This is bullish from Zelensky. He seems confident of receiving additional weapons from Trump. Let's hope it's not misplaced.
An Axios journalist asked what those working in the Kremlin should know after an attack on Kyiv’s government building. Zelensky answered plainly: "first, know where your bomb shelters are. If you do not stop the war, you will need them."
I wonder if it’ll start to tighten again next spring as the world approaches next year’s Taiwan invasion season?
Supposedly the Chinese are committed to sustaining Russia's war so that it distracts the US from the Pacific. The obvious corollary is that a Ukrainian victory over Russia frees the US to concentrate on China.
If Zelensky has managed to convince Trump that a Ukrainian victory is an "America First" interest, then perhaps @Sandpit will be due a few apologies in the coming months?
Though clearly I am allowing my inherent optimism to run away from me with that.
@Sandpit got the narrative wrong for the first 9 months of the Administration. I don't believe he was expecting Zelensky to get brutally mugged by Trump and Vance in the Oval Office. No apology needed.
That “meeting” was a diplomatic failure on all sides, including the Ukranians.
I’m pleased that the relationship six months later appears to be a lot better.
Nigel has certainly been making a number of unforced errors in recent times. Has his performance degraded, or are we just now seeing things that were really always there?
Farage doesn’t like scrutiny and is thin skinned . The latest immigration proposals were down to over-confidence and they’ve already fallen apart .
Sky's Ed Conway reporting cordial meeting between the Bank of England and Farage with Tice
Odd that it would be cordial. I'd be astonished if Reform don't revoke its independence.
Definitely on the cards although their plans are so half baked it might well not happen, even if they win. They are going down the Trump path of trying to crush any independent institution because the Populist leader must be all powerful, but like Trump they don't have many positive ideas of how to proceed so it's mostly just destructive of credible institutions rather than actively replacing them with something new.
Europe turning its back on Musk - Tesla sales down 43% year on year in first eight months of 2025. Meanwhile sales of Chinese BYD cars rocketing - notice them a lot in Dublin, not so much in the UK. Full details here in Guardian business blog.
I do wonder how many people who want to see Tesla fail were also repeating Jimmy Kimmel’s words about loads of people losing their jobs because of a reaction to what someone has said.
No great fan of Musk but glee over Tesla crapping out and anger over Kimmel production crew losing jobs would be a little hypocritical.
I don't think I've seen anyone repeating Kimmel's words about loads of people losing their jobs.
Your post is a bit of a strawman: I do no care about Tesla in itself. They're a company that's done some amazing things, but which has a f'load of technical debt and is led by a really nasty man who is calling for chaos in this country. He gets most of his power from Tesla, and a good way of getting him to fail is for Tesla to become less powerful.
If Tesla was run by someone else, and Musk had no influence over it and no shares in it, I might be cheering them along. Still concerned about the technical debt, though...
What is 'technical debt'?
In this case, promising things that have not been developed yet, and may not be able to be delivered in any meaningful timespan. Promising things that will require resources to develop and make that you will not have available.
Example of the former is FSD/Autopilot, which is *far* from what he promised for 2017, and may not be possible with the tech they're building into the cars. An example of the latter is the Roadster 2; promised for many years with loads of expensive deposits taken, yet still does not exist.
ChayGPT when asked 'Is Tesla's FSD safer than human drivers?' "Tentative conclusion: Is FSD safer overall?
Given what we know:
In certain contexts (highways, well marked roads, good weather, etc.), Tesla’s Autopilot / FSD likely does reduce the risk compared to average human driving. The data supports that in many cases, especially for more severe crashes, there's a measurable benefit.
However, it's not yet clear that FSD is universally safer than human drivers in all conditions, especially in complex or unpredictable driving scenarios (urban driving, intersections, poor visibility, pedestrians & cyclists, etc.), or when driver oversight is poor.
Also, because of limitations in data reporting, potential biases in which miles/modes are counted, and the level of human responsibility still required, the “safety advantage” needs to be understood with nuance—not as a blanket replacement of human judgment, but more like an assist that sometimes is much better than human, sometimes less so, depending on the situation."
Lots of people manage to drive across America. Musk promised FSD would be able to do it autonomously in 2017. It still cannot.
This is bullish from Zelensky. He seems confident of receiving additional weapons from Trump. Let's hope it's not misplaced.
An Axios journalist asked what those working in the Kremlin should know after an attack on Kyiv’s government building. Zelensky answered plainly: "first, know where your bomb shelters are. If you do not stop the war, you will need them."
I wonder if it’ll start to tighten again next spring as the world approaches next year’s Taiwan invasion season?
Supposedly the Chinese are committed to sustaining Russia's war so that it distracts the US from the Pacific. The obvious corollary is that a Ukrainian victory over Russia frees the US to concentrate on China.
If Zelensky has managed to convince Trump that a Ukrainian victory is an "America First" interest, then perhaps @Sandpit will be due a few apologies in the coming months?
Though clearly I am allowing my inherent optimism to run away from me with that.
We’ll see, I’m also an inherent optimist.
I’ve not been a fan of Trump’s approach to the Ukraine war so far, but can understand where he’s coming from in his approach.
It’s now clear that that approach isn’t working, that Putin has no intention of ending the war, but also that the whole Western world is behind Ukraine winning the war irrespective of what happens between Washington and Moscow.
Trump wants his peace prize, and he now realises that this happens from being unequivocally on the Ukranian side.
One thing which has changed now Trump has replaced Biden is that Ukraine seems to have been given the go ahead (or is no longer being prevented from) attacking Russia's energy infrastructure. This appears to be paying some dividends for Ukraine.
This is bullish from Zelensky. He seems confident of receiving additional weapons from Trump. Let's hope it's not misplaced.
An Axios journalist asked what those working in the Kremlin should know after an attack on Kyiv’s government building. Zelensky answered plainly: "first, know where your bomb shelters are. If you do not stop the war, you will need them."
I wonder if it’ll start to tighten again next spring as the world approaches next year’s Taiwan invasion season?
Supposedly the Chinese are committed to sustaining Russia's war so that it distracts the US from the Pacific. The obvious corollary is that a Ukrainian victory over Russia frees the US to concentrate on China.
If Zelensky has managed to convince Trump that a Ukrainian victory is an "America First" interest, then perhaps @Sandpit will be due a few apologies in the coming months?
Though clearly I am allowing my inherent optimism to run away from me with that.
@Sandpit got the narrative wrong for the first 9 months of the Administration. I don't believe he was expecting Zelensky to get brutally mugged by Trump and Vance in the Oval Office. No apology needed.
That “meeting” was a diplomatic failure on all sides, including the Ukranians.
I’m pleased that the relationship six months later appears to be a lot better.
They were mugged in the Oval Office.
Trump blamed the Ukrainians for starting the war.
Trump rolled out the red carpet to Putin in Alaska.
You call it a reset. I call it confused and confusing.
If this is peak Reform, and we dont know that yet, how much unwind in their polling we get before the next set of elections will have a big say in the final results in May
3 different parties have led the last 3 polls in Senedd opinion polling (going by wikipedia). My guess would be any Reform unwind would not lump back in with the Tories or Labour monolithically, but others will be better informed than me
I sense the paracetamol stuff is a claim too far for a lot of people, seen by the amount of health professionals putting out clips on social media to dissipate scare stories.
Reform seem to be more an anti establishment rabble, putting out claims and counter arguments they don't need to, in order to attract attention. Can't they sit down and form coherent policy? How will they deal with migration?
