks for the reminder!
https://x.com/ndrewtoy/status/1964397446576189676
You know how these charismatic leader parties have worked throughout history; the policy is whatever the leader says it is today. And if/when it goes pearshaped, it's the fault of the liberals.
"Labour is dead" says Zara Sultana
"Tories are dead" says Nadine Dorries
That's a lot of dead, if true.
Along with many of the British virtues: moderation, unflappability, and a contempt for conmen, blowhards and toad-eaters.
But Ukraine have defeated Russia's summer offensive *so far*, even with NK's overt help. There are rumours of a Russian autumn offensive, and we shall see how that goes, but if I were a Putinist, I would not have confidence.
I would love you to answer a question: what do you think China's (actually, Xi's) preferred end-game in all of this is?
And the evidence of 2016-24 in the US is that it’s a very poor political strategy if you are trying to defeat an insurgent election candidate. Still time to come up with a strategy to beat Farage. But it needs a consistent period of utterly disciplined and effective governance in the way Max described above.
Sending women back to Afghanistan and Iran, not made up his mind on the children, tens of billions of pounds of unfunded tax cuts, virtually nobody with any experience of government but according to him today Nadine Dorries will resolve that, will all catch up on him
I believe it is time for Starmer to ignore him, and other politicians, and make a case on immigration and the economy that is believable and more importantly achieve visable results
No amount of mud slinging is going to take him down and only gives him more publicity
I genuinely believe that in the next 3 years he and Reform will be found out, but what follows on I have no idea
@Gardenwalker has very clearly stated the story.
I'm joking! I've had more than enough flags for one day!
I suspect that a minority Reform government will struggle to outlast a lettuce, but even a majority one might struggle to outlast a cabbage.
But even if it was analogous to the end of Boris, I doubt Farage would quit, or his MPs would resign as the Cons did. He is more like Trump, and the norms don’t seem to apply, however much his detractors wish they did
That said he’s been ruthless in consolidating his domestic power. I’ve been previously very faintly acquainted with someone who at one time was flying so high they were a voting member of the National Congress that allowed the abolition of term limits but is now in a state of disappeared. There are many such examples. It’s uneducated guess work on any of our parts to try and predict Xi’s goals and actions, when those so much closer and with very much more to lose are so often failing to.
See you all later!
“I have huge sympathy for Angela, but she had to go,” says one cabinet member close to the prime minister. Sir Keir had pledged a tougher standards regime and to be merciless in the removal of ministers, however mighty or popular, who transgressed. He could either stick to that pledge or start becoming a version of Boris Johnson with a neater haircut. He chose to be “Mr Rules”. There is probably a way back for her one day. In the meantime, she will have to decide whether to be a supportive presence on the backbenches or to make Sir Keir’s life even harder by becoming a sharp thorn in his side.
Many in the party’s ranks will see her as the victim of the hound dogs of the rightwing media. Some will seethe that Sir Keir has let Labour’s enemies take the scalp of a figure they admire. The glee her resignation has ignited among Labour’s foes – Nigel Farage brought forward his conference speech to have an instant gloat – is in part because she could make emotional connections with voters in a way few of the cabinet can.
On top of which, there is the potential for the contest for the vacant deputy leadership to become an unedifying spectacle that inflicts further harm to the battered reputation of the government.
Reshuffles are rarely enough by themselves to revive the fortunes of a flagging government, but Number 10 is evidently hoping that this will look like a decisive response that softens the sting of the Rayner resignation. One source of alarm for allies of Sir Keir is that the electorate of activists and trades unionists are much less likely to have an appetite for a Starmer loyalist than a yearning for someone to his left. The candidates will therefore tailor their messages accordingly.
These and other troublesome questions are already rumbling away just below the surface of the Labour party. In the worst case scenario for the prime minister, the contest becomes a competition to identify where he has gone most wrong, a referendum on welfare, fiscal and foreign policy, and a proxy vote of confidence in him. Loyalist ministers are right to worry about the threat that it brings all the anxieties about the government’s direction to a furious boil.
I suspect calling out Farage when the time comes will have much the same result.
Well I do care that you flagged me. If only I knew how to flag you!
Oh well.
Indeed in the years on this forum I haven't even thought of using it
vaccines saved a lot of lives in the older age groups but should certainly not have been pushed out universally to children and younger adults.
Rather, below about the age of 40, on an individual level the risk-benefit analysis was pretty marginal (and unfavourable as you got younger). However the benefits to society were significant (herd effect).
“Certainly not” is way too strong
https://youtu.be/bX9BB0anXks?t=11022
Ref UK have distance themselves:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62z4rd87nlo
Pretty sure it’s a cynical strategy, ie continually flash some fruitcake, loony and closet racist leg then look all innocent when it goes over the edge.
Alternatively, are we in a world where almost everyone has had Covid, and therefore viral shedding is likely to be more modest, where paxlovid is widely available, and where there is plenty of hospital capacity. That's a very different situation.
