Nobody is willing to sacrifice themselves for the King of the North – politicalbetting.com
Nobody is willing to sacrifice themselves for the King of the North – politicalbetting.com
Full story @thetimes hereLabour insiders had said Gwynne was on the brink of taking medical retirement from the Commons — a rare mechanism that eases financial pain of quitting But he’s now become second Greater Manchester MP to say no to resigninghttps://t.co/Xn5OpN1lG2
1
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
So I don't see how he can return to the commons before the next General Election, which pretty much rules him out of being PM.
A childish tweet during President Trump’s state visit was just the latest unseemly insult by a British MP
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/09/19/shouting-insults-politicians-like-children/ (£££)
The tweet in question included a photo from last week's state visit, and the text:-
Did Keir Starmer borrow that suit from someone a lot bigger?
Crumpled at the ankles, too long in the cuff, loose enough to get another bloke in there with him.
And someone please tell him about the buttons.
https://x.com/JamesCleverly/status/1968431569359581443
Just imagine Ed becomes PM, there will be two really bad consequences
1) He's PM
2) I will become even more unbearably smug as I keep on reminding PBers about my 100/1 tip.
And he did!
(And before anyone shouts "He wasn't the minister responsible at the time", as they often do, they need to remember he was "Minister of State (Department of Health) (Delivery and Quality)" right in the middle of the scandal, and hamstrung the initial Francis inquiry.)
Trouble is, there isn't a better alternative. At some point, the nation needs to reflect on why this is so, and why so few PMs turn out to the up to the job.
In the meantime, and sorry to those who hate to hear this, Vote Starmer Because He'll Have To Do.
Then there was Boris, who was often an utter scruffbag and was often wrong.
… nine-tenths of the Lib Dem’s battle is attracting attention… this rebirth of Liberal England was first eclipsed by the scale of Labour’s parliamentary landslide and has since been overshadowed by Reform’s surge in the polls.
If Sir Ed is not always cutting through, he can fairly protest that it is not for want of trying. He has been astute about spotting empty spaces in the political battleground and moving to occupy the terrain. Reform and the Tories won’t condemn Donald Trump and the Labour leadership can’t. Sir Ed has made himself a voice speaking for the millions of Brits who are repelled by the US president.
It is on the domestic front that the Lib Dems struggle to make a consistently compelling impression. I suspect this is partly because the political matrix has been scrambled more dramatically than Sir Ed anticipated… Mr Farage is competing for protest voters and doing so more successfully.
“Soft Conservatives remain the main target,” says a senior Lib Dem. “The continued lurch towards Reform by Kemi Badenoch is great for us.” Nearly all the Lib Dem’s most promising prospects are seats held by Conservatives. Sir Ed presents his party as a refuge for what he calls “the homeless” centre-right voter who is disillusioned with Labour, despairs of the Tories and is disgusted by Reform.
Relations with Sir Keir Starmer have soured…[but] both surely know that the most consequential struggle of this era is that between the liberal left and the demagogic right. “Politics today is like playing with live ammunition,” says one of the Davey team. “Mess it up and you could put Nigel Farage into Number 10.” There’ll be some kissing and making up to do between the Lib Dems and Labour before we get to the next general election.
He tried to persuade Francis Dyke Acland to vacate Camborne for him. Acland wrote back, 'I wish my seat were safe against all comers so that I could resign and you could take it: but it is not.'
(And he was right, actually, as he did lose it himself at the 1922 election.)
Burnham is in the same position. And by the time that changes, he will either be too old to lead a Labour party in opposition, or Starmer's hand will have been immeasurably strengthened by winning an election.
Either way, I don't think he's even worth a trading bet.
An image of a certain lettuce springs unbidden to my mind.
As does a certain blond person with a Russian sounding name.
I am Derek Guy and claim my £5
Or qualify on the grounds that his bungling over Mid Staffs revealed him to be a total c[MODERATED]
Mrs May and Cameron are perhaps better examples of people whose failings were at least mostly unexpected.
The signs were there, but they were quite subtle. It's understandable why people missed them.
But mostly, we do not know. I expected Brown to be much better as PM than he was, as an example.
Burnham's realistic plan is to (try to - there are no certain seats) become an MP in 2028/9, when he is about 58/59 and wait and see. At least such a plan is worthy of respect.
The other point is this; to be the next really good leader you have to speak to and for: party members, voters, your MPs, the country. This at the moment requires head on engagement with economic and fiscal realities which Burnham has no record of interest in. Labour MPs currently act as if there is a money tree.
But if Ed's backers want him in, he'll have to move quicky to head off her and Burnham. Lets see what the Party conference brings.
I suppose there might be a 30 second mention when they vote to legalise pot, in time-honoured fashion.
The problem for the LibDems is that they are generally being ignored as an irrelevance.
It works as a simile...
He didn't learn.
It's one spot behind RAF joining NATO missions in eastern Europe.
Unfortunately, not wanting the job (which I think was the case for Starmer) doesn't help much.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/sep/20/just-add-water-how-to-bring-back-ancient-plants-in-a-norfolk-ghost-pond
What on earth are Davey and the Lib Dems doing in a display of Reform flag waving which is simply disingenuous
Mimicking Reform as Starmer does only adds loads of votes to Reform who are the real deal
Please do not go down this road
Albon at 5.2-5.3 for points still up on Betfair.