When it comes down to who to vote for, a working class man eats food, not flags, and it's who he can trust to help him put food on the table which will win the next election. Reform have more chance of retaining the pension age vote
Definitely sense a ratcheting up in attacks on Reform from Labour and other parties this week, Farage is not going to go away if you ignore him
They will also be pressuring the BoE today to cut interest rates opening a flank to attack them on inflation/CoL Reforms problem is they are very unlikely to do as well in May as in May 2024 - they will make progress in London but probably be just 'in the mix' and not dominant. They could undershoots at Holyrood and come 4th in seats on a poorish night and if they don't form the givernment at the Senedd then any 'momentum' will be district councils and mayors - but that could be lost in a 'surge fading' narrative.
Might be a case of too much, too soon Time will tell
You get the feeling now that the 'establishment' parties, SNP included, are starting to hit them harder and will seek to hoover up votes put off by their more extreme views
If there was to be real momentum, Farage would want to secure a few more defections - past MPs, people who used to be important and now Lords don't cut through as much
It's a long way off but I can see them 3rd (or worse) at Holyrood, once the debates get going the public get to see a different side. A little over 7 months to go, and as far as I can see still no Reform candidates for Scottish parliament selected
The biggest question is, when do they peak? if Farage goes, I doubt they'll poll anywhere near 30% across the UK
The big questions are how much of the 30% is raw dissatisfaction and how much of that dissatisfaction is motivated to actually vote on it. Labour were polling in the 40s and (a little earlier) 50s right up to actual voting time. 'Im super pissed off' becomes 'but not that super pissed off' for some when a vote looms. Reform are performing close to polling expectations in local by elections but on 25% turnouts. The 25 to 35% who will turn out at a GE on top are, I think, more likely to be Uniparty types than burn it downers - they are already registering their annoyance every chance they get. Ergo Refirm drift back in a campaign just like Labour did
We saw something like this in the early '60's. The Liberal's, once Jo Grimond had shaken things up started doing well in by-elections and in local government, and I recall discussing it with a friend who had become a keen Liberal. (I wasn't; I was definitely Labour then!) and opining that the Liberal voters were keen and when the GE came we'd see that their vote, numerically, would be the same as at the local elections. And so it proved; there were some Liberal successes in the '64 and '66 General Election but not the massive breakthrough the more excitable were expecting.
Apparently Starmer has given several interviews to broadcasters which have been embargoed till 6pm .
I fear another re-set !
Resignation, or at the very least the firing of McSweeney?
Outside of pb and Westminster no-one knows who McSweeney even is.
He's Dominic Cummings and his removal would have similar resonance
Cummings was on tv briefing us about covid on a daily basis. I don't even know what McSweeney looks like and I follow politics more than 90% of the country.
This is bullish from Zelensky. He seems confident of receiving additional weapons from Trump. Let's hope it's not misplaced.
An Axios journalist asked what those working in the Kremlin should know after an attack on Kyiv’s government building. Zelensky answered plainly: "first, know where your bomb shelters are. If you do not stop the war, you will need them."
I wonder if it’ll start to tighten again next spring as the world approaches next year’s Taiwan invasion season?
Supposedly the Chinese are committed to sustaining Russia's war so that it distracts the US from the Pacific. The obvious corollary is that a Ukrainian victory over Russia frees the US to concentrate on China.
If Zelensky has managed to convince Trump that a Ukrainian victory is an "America First" interest, then perhaps @Sandpit will be due a few apologies in the coming months?
Though clearly I am allowing my inherent optimism to run away from me with that.
I think Trump's comments are just another phase in his random walk. He'll say something else tomorrow.
Chyyyyyyyna is more interesting, perhaps. They have already been heavily sustaining Russia, whilst balancing it with external relationships.
But *could* they sustain Russia without full-blown support eg sending troops and tanks, and avoid a bigger downside from other relationships? Maybe air decfences are a possibility?
Russia is not a large economy, so what does Russia offer beyond gas/oil, and a black hole? Perhaps strategic land?
I'm not aware of any so far, but eventually Trump will get onto 'persecuted Christians in China', and how he has to protect them.
❗️Can everyone please STOP using the hashtag #RussianFuelCrisis because it is causing HUGE tailbacks all across russia. Causing people to panic buy which makes the situation EVEN WORSE.
So 🙏 DON'T retweet and DON'T use the hashtag #RussianFuelCrisis ever again!!
If this is peak Reform, and we dont know that yet, how much unwind in their polling we get before the next set of elections will have a big say in the final results in May
3 different parties have led the last 3 polls in Senedd opinion polling (going by wikipedia). My guess would be any Reform unwind would not lump back in with the Tories or Labour monolithically, but others will be better informed than me
I sense the paracetamol stuff is a claim too far for a lot of people, seen by the amount of health professionals putting out clips on social media to dissipate scare stories.
Reform seem to be more an anti establishment rabble, putting out claims and counter arguments they don't need to, in order to attract attention. Can't they sit down and form coherent policy? How will they deal with migration?
When it comes down to who to vote for, a working class man eats food, not flags, and it's who he can trust to help him put food on the table which will win the next election. Reform have more chance of retaining the pension age vote
Definitely sense a ratcheting up in attacks on Reform from Labour and other parties this week, Farage is not going to go away if you ignore him
They will also be pressuring the BoE today to cut interest rates opening a flank to attack them on inflation/CoL Reforms problem is they are very unlikely to do as well in May as in May 2024 - they will make progress in London but probably be just 'in the mix' and not dominant. They could undershoots at Holyrood and come 4th in seats on a poorish night and if they don't form the givernment at the Senedd then any 'momentum' will be district councils and mayors - but that could be lost in a 'surge fading' narrative.
Might be a case of too much, too soon Time will tell
You get the feeling now that the 'establishment' parties, SNP included, are starting to hit them harder and will seek to hoover up votes put off by their more extreme views
If there was to be real momentum, Farage would want to secure a few more defections - past MPs, people who used to be important and now Lords don't cut through as much
It's a long way off but I can see them 3rd (or worse) at Holyrood, once the debates get going the public get to see a different side. A little over 7 months to go, and as far as I can see still no Reform candidates for Scottish parliament selected
The biggest question is, when do they peak? if Farage goes, I doubt they'll poll anywhere near 30% across the UK
The big questions are how much of the 30% is raw dissatisfaction and how much of that dissatisfaction is motivated to actually vote on it. Labour were polling in the 40s and (a little earlier) 50s right up to actual voting time. 'Im super pissed off' becomes 'but not that super pissed off' for some when a vote looms. Reform are performing close to polling expectations in local by elections but on 25% turnouts. The 25 to 35% who will turn out at a GE on top are, I think, more likely to be Uniparty types than burn it downers - they are already registering their annoyance every chance they get. Ergo Refirm drift back in a campaign just like Labour did
We saw something like this in the early '60's. The Liberal's, once Jo Grimond had shaken things up started doing well in by-elections and in local government, and I recall discussing it with a friend who had become a keen Liberal. (I wasn't; I was definitely Labour then!) and opining that the Liberal voters were keen and when the GE came we'd see that their vote, numerically, would be the same as at the local elections. And so it proved; there were some Liberal successes in the '64 and '66 General Election but not the massive breakthrough the more excitable were expecting.
Interesting, thank you. I don't see a Reform majority at the moment, nor indeed more than 250 seats. But that would still be extraordinary.
Europe turning its back on Musk - Tesla sales down 43% year on year in first eight months of 2025. Meanwhile sales of Chinese BYD cars rocketing - notice them a lot in Dublin, not so much in the UK. Full details here in Guardian business blog.
It seems about half the Teslas in London have the "I bought this car before Elon went crazy" sticker.