A Dutch salute to the conspiracy theorists, but deniability to the media.
MAGA style "dictator on day one" is to be kept under cover, at least for now.
It won't get directly reported by unsympathetic journos though, as they were banned.
Mainly control of anyone's speech aside from their own. Because their speech matters; yours does not.
"We don't censor anybody here. We believe in free speech. Unlike Keir Starmer who locks people up for speaking their mind we encourage it."
Fun fact, Christine Keeler shared a peter with Wes Streeting's granny. (Translation: they were in HMP Holloway together.)
The majority of the arrests were for supporting a proscribed group under the Terrorism Act, while police said 17 were also arrested for assaults on police officers "after the protest turned violent".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rvly00440o
I think William got the ban. But am not sure.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/mar/08/election2005.politicalcolumnists
'Driving out of the Sainsbury's car park with the weekly groceries, you now pass a large and prominent political billboard. "Are you thinking what we're thinking?" it asks. Then it explains: "It's not racist to impose limits on immigration."
It is only a single Conservative poster. And the election is probably still 58 days away. A lot can happen between now and then. But that billboard makes me uncomfortable. What is this country really thinking? [...]'
Edit: and of course immigration *was* limited at the time, surely.
Though, of course, the Tories were not proposing to limit that.
All party leaders need to strike a balance that keeps together MPs, activists and voters, all of which have divergent interests, to get them singing off the same hymn sheet is what leadership is about.
Farage has particular difficulty because the 3 have very divergent desires. The MPs (and financial backers) want low taxes, no environmental or consumer protections and no rights for employees. The activists want anti-climate science, anti-vaxxing, and no darkies, particularly Muslim ones, the voters want stable communities with well paid blue collar jobs and welfare state.
Farage may well keep them together long enough to get elected, but the probability of outlasting a lettuce as PM is very dependent on his skills in people management. That is an area that he has consistently been very poor at.
I wish we didn't have a government.
The French tried using slightly time expired stuff - it literally fell apart.
So you have fairly short life spans - which means that rotating a stockpile for a COVID like event is impractical. You won’t be normally using enough from the stockpile to stop most of it rotting.
So you have 3 choices
1) small stockpile
2) large stockpile and bin vast quantities every day.
3) move to reusable materials.
In addition, many of these “biodegradable” plastics leave a residue of microscopic plastic in the environment which is a big issue.
The answer, it seems to me, is (3). The objection are
1) We don’t do that
2) it’s uncomfortable
3) cleaning is an issue
1) is farcical.
2) is answered by the huge improvements in recent years - I’ve use welding stuff (some welding gives off extremely toxic fumes) that is a *pleasure* to wear in hot weather. It includes belt mounted forced air which goes through a filter - you have personal air conditioning. The visors have built in anti fogging, and the dams/seals can be 3D printed to fit various face structures. Some units include microphone/speaker systems to aid communication - no muffled voices.
3) is answered by jumps in materials technology - stuff that can resist powerful cleaning chemicals - just drop it in a garbage bin full of stuff, let it soak for a few minutes, then wash it off with a pressure washer (or similar)
It’s worth wondering what will happen if we hit a real airborne disease. The existing patchwork of masks, visors and plastic gowns is full of gaps….
In the first ODI, we looked wretched and South Africa were clearly superior. In the second, the teams were pretty level and it was a close finish and today we were superb and the Saffers were awful.
I'd rather bet on an all-weather seller at Lingfield in January - much more predictable.
The excuse Government ministers are now giving for the arrests that there is something that they are unable to disclose to us something that makes supporting Palestine Action a genuinely awful terrorist activity. Now, there might be something some members of the core group have planned to do, like killing a soldier or burning a synagogue, but how the hell are these protestors supposed to know that?
There are going to be loads of pensioners coming up in front of a judge who - for the first time - finally find out the nature of the group they are supporting as the CPS/Crown Office makes a case behind closed doors. Surely there is something for the defence there? Or worse - ministers have simply made this up and there is no real underlying reason for it, and they are just trying to scare people into not protesting with these vague allusions.
That's probably true of most parties most of the time.
I mentioned the divergenvce between the Reform leadership and its voter base in advance of the 2024 election and the truth is immigration is the only glue binding the party together. Yes, you could argue there is a broad socially conservative concensus as well (though I'm not convinced) and certainly on economics (tax and spending) there is a clear split between the Thatcherite leadership and those supporters who come from the "old Labour" background and who want money spent on and in the WWC communities rather than on asylum seekers (for example).
The implosion of the 2019 Conservative coalition showed what can happen to a seemingly unstoppable voting bloc when the Government can't or won't deliver.
Reform are the anti-vax party.
If it quacks like a duck…(pun intended).
I can understand if people don't trust the government. The Southport case had huge issues with that. I also sense that even if it does come out that P A were planning a 'genuine' act a lot of this mob wouldn't care, just as many reformers are in love with Connolly.
The alternative is not to enough PPE, for the next worldwide infection.