To this day I cannot for the life of me understand how this was glossed over. Profumo barely touched the sides compared to this outrageous scandal. And then we made him Prime Minister!
https://x.com/dave_brown24/status/1968666791380418615
And whilst I'm sure Reform and worse would like to claim the Union Flag and the St George's cross as their emblems, they aren't. Consider the Last Night of the Proms. Or thousands of church towers across the land. Or the attached scout huts. It's for all of us, and it's to all our shame that we let them appropriate it. The more flags, the merrier. And the more varied flags, because we all have overlapping identifies.
Far better than scruffy graffiti on roundabouts, or the cheapo polyester jobs ziptied at half-mast on lampposts. The ones round here are already looking tatty and tangled. That's what's really disrespectful.
How many flags will be in evidence there?
It is really a bit of Tory conference of old targeted at One Nation Tory Remainers still voting Tory who may be a bit wary if Kemi does back taking us out of the ECHR at the Tory conference
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Briefs-European-Underwear-Bikinis-Panties/dp/B0CB2FXQ89
https://x.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1969500562086642006
They are both wrong and how on earth are we to get out of this mess with politicians inability to do the right thing
Though there's the usual tut-tutting from the usual suspects, it's good to see Sir Ed Davey having a bit of fun at the start of the LD Conference. For those who never had the pleasure of attending a Liberal Assembly or even an early Lib Dem Conference, they were fun-filled social events where serious politics is relegated to the Conference Floor and the odd Fringe meeting (and some of them were very odd).
The heart of it is a social gathering of like-minded people who exchange notes and war stories (usually about winning seats off the Tories or Labour). There's singing, drinking and laughs and I suspect the same happens at other Conferences as well though the Conservatives are likely more decorous.
That's not to say the big items don't get discussed once you get through the formulaic business - parties are businesses and in effect the Conference functions as an AGM with changes to the way the business is run as much on the agenda as weighty debates about the issues of the day.
Conferences used to show the true nature of parties - divided, disparate and occasionally rancorous but in the days of media imagery and top down control, any displays of disloyalty are relegated to the furthest edges of the fringe and it's more like a rally. The days when the party leader would be among the delegates on the Conference floor having the same vote as everyone else probably no longer exist. Inconvenient Conference decisions are waved away these days in the name of unity and with social media the slightest notion of dissent is magnified into a full-blown rebellion within minutes and you have forums this like where those opposed can jab and point at the slightest indiscretion.
Many opt to damage the national interest instead.
After whacking up the minimum wage and refusing to cut unemployment and incapacity benefits, Labour can hardly hit those relatively poor pensioners who are reliant on the state pension and have no private pension to speak of.
Expect Rayner to whack up taxes on private pension contributions as well as CGT etc in the Budget though
I assume you mean Reeves but increaes in taxes are certain
I went to few Liberal Conferences in the 70's/80's and they were as Mr Stodge describes; cheerful affairs, where the great and good of the Party mixed with the delegates, especially during the evening socialising.
I've listened to several Party Leaders in the last few days and what struck me about Ed Davey was that he was cheerful. Starmer came across as somewhat indecisive and still finding his way and both Badenoch and Farage as self-righteous and unwilling to listen. If we hear more of the LibDem Front Bench in the next few days I suspect it will be a Good Thing for the party, and the country.
The world in general and this country in particular are in a bad place at the moment and a bit of positivity won't go amiss.
And before anyone seizes on about 2% of my post, yes, we in Britain are a great deal better off than many other people.But that doesn't mean things couldn't all be better for everybody.
Removing it does not save the government much money in the short/medium term, nor does would affect current pensioners particularly badly. It's a long term fiscal issue that carries gigantic short-term political risk, so there is no chance of it removed by any party.
David Steele had a dozen or so MPs, Ashdown twice that, Ed Davey has 72 MPs so needs to move on to serious politics. Continuing the stunts and student politics has led to the party being overtaken in public consciousness by Reform, who have only four or five MPs.
And if people don't get some tax advantage from personal and work pensions then there would be no point in contributing to them.
Nobody is going to put any more money than they have to into a pension which cannot be accessed until they're at least 57 if the tax advantage is no better than in a stocks and shares ISA.
Not to mention fees on work pensions are very likely higher than those in a stocks and shares ISA.
The better solution would be to get rid of national insurance entirely and increase income tax by an equivalent amount.
Maybe unexpected ?
And through nimbyism and waspism are pandering to it.
I had no problem with Reeves wanting to reduce eligibility for the Winter Fuel Allowance - had she said, for example, it wouldn't be available to higher rate taxpayers but only to those paying just basic rate or those solely on pension credit, I think most people would have, if not supported it then understood it.
The problem with the previous regime was it was easy and cheap to administer - as soon as you got the pension you were eligible for the allowance whatever your financial situation so both the poorest and wealthiest pensioners got it and that was an obvious anomaly which needed to be resolved.
The way Reeves went about it was as hamfisted and politically inept as you could imagine but the basic notion wasn't wrong and isn't wrong. Universal entitlement to benefits costs in every sense.
Much has been done to ensure those of advanced years have a decent standard of living but much remains to be done.