Musk is odd. He's massively into space travel, going to Mars and beyond, interplanetary exploration/colonisation, really big picture stuff, can't get bigger, and people like that usually have an affectionate uplifting perspective on humanity. Eg those astronauts you hear about who have gazed back at our little blue orb from up there and marvelled at the wonder of it, our one and only precious home populated by billions of human beings whose essential similarity and kinship dwarfs all differences and in particular makes obsessing about things like 'race' seem utterly ridiculous. Yet Musk, in his politics, is the opposite of this. He does obsess about things like 'race. His politics in general is ugly and mean and small-minded. It doesn't scan for me. Something's gone awry with the brain chemistry.
His motivation for space travel is as a lifeboat to escape from a collapsed Earth. It's a very nihilistic motivation, entirely consistent with his politics.
Almost as if his terrestrial politics is aimed at pushing demand for his extraterrestrial ambitions
Sky's Ed Conway reporting cordial meeting between the Bank of England and Farage with Tice
Odd that it would be cordial. I'd be astonished if Reform don't revoke its independence.
I always think of a 'cordial meeting' as a pretty simple plain one with only glasses of squash served. For people you don't value too much. A definite step down from a breakfast meeting - or even from meeting over coffee.
Pb scooped the BBC (and the government?) by a week or so.
The speed with which the government has acted on this is lamentable. We are probably within 10 days of production restarting and we are still talking about possible support. Many of the suppliers will have been without work for weeks already and for some it is probably too late.
I think the government needs to give much more serious consideration to cyber attacks, both in prevention and amelioration when they occur. We have seen a few major UK companies very badly damaged by this already. It is unlikely to stop. The economic effects are sufficiently large to engage the national interest.
They are just getting around to working that out, too.
The idea for JLR is to pay the suppliers to stockpile parts. That's not a thing which would be practical for more than a few weeks at most, and risks leaving them with a glut of stock which they'll then struggle to sell.
I think the reality is that there's no great way to mitigate a very lengthy disruption to a large company's business, other than to prevent it.
I wonder how much cyber protection and cyber insurance JLR had.
Insurance does nothing to help for the knock on effects. And the money could arguably be better spent on prevention.
If we are to start regularly paying out hundreds of millions to maintain UK firms (and perhaps we should) then lets add a levy to the biggest companies profits to cover those costs.
It’s not as simple as maintaining UK firms, JLR doesn’t need to have manufacturing here, it doesn’t need to use UK parts suppliers. JLR are losing (according to Today’s two different guests this morning) between £50m and “hundreds of millions” per week.
As we are seeing with the life sciences industry, if you make the financial environment trickier for companies, especially global companies, they actually do vote with their feet.
You do realise that the Lifesciences companies are currently in the middle of a negotiation on the NHS rebate? They had a tough meeting with Reeves (not only was she was inflexible but she was shouty and ill-prepared). And then all these coordinated announcements (not actions) are made as a way to put pressure on them
Absolutely but it doesn’t change the point that companies have options to be in the UK or not and if you make it unviable or unwelcoming then they can leave, it might damage them to some extent but it will also damage the country.
Entirely agree that we should make the UK attractive for these companies to do their research in. The idea such investment is conditional on high drug prices for the NHS is malign rent-seeking behaviour, and not a good deal overall for the UK.
Apparently Starmer has given several interviews to broadcasters which have been embargoed till 6pm .
I fear another re-set !
Resignation, or at the very least the firing of McSweeney?
Outside of pb and Westminster no-one knows who McSweeney even is.
He's Dominic Cummings and his removal would have similar resonance
Cummings was on tv briefing us about covid on a daily basis. I don't even know what McSweeney looks like and I follow politics more than 90% of the country.
A ginger technocrat type. Lives in Lanarkshire apparently.
McSweeney is extremely un-noisy, certainly compared to eg Cumming and Campbell. I don’t think I’ve seen any kind of public statement by him.
Thought it was puerile myself though wholly typical. Will the US every be taken seriously again? Something about it has died.
You’re so dull
Didn’t you once have a brain? Was it Brexit?
I like a bit of childish humour along with the next man, but there's a time and a place. This is like Sir Keir replacing Liz Truss's portrait on the stairs of Number Ten with one of a lettuce. That would sadden me too.
Apparently Starmer has given several interviews to broadcasters which have been embargoed till 6pm .
I fear another re-set !
Perhaps sending out the Army Reserves to tackle lawlessness in the streets of Manchester.
Meloni has Italian army landrovers driving around in Italian city centres of an evening. But I have never seen any of them stop and get out to attend to anything
The JLR issue is a microcosmic demonstration of this Government's tardy inaction and useless comms.
Yesterday's Government statement was on the lines of, "Ooh we are having a bit of a meeting with JLR and their suppliers, we will report back in November when all the suppliers have gone to the wall", instead of "after a hostile hack on JLR, most likely on behalf of a rogue power, we are underwriting bridging loans at the base rate to JLR suppliers who require our support until this issue is resolved".
Rudderless and crap comms!
Not that simple
Government is on the hook for the loans if they go bankrupt. Not to mention the complexity of existing credit agreements that need to be reviewed at each firm (the government would want seniority).
Lend the money to JLR with a parent company guarantee. And/or provide a guarantee facility through each firm’s bank.
Sky's Ed Conway reporting cordial meeting between the Bank of England and Farage with Tice
Odd that it would be cordial. I'd be astonished if Reform don't revoke its independence.
I always think of a 'cordial meeting' as a pretty simple plain one with only glasses of squash served. For people you don't value too much. A definite step down from a breakfast meeting - or even from meeting over coffee.
Tommy Robinson’s Barley Waters all round. Though one shudders to think what such a brew might contain.
What we can glean from the Boriswave in its international context is that rather than pushing extreme policy, Boris Johnson was passive in the face of groupthink. The machine did what the machine does. And it churned out the same policy in most developed countries.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
Here's an idea. Labour should announce scrapping Council tax for a 0.5%ish charge on property values, subject to a referendum.
Send every house in country info on how much they pay now and what they would pay in future. Make sure that 75% will see lower tax bill.
Tories and Reform will inevitably oppose and 75% of people will see that Labour lowered their tax bill.
It's not just 75% of all households - I'd wager that more than 75% of PBers would get a tax cut. I know that both Big_G_NorthWales and I would both get one, and he has a property worth around £400k (I think).
You don’t need a referendum - it would be part of the Finance Bill legislation. For Stodge Towers, a 0.5% tax on what I think would be a realistic valuation comes out close to what we pay now in Council Tax. You could go for 0.5% below a certain value and perhaps up to 1% for properties over £2.5 million. The key is to ensure the amounts raised in each area meet the demands of each area and reduce the amount Government has to put in to make up the difference.
1% would be a slightly bonkers amount of cash on some Edinburgh propertied. 0.5% on a Barton Avenue property would be £12,000 per year, up from £3,800.
A bit too far imo.
High value property owners have done well for decades out of the current scheme - if I pay nearly £2k a year on a house worth, let’s say, £500k, how can someone owning a house worth £2 million pay less than £4k? The failure to account for high value property is one of the biggest flaws in the Council Tax system and has pushed the costs disproportionately on to lower value homes which are often those owned by those with lower income.
It was a design feature not a flaw.
Council tax is about local services not redistribution. There is some element of greater contribution from the wealthy but fundamentally people use the same amount of rubbish collection etc
Apparently Starmer has given several interviews to broadcasters which have been embargoed till 6pm .
I fear another re-set !
Resignation, or at the very least the firing of McSweeney?
Outside of pb and Westminster no-one knows who McSweeney even is.
He's Dominic Cummings and his removal would have similar resonance
Cummings was on tv briefing us about covid on a daily basis. I don't even know what McSweeney looks like and I follow politics more than 90% of the country.
Pb scooped the BBC (and the government?) by a week or so.
The speed with which the government has acted on this is lamentable. We are probably within 10 days of production restarting and we are still talking about possible support. Many of the suppliers will have been without work for weeks already and for some it is probably too late.
I think the government needs to give much more serious consideration to cyber attacks, both in prevention and amelioration when they occur. We have seen a few major UK companies very badly damaged by this already. It is unlikely to stop. The economic effects are sufficiently large to engage the national interest.
They are just getting around to working that out, too.
The idea for JLR is to pay the suppliers to stockpile parts. That's not a thing which would be practical for more than a few weeks at most, and risks leaving them with a glut of stock which they'll then struggle to sell.
I think the reality is that there's no great way to mitigate a very lengthy disruption to a large company's business, other than to prevent it.
I wonder how much cyber protection and cyber insurance JLR had.
Insurance does nothing to help for the knock on effects. And the money could arguably be better spent on prevention.
If we are to start regularly paying out hundreds of millions to maintain UK firms (and perhaps we should) then lets add a levy to the biggest companies profits to cover those costs.
It’s not as simple as maintaining UK firms, JLR doesn’t need to have manufacturing here, it doesn’t need to use UK parts suppliers. JLR are losing (according to Today’s two different guests this morning) between £50m and “hundreds of millions” per week.
As we are seeing with the life sciences industry, if you make the financial environment trickier for companies, especially global companies, they actually do vote with their feet.
You do realise that the Lifesciences companies are currently in the middle of a negotiation on the NHS rebate? They had a tough meeting with Reeves (not only was she was inflexible but she was shouty and ill-prepared). And then all these coordinated announcements (not actions) are made as a way to put pressure on them
Absolutely but it doesn’t change the point that companies have options to be in the UK or not and if you make it unviable or unwelcoming then they can leave, it might damage them to some extent but it will also damage the country.
Entirely agree that we should make the UK attractive for these companies to do their research in. The idea such investment is conditional on high drug prices for the NHS is malign rent-seeking behaviour, and not a good deal overall for the UK.
Absolutely, it’s not worth it.
American pharma is inherently political, and they work in a way that’s totally antithetical to a British audience.
Personally I think the NHS model is less than ideal, but the single biggest argument in favour of it is central negotiations with suppliers.
There were three big decisions. Ukraine, Hong Kong and student expansion. Each one was a deliberate choice and can certainly be justified on their own merits.
However, if doing all three, it needs political backing, persuasion and significant, quick expansion of housing and infrastructure alongside it. None of which they could be bothered with.
Here's an idea. Labour should announce scrapping Council tax for a 0.5%ish charge on property values, subject to a referendum.
Send every house in country info on how much they pay now and what they would pay in future. Make sure that 75% will see lower tax bill.
Tories and Reform will inevitably oppose and 75% of people will see that Labour lowered their tax bill.
It's not just 75% of all households - I'd wager that more than 75% of PBers would get a tax cut. I know that both Big_G_NorthWales and I would both get one, and he has a property worth around £400k (I think).
You don’t need a referendum - it would be part of the Finance Bill legislation. For Stodge Towers, a 0.5% tax on what I think would be a realistic valuation comes out close to what we pay now in Council Tax. You could go for 0.5% below a certain value and perhaps up to 1% for properties over £2.5 million. The key is to ensure the amounts raised in each area meet the demands of each area and reduce the amount Government has to put in to make up the difference.
1% would be a slightly bonkers amount of cash on some Edinburgh propertied. 0.5% on a Barton Avenue property would be £12,000 per year, up from £3,800.
A bit too far imo.
High value property owners have done well for decades out of the current scheme - if I pay nearly £2k a year on a house worth, let’s say, £500k, how can someone owning a house worth £2 million pay less than £4k? The failure to account for high value property is one of the biggest flaws in the Council Tax system and has pushed the costs disproportionately on to lower value homes which are often those owned by those with lower income.
What I meant is 1% on more expensive properties would be too far, not a flat 0.5% (which would be very significant increase anyway for those types of houses).
I entirely agree with your sentiment, I'm just a bit nervous that a progressive system would cause such outrage in the SE establishment that an excellent policy would be undermined.
Pb scooped the BBC (and the government?) by a week or so.
The speed with which the government has acted on this is lamentable. We are probably within 10 days of production restarting and we are still talking about possible support. Many of the suppliers will have been without work for weeks already and for some it is probably too late.
I think the government needs to give much more serious consideration to cyber attacks, both in prevention and amelioration when they occur. We have seen a few major UK companies very badly damaged by this already. It is unlikely to stop. The economic effects are sufficiently large to engage the national interest.
They are just getting around to working that out, too.
The idea for JLR is to pay the suppliers to stockpile parts. That's not a thing which would be practical for more than a few weeks at most, and risks leaving them with a glut of stock which they'll then struggle to sell.
I think the reality is that there's no great way to mitigate a very lengthy disruption to a large company's business, other than to prevent it.
I wonder how much cyber protection and cyber insurance JLR had.
Insurance does nothing to help for the knock on effects. And the money could arguably be better spent on prevention.
If we are to start regularly paying out hundreds of millions to maintain UK firms (and perhaps we should) then lets add a levy to the biggest companies profits to cover those costs.
It’s not as simple as maintaining UK firms, JLR doesn’t need to have manufacturing here, it doesn’t need to use UK parts suppliers. JLR are losing (according to Today’s two different guests this morning) between £50m and “hundreds of millions” per week.
As we are seeing with the life sciences industry, if you make the financial environment trickier for companies, especially global companies, they actually do vote with their feet.
I'm extremely sceptical of the pharma companies on this. They are effectively threatening to cancel investment in research facilities in the UK because we won't adjust NHS drug pricing. The Eli Lilly article in the FT just came across as rent-seeking behaviour, special pleading.
The government should call their bluff on this.
Plenty of global senior academics and bright students will be very wary of working or studying in the USA for the next decade. So I strongly concur.
Academics are not the pharma industry.
A good illustration is the invention and development of the therapeutic monoclonal antibody. British Nobel prize winners pioneered the field, and one of the most commercially valuable drugs in history (Humira) was developed in the UK.
It was licensed to a US manufacturer, and the UK's Cambridge Antibody, which pioneered both the drug and the underlying drug development platform, ended up with a very small percentage royalty from the $250bn or so revenue that it has generated since. CAT ended up being purchased by AZN for around £1bn.
CAT's exact contemporary, and a small biotech US competitor in the early development of antibody therapeutics, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, stayed independent and is now worth around $60bn.
The issue is that the government has regulated to require pension funds to invest in bonds and to invest globally. I believe the parliamentary pension fund, for example, has a *3%* allocation to UK equities.
Fundamentally they have deskilled the asset management industry and crushed the risk taking capability. There are now only 4-5 firms that regularly invest in biotech and that’s just not enough for a healthy ecosystem
Apparently Starmer has given several interviews to broadcasters which have been embargoed till 6pm .
I fear another re-set !
Perhaps sending out the Army Reserves to tackle lawlessness in the streets of Manchester.
Meloni has Italian army landrovers driving around in Italian city centres of an evening. But I have never seen any of them stop and get out to attend to anything
When I was in Rome about 18 months ago I kept seeing groups of police standing around outside official buildings chatting to each other, and then I got robbed on a bus one night, tried to report it, and found it impossible to find a police station that was open, so it never got officially reported.
This is bullish from Zelensky. He seems confident of receiving additional weapons from Trump. Let's hope it's not misplaced.
An Axios journalist asked what those working in the Kremlin should know after an attack on Kyiv’s government building. Zelensky answered plainly: "first, know where your bomb shelters are. If you do not stop the war, you will need them."
I wonder if it’ll start to tighten again next spring as the world approaches next year’s Taiwan invasion season?
Supposedly the Chinese are committed to sustaining Russia's war so that it distracts the US from the Pacific. The obvious corollary is that a Ukrainian victory over Russia frees the US to concentrate on China.
If Zelensky has managed to convince Trump that a Ukrainian victory is an "America First" interest, then perhaps @Sandpit will be due a few apologies in the coming months?
Though clearly I am allowing my inherent optimism to run away from me with that.
China wins either way. Russia's defences are depleted and so too its economy. We of the fifth tin foil lancers believe as well as Taiwan, China would quite like its half of Sibera (formerly Outer Manchuria) back.
Taiwan is a vanity play. Siberia has oil, metals and not least, fresh water, all of which China needs.
This is bullish from Zelensky. He seems confident of receiving additional weapons from Trump. Let's hope it's not misplaced.
An Axios journalist asked what those working in the Kremlin should know after an attack on Kyiv’s government building. Zelensky answered plainly: "first, know where your bomb shelters are. If you do not stop the war, you will need them."
I wonder if it’ll start to tighten again next spring as the world approaches next year’s Taiwan invasion season?
Supposedly the Chinese are committed to sustaining Russia's war so that it distracts the US from the Pacific. The obvious corollary is that a Ukrainian victory over Russia frees the US to concentrate on China.
If Zelensky has managed to convince Trump that a Ukrainian victory is an "America First" interest, then perhaps @Sandpit will be due a few apologies in the coming months?
Though clearly I am allowing my inherent optimism to run away from me with that.
China wins either way. Russia's defences are depleted and so too its economy. We of the fifth tin foil lancers believe as well as Taiwan, China would quite like its half of Sibera (formerly Outer Manchuria) back.
Taiwan is a vanity play. Siberia has oil, metals and not least, fresh water, all of which China needs.
China gets what it wants from the Russian border lands without the opprobrium of stealing land from Russia.
Apparently Starmer has given several interviews to broadcasters which have been embargoed till 6pm .
I fear another re-set !
Resignation, or at the very least the firing of McSweeney?
Outside of pb and Westminster no-one knows who McSweeney even is.
He's Dominic Cummings and his removal would have similar resonance
Cummings was on tv briefing us about covid on a daily basis. I don't even know what McSweeney looks like and I follow politics more than 90% of the country.
Cummings was almost never on TV briefings
His famous press conference in the Downing Street garden was the first time the vast majority of the population ever saw him on TV.
Pb scooped the BBC (and the government?) by a week or so.
The speed with which the government has acted on this is lamentable. We are probably within 10 days of production restarting and we are still talking about possible support. Many of the suppliers will have been without work for weeks already and for some it is probably too late.
I think the government needs to give much more serious consideration to cyber attacks, both in prevention and amelioration when they occur. We have seen a few major UK companies very badly damaged by this already. It is unlikely to stop. The economic effects are sufficiently large to engage the national interest.
They are just getting around to working that out, too.
The idea for JLR is to pay the suppliers to stockpile parts. That's not a thing which would be practical for more than a few weeks at most, and risks leaving them with a glut of stock which they'll then struggle to sell.
I think the reality is that there's no great way to mitigate a very lengthy disruption to a large company's business, other than to prevent it.
I wonder how much cyber protection and cyber insurance JLR had.
Insurance does nothing to help for the knock on effects. And the money could arguably be better spent on prevention.
If we are to start regularly paying out hundreds of millions to maintain UK firms (and perhaps we should) then lets add a levy to the biggest companies profits to cover those costs.
It’s not as simple as maintaining UK firms, JLR doesn’t need to have manufacturing here, it doesn’t need to use UK parts suppliers. JLR are losing (according to Today’s two different guests this morning) between £50m and “hundreds of millions” per week.
As we are seeing with the life sciences industry, if you make the financial environment trickier for companies, especially global companies, they actually do vote with their feet.
I'm extremely sceptical of the pharma companies on this. They are effectively threatening to cancel investment in research facilities in the UK because we won't adjust NHS drug pricing. The Eli Lilly article in the FT just came across as rent-seeking behaviour, special pleading.
The government should call their bluff on this.
Plenty of global senior academics and bright students will be very wary of working or studying in the USA for the next decade. So I strongly concur.
Academics are not the pharma industry.
A good illustration is the invention and development of the therapeutic monoclonal antibody. British Nobel prize winners pioneered the field, and one of the most commercially valuable drugs in history (Humira) was developed in the UK.
It was licensed to a US manufacturer, and the UK's Cambridge Antibody, which pioneered both the drug and the underlying drug development platform, ended up with a very small percentage royalty from the $250bn or so revenue that it has generated since. CAT ended up being purchased by AZN for around £1bn.
CAT's exact contemporary, and a small biotech US competitor in the early development of antibody therapeutics, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, stayed independent and is now worth around $60bn.
The issue is that the government has regulated to require pension funds to invest in bonds and to invest globally. I believe the parliamentary pension fund, for example, has a *3%* allocation to UK equities.
Fundamentally they have deskilled the asset management industry and crushed the risk taking capability. There are now only 4-5 firms that regularly invest in biotech and that’s just not enough for a healthy ecosystem
It's a well known phenomenon that beating the market long term is very difficult by choosing specific stocks, so simply buying globally involves the least choice (on aggregate) and should do well long term. The only argument I can think against it is it leaves you maybe slightly exposed to US big tech - but those companies have done well long term.
What we can glean from the Boriswave in its international context is that rather than pushing extreme policy, Boris Johnson was passive in the face of groupthink. The machine did what the machine does. And it churned out the same policy in most developed countries.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
Disagree. 3 key decisions on Ukraine, HK and students. All Conservative party policy, led by the executive.
Apparently Starmer has given several interviews to broadcasters which have been embargoed till 6pm .
I fear another re-set !
Resignation, or at the very least the firing of McSweeney?
Outside of pb and Westminster no-one knows who McSweeney even is.
He's Dominic Cummings and his removal would have similar resonance
Cummings was on tv briefing us about covid on a daily basis. I don't even know what McSweeney looks like and I follow politics more than 90% of the country.
Cummings was almost never on TV briefings
His famous press conference in the Downing Street garden was the first time the vast majority of the population ever saw him on TV.
Quite so and then he stayed in the background until resigning in December
The swan thing looks like another trap for the left, just like the Jenrick fare-dodging videos.
Reform need to grow their support. Which group of voters hitherto unconvinced by Farage & Tice’s spicy stories are going to fall for the swan bollocks*?
*Swan bollocks, a much prized Roma delicacy I believe.
The swan thing looks like another trap for the left, just like the Jenrick fare-dodging videos.
How ? It just makes him look unserious and believing in conspiracy theories .
You'd hope that we Brits are a bit more sceptical and worldly wise than all those credulous Americans. But then you look at some of the stuff that someone of middling intelligence like our Leon often comes out with, and begin to wonder.
Pb scooped the BBC (and the government?) by a week or so.
The speed with which the government has acted on this is lamentable. We are probably within 10 days of production restarting and we are still talking about possible support. Many of the suppliers will have been without work for weeks already and for some it is probably too late.
I think the government needs to give much more serious consideration to cyber attacks, both in prevention and amelioration when they occur. We have seen a few major UK companies very badly damaged by this already. It is unlikely to stop. The economic effects are sufficiently large to engage the national interest.
They are just getting around to working that out, too.
The idea for JLR is to pay the suppliers to stockpile parts. That's not a thing which would be practical for more than a few weeks at most, and risks leaving them with a glut of stock which they'll then struggle to sell.
I think the reality is that there's no great way to mitigate a very lengthy disruption to a large company's business, other than to prevent it.
I wonder how much cyber protection and cyber insurance JLR had.
Insurance does nothing to help for the knock on effects. And the money could arguably be better spent on prevention.
If we are to start regularly paying out hundreds of millions to maintain UK firms (and perhaps we should) then lets add a levy to the biggest companies profits to cover those costs.
It’s not as simple as maintaining UK firms, JLR doesn’t need to have manufacturing here, it doesn’t need to use UK parts suppliers. JLR are losing (according to Today’s two different guests this morning) between £50m and “hundreds of millions” per week.
As we are seeing with the life sciences industry, if you make the financial environment trickier for companies, especially global companies, they actually do vote with their feet.
I'm extremely sceptical of the pharma companies on this. They are effectively threatening to cancel investment in research facilities in the UK because we won't adjust NHS drug pricing. The Eli Lilly article in the FT just came across as rent-seeking behaviour, special pleading.
The government should call their bluff on this.
Plenty of global senior academics and bright students will be very wary of working or studying in the USA for the next decade. So I strongly concur.
Academics are not the pharma industry.
A good illustration is the invention and development of the therapeutic monoclonal antibody. British Nobel prize winners pioneered the field, and one of the most commercially valuable drugs in history (Humira) was developed in the UK.
It was licensed to a US manufacturer, and the UK's Cambridge Antibody, which pioneered both the drug and the underlying drug development platform, ended up with a very small percentage royalty from the $250bn or so revenue that it has generated since. CAT ended up being purchased by AZN for around £1bn.
CAT's exact contemporary, and a small biotech US competitor in the early development of antibody therapeutics, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, stayed independent and is now worth around $60bn.
The issue is that the government has regulated to require pension funds to invest in bonds and to invest globally. I believe the parliamentary pension fund, for example, has a *3%* allocation to UK equities.
Fundamentally they have deskilled the asset management industry and crushed the risk taking capability. There are now only 4-5 firms that regularly invest in biotech and that’s just not enough for a healthy ecosystem
It's a well known phenomenon that beating the market long term is very difficult by choosing specific stocks, so simply buying globally involves the least choice (on aggregate) and should do well long term. The only argument I can think against it is it leaves you maybe slightly exposed to US big tech - but those companies have done well long term.
The swan thing looks like another trap for the left, just like the Jenrick fare-dodging videos.
How ? It just makes him look unserious and believing in conspiracy theories .
You'd hope that we Brits are a bit more sceptical and worldly wise than all those credulous Americans. But then you look at some of the stuff that someone of middling intelligence like our Leon often comes out with, and begin to wonder.
Farage seems convinced that there’s enough Brits that will fall for his Trump tribute act . No doubt Reform have a base of support who will stick with the party regardless of the swan rubbish and anti-vax sentiment.
What we can glean from the Boriswave in its international context is that rather than pushing extreme policy, Boris Johnson was passive in the face of groupthink. The machine did what the machine does. And it churned out the same policy in most developed countries.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
We all knew that Johnson was just a front man, and that his effectiveness as PM would be determined by the calibre of people appointed to serve under him. We lucked out with the appointment of Kate Bingham to deal with vaccines, but everything else was various shades of disaster.
Though you have to think that Cummings would have been able to see what the consequences of the Boriswave would be, and prevented it from happening, but even his vision needed testing from time to time.
What we can glean from the Boriswave in its international context is that rather than pushing extreme policy, Boris Johnson was passive in the face of groupthink. The machine did what the machine does. And it churned out the same policy in most developed countries.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
We all knew that Johnson was just a front man, and that his effectiveness as PM would be determined by the calibre of people appointed to serve under him. We lucked out with the appointment of Kate Bingham to deal with vaccines, but everything else was various shades of disaster.
Though you have to think that Cummings would have been able to see what the consequences of the Boriswave would be, and prevented it from happening, but even his vision needed testing from time to time.
Can I put on the record how much I despise the phrase 'lucked out'? To me it sounds like 'luck was out', so the opposite of the intended meaning. Am I the only one?
This is bullish from Zelensky. He seems confident of receiving additional weapons from Trump. Let's hope it's not misplaced.
An Axios journalist asked what those working in the Kremlin should know after an attack on Kyiv’s government building. Zelensky answered plainly: "first, know where your bomb shelters are. If you do not stop the war, you will need them."
I wonder if it’ll start to tighten again next spring as the world approaches next year’s Taiwan invasion season?
Supposedly the Chinese are committed to sustaining Russia's war so that it distracts the US from the Pacific. The obvious corollary is that a Ukrainian victory over Russia frees the US to concentrate on China.
If Zelensky has managed to convince Trump that a Ukrainian victory is an "America First" interest, then perhaps @Sandpit will be due a few apologies in the coming months?
Though clearly I am allowing my inherent optimism to run away from me with that.
China wins either way. Russia's defences are depleted and so too its economy. We of the fifth tin foil lancers believe as well as Taiwan, China would quite like its half of Sibera (formerly Outer Manchuria) back.
Taiwan is a vanity play. Siberia has oil, metals and not least, fresh water, all of which China needs.
We need to persuade the Chinese that heading for Vladivostok is a great idea.
Russia has absolutely no chance of defending its Eastern borders against a Chinese invasion.
This is bullish from Zelensky. He seems confident of receiving additional weapons from Trump. Let's hope it's not misplaced.
An Axios journalist asked what those working in the Kremlin should know after an attack on Kyiv’s government building. Zelensky answered plainly: "first, know where your bomb shelters are. If you do not stop the war, you will need them."
I wonder if it’ll start to tighten again next spring as the world approaches next year’s Taiwan invasion season?
Supposedly the Chinese are committed to sustaining Russia's war so that it distracts the US from the Pacific. The obvious corollary is that a Ukrainian victory over Russia frees the US to concentrate on China.
If Zelensky has managed to convince Trump that a Ukrainian victory is an "America First" interest, then perhaps @Sandpit will be due a few apologies in the coming months?
Though clearly I am allowing my inherent optimism to run away from me with that.
China wins either way. Russia's defences are depleted and so too its economy. We of the fifth tin foil lancers believe as well as Taiwan, China would quite like its half of Sibera (formerly Outer Manchuria) back.
Taiwan is a vanity play. Siberia has oil, metals and not least, fresh water, all of which China needs.
I don't believe Russia would use nuclear weapons to defend expansionist conquests (e.g. of Ukraine), but if a country isn't prepared to use nuclear weapons to defend against a war of conquest launched against them, then there's no point in having them.
So I don't find speculation about China taking Siberia remotely credible.
What we can glean from the Boriswave in its international context is that rather than pushing extreme policy, Boris Johnson was passive in the face of groupthink. The machine did what the machine does. And it churned out the same policy in most developed countries.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
We all knew that Johnson was just a front man, and that his effectiveness as PM would be determined by the calibre of people appointed to serve under him. We lucked out with the appointment of Kate Bingham to deal with vaccines, but everything else was various shades of disaster.
Though you have to think that Cummings would have been able to see what the consequences of the Boriswave would be, and prevented it from happening, but even his vision needed testing from time to time.
Can I put on the record how much I despise the phrase 'lucked out'? To me it sounds like 'luck was out', so the opposite of the intended meaning. Am I the only one?
The swan thing looks like another trap for the left, just like the Jenrick fare-dodging videos.
How ? It just makes him look unserious and believing in conspiracy theories .
You'd hope that we Brits are a bit more sceptical and worldly wise than all those credulous Americans. But then you look at some of the stuff that someone of middling intelligence like our Leon often comes out with, and begin to wonder.
Farage seems convinced that there’s enough Brits that will fall for his Trump tribute act . No doubt Reform have a base of support who will stick with the party regardless of the swan rubbish and anti-vax sentiment.
But that’s not enough to win an election .
But when will the squeezed middle get to hear of Reform chaos when the BBC have an embargo on Reform bad news?
What we can glean from the Boriswave in its international context is that rather than pushing extreme policy, Boris Johnson was passive in the face of groupthink. The machine did what the machine does. And it churned out the same policy in most developed countries.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
We all knew that Johnson was just a front man, and that his effectiveness as PM would be determined by the calibre of people appointed to serve under him. We lucked out with the appointment of Kate Bingham to deal with vaccines, but everything else was various shades of disaster.
Though you have to think that Cummings would have been able to see what the consequences of the Boriswave would be, and prevented it from happening, but even his vision needed testing from time to time.
Can I put on the record how much I despise the phrase 'lucked out'? To me it sounds like 'luck was out', so the opposite of the intended meaning. Am I the only one?
Isn't that what happens to posh people when they lose their house keys?
The swan thing looks like another trap for the left, just like the Jenrick fare-dodging videos.
How ? It just makes him look unserious and believing in conspiracy theories .
There have been cases in the past of migrants killing and eating swans, not realising that they're a protected animal in this country. I remember reading about it at the time, but it may have been 10 years ago.
What we can glean from the Boriswave in its international context is that rather than pushing extreme policy, Boris Johnson was passive in the face of groupthink. The machine did what the machine does. And it churned out the same policy in most developed countries.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
We all knew that Johnson was just a front man, and that his effectiveness as PM would be determined by the calibre of people appointed to serve under him. We lucked out with the appointment of Kate Bingham to deal with vaccines, but everything else was various shades of disaster.
Though you have to think that Cummings would have been able to see what the consequences of the Boriswave would be, and prevented it from happening, but even his vision needed testing from time to time.
Can I put on the record how much I despise the phrase 'lucked out'? To me it sounds like 'luck was out', so the opposite of the intended meaning. Am I the only one?
What we can glean from the Boriswave in its international context is that rather than pushing extreme policy, Boris Johnson was passive in the face of groupthink. The machine did what the machine does. And it churned out the same policy in most developed countries.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
We all knew that Johnson was just a front man, and that his effectiveness as PM would be determined by the calibre of people appointed to serve under him. We lucked out with the appointment of Kate Bingham to deal with vaccines, but everything else was various shades of disaster.
Though you have to think that Cummings would have been able to see what the consequences of the Boriswave would be, and prevented it from happening, but even his vision needed testing from time to time.
Can I put on the record how much I despise the phrase 'lucked out'? To me it sounds like 'luck was out', so the opposite of the intended meaning. Am I the only one?
Isn't that what happens to posh people when they lose their house keys?
Posh people don't carry keys - their servants open and close the doors.
What we can glean from the Boriswave in its international context is that rather than pushing extreme policy, Boris Johnson was passive in the face of groupthink. The machine did what the machine does. And it churned out the same policy in most developed countries.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
We all knew that Johnson was just a front man, and that his effectiveness as PM would be determined by the calibre of people appointed to serve under him. We lucked out with the appointment of Kate Bingham to deal with vaccines, but everything else was various shades of disaster.
Though you have to think that Cummings would have been able to see what the consequences of the Boriswave would be, and prevented it from happening, but even his vision needed testing from time to time.
Can I put on the record how much I despise the phrase 'lucked out'? To me it sounds like 'luck was out', so the opposite of the intended meaning. Am I the only one?
(What's going on with his eyebrows? Is he one of those people who naturally has a monobrow and he's shaved a little path between them? I have some sympathy with him if so. Probably there's no good solution.)
The fella interviewing him, by the way, is Mike Sweeney - local radio presenter and very much not the sort of person the BBC habitually employs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Sweeney_(DJ)
"Sweeney attended Mount Carmel School in Salford, after which he worked at Associated Electrical Industries in Trafford Park. He was a platelayer at the docks, a labourer, a miner, a van driver, building site labourer and a computer programmer.[citation needed] He performed in a local band, the Salford Jets ... He plays football, has boxed for Salford Lads' Club and also swum for the city."
What we can glean from the Boriswave in its international context is that rather than pushing extreme policy, Boris Johnson was passive in the face of groupthink. The machine did what the machine does. And it churned out the same policy in most developed countries.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
We all knew that Johnson was just a front man, and that his effectiveness as PM would be determined by the calibre of people appointed to serve under him. We lucked out with the appointment of Kate Bingham to deal with vaccines, but everything else was various shades of disaster.
Though you have to think that Cummings would have been able to see what the consequences of the Boriswave would be, and prevented it from happening, but even his vision needed testing from time to time.
Can I put on the record how much I despise the phrase 'lucked out'? To me it sounds like 'luck was out', so the opposite of the intended meaning. Am I the only one?
The onward march of English results, appropriately given the country's Imperial past, in large quantities of collateral linguistic damage.
What we can glean from the Boriswave in its international context is that rather than pushing extreme policy, Boris Johnson was passive in the face of groupthink. The machine did what the machine does. And it churned out the same policy in most developed countries.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
We all knew that Johnson was just a front man, and that his effectiveness as PM would be determined by the calibre of people appointed to serve under him. We lucked out with the appointment of Kate Bingham to deal with vaccines, but everything else was various shades of disaster.
Though you have to think that Cummings would have been able to see what the consequences of the Boriswave would be, and prevented it from happening, but even his vision needed testing from time to time.
Can I put on the record how much I despise the phrase 'lucked out'? To me it sounds like 'luck was out', so the opposite of the intended meaning. Am I the only one?
Isn't that what happens to posh people when they lose their house keys?
Posh people don't carry keys - their servants open and close the doors.
In that case they would be "lucked out" if they lost their butlers. Anyway I'm off to read a buck.
This is bullish from Zelensky. He seems confident of receiving additional weapons from Trump. Let's hope it's not misplaced.
An Axios journalist asked what those working in the Kremlin should know after an attack on Kyiv’s government building. Zelensky answered plainly: "first, know where your bomb shelters are. If you do not stop the war, you will need them."
I wonder if it’ll start to tighten again next spring as the world approaches next year’s Taiwan invasion season?
Supposedly the Chinese are committed to sustaining Russia's war so that it distracts the US from the Pacific. The obvious corollary is that a Ukrainian victory over Russia frees the US to concentrate on China.
If Zelensky has managed to convince Trump that a Ukrainian victory is an "America First" interest, then perhaps @Sandpit will be due a few apologies in the coming months?
Though clearly I am allowing my inherent optimism to run away from me with that.
China wins either way. Russia's defences are depleted and so too its economy. We of the fifth tin foil lancers believe as well as Taiwan, China would quite like its half of Sibera (formerly Outer Manchuria) back.
Taiwan is a vanity play. Siberia has oil, metals and not least, fresh water, all of which China needs.
We need to persuade the Chinese that heading for Vladivostok is a great idea.
Russia has absolutely no chance of defending its Eastern borders against a Chinese invasion.
Tricky one, that. Who is the bigger bogeyman, Russia or China? Russia is probably the looser cannon but China is almost certainly the stronger and is clearly an enemy. I'm not convinced the west is better off with a dying Russia with China gobbling away at its east. In an ideal world an independent Eastern Russia would be aligned with the west but I don't see how we achieve that.
At this point, the enemy is basically out of air defences except for those protecting the Kremlin and Putin’s dacha on the coast.
Crimea is now just a piñata, to be whacked for sport by Ukraine. It holds a mass of Russian men and materiel that are making no contribution to the war in the east, and are simply holding Crimea which is now no use as a warm-water base (well, not unless Russia wants to convert surface vessels to submarines).
They are stuck in there purely to stop Putin losing face (and ultimately, his neck). Crimea ties down air defence systems that should be protecting hydrocarbons infrastructure across Mother Russia - that is, until they get taken out (with their supporting radar). Crimea is a graveyard for high value kit - and not much more, strategically.
The swan thing looks like another trap for the left, just like the Jenrick fare-dodging videos.
How ? It just makes him look unserious and believing in conspiracy theories .
There have been cases in the past of migrants killing and eating swans, not realising that they're a protected animal in this country. I remember reading about it at the time, but it may have been 10 years ago.
Citation please. A court conviction report would be helpful.
What we can glean from the Boriswave in its international context is that rather than pushing extreme policy, Boris Johnson was passive in the face of groupthink. The machine did what the machine does. And it churned out the same policy in most developed countries.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
We all knew that Johnson was just a front man, and that his effectiveness as PM would be determined by the calibre of people appointed to serve under him. We lucked out with the appointment of Kate Bingham to deal with vaccines, but everything else was various shades of disaster.
Though you have to think that Cummings would have been able to see what the consequences of the Boriswave would be, and prevented it from happening, but even his vision needed testing from time to time.
Can I put on the record how much I despise the phrase 'lucked out'? To me it sounds like 'luck was out', so the opposite of the intended meaning. Am I the only one?
No good explanation of its origin in a quick google so I'll throw in a plausible one.
Golfers hole out. Hole a chip shot that would be running way past the pin but hits the flag and you have lucked out.
More likely the meaning just reversed over time as with so many words, terrific, awesome, bad, sick, etc. It is just part of how language evolves.
Here's an idea. Labour should announce scrapping Council tax for a 0.5%ish charge on property values, subject to a referendum.
Send every house in country info on how much they pay now and what they would pay in future. Make sure that 75% will see lower tax bill.
Tories and Reform will inevitably oppose and 75% of people will see that Labour lowered their tax bill.
It's not just 75% of all households - I'd wager that more than 75% of PBers would get a tax cut. I know that both Big_G_NorthWales and I would both get one, and he has a property worth around £400k (I think).
You don’t need a referendum - it would be part of the Finance Bill legislation. For Stodge Towers, a 0.5% tax on what I think would be a realistic valuation comes out close to what we pay now in Council Tax. You could go for 0.5% below a certain value and perhaps up to 1% for properties over £2.5 million. The key is to ensure the amounts raised in each area meet the demands of each area and reduce the amount Government has to put in to make up the difference.
1% would be a slightly bonkers amount of cash on some Edinburgh propertied. 0.5% on a Barton Avenue property would be £12,000 per year, up from £3,800.
A bit too far imo.
High value property owners have done well for decades out of the current scheme - if I pay nearly £2k a year on a house worth, let’s say, £500k, how can someone owning a house worth £2 million pay less than £4k? The failure to account for high value property is one of the biggest flaws in the Council Tax system and has pushed the costs disproportionately on to lower value homes which are often those owned by those with lower income.
It was a design feature not a flaw.
Council tax is about local services not redistribution. There is some element of greater contribution from the wealthy but fundamentally people use the same amount of rubbish collection etc
Plenty of redistribution involved. For example, from the outlying parts of the district into urban Bradford.
The swan thing looks like another trap for the left, just like the Jenrick fare-dodging videos.
How ? It just makes him look unserious and believing in conspiracy theories .
There have been cases in the past of migrants killing and eating swans, not realising that they're a protected animal in this country. I remember reading about it at the time, but it may have been 10 years ago.
An enterprising journalist might start digging into the grouse shooting estates that Farage spends so much time at. A few Hen Harrier deaths and...
The swan thing looks like another trap for the left, just like the Jenrick fare-dodging videos.
How ? It just makes him look unserious and believing in conspiracy theories .
You'd hope that we Brits are a bit more sceptical and worldly wise than all those credulous Americans. But then you look at some of the stuff that someone of middling intelligence like our Leon often comes out with, and begin to wonder.
This is bullish from Zelensky. He seems confident of receiving additional weapons from Trump. Let's hope it's not misplaced.
An Axios journalist asked what those working in the Kremlin should know after an attack on Kyiv’s government building. Zelensky answered plainly: "first, know where your bomb shelters are. If you do not stop the war, you will need them."
I wonder if it’ll start to tighten again next spring as the world approaches next year’s Taiwan invasion season?
Supposedly the Chinese are committed to sustaining Russia's war so that it distracts the US from the Pacific. The obvious corollary is that a Ukrainian victory over Russia frees the US to concentrate on China.
If Zelensky has managed to convince Trump that a Ukrainian victory is an "America First" interest, then perhaps @Sandpit will be due a few apologies in the coming months?
Though clearly I am allowing my inherent optimism to run away from me with that.
China wins either way. Russia's defences are depleted and so too its economy. We of the fifth tin foil lancers believe as well as Taiwan, China would quite like its half of Sibera (formerly Outer Manchuria) back.
Taiwan is a vanity play. Siberia has oil, metals and not least, fresh water, all of which China needs.
We need to persuade the Chinese that heading for Vladivostok is a great idea.
Russia has absolutely no chance of defending its Eastern borders against a Chinese invasion.
Tricky one, that. Who is the bigger bogeyman, Russia or China? Russia is probably the looser cannon but China is almost certainly the stronger and is clearly an enemy. I'm not convinced the west is better off with a dying Russia with China gobbling away at its east. In an ideal world an independent Eastern Russia would be aligned with the west but I don't see how we achieve that.
In a perfect world, Russia and China spending the next decade fighting each other would be great for everyone else.
The economies of both russia and china do appear to be pretty screwed at the moment, it’ll be interesting to watch what happens there in the next few years.
(What's going on with his eyebrows? Is he one of those people who naturally has a monobrow and he's shaved a little path between them? I have some sympathy with him if so. Probably there's no good solution.)
The fella interviewing him, by the way, is Mike Sweeney - local radio presenter and very much not the sort of person the BBC habitually employs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Sweeney_(DJ)
"Sweeney attended Mount Carmel School in Salford, after which he worked at Associated Electrical Industries in Trafford Park. He was a platelayer at the docks, a labourer, a miner, a van driver, building site labourer and a computer programmer.[citation needed] He performed in a local band, the Salford Jets ... He plays football, has boxed for Salford Lads' Club and also swum for the city."
For the monobrow? Electrolysis is the permanent solution
Pb scooped the BBC (and the government?) by a week or so.
The speed with which the government has acted on this is lamentable. We are probably within 10 days of production restarting and we are still talking about possible support. Many of the suppliers will have been without work for weeks already and for some it is probably too late.
I think the government needs to give much more serious consideration to cyber attacks, both in prevention and amelioration when they occur. We have seen a few major UK companies very badly damaged by this already. It is unlikely to stop. The economic effects are sufficiently large to engage the national interest.
They are just getting around to working that out, too.
The idea for JLR is to pay the suppliers to stockpile parts. That's not a thing which would be practical for more than a few weeks at most, and risks leaving them with a glut of stock which they'll then struggle to sell.
I think the reality is that there's no great way to mitigate a very lengthy disruption to a large company's business, other than to prevent it.
I wonder how much cyber protection and cyber insurance JLR had.
Insurance does nothing to help for the knock on effects. And the money could arguably be better spent on prevention.
If we are to start regularly paying out hundreds of millions to maintain UK firms (and perhaps we should) then lets add a levy to the biggest companies profits to cover those costs.
It’s not as simple as maintaining UK firms, JLR doesn’t need to have manufacturing here, it doesn’t need to use UK parts suppliers. JLR are losing (according to Today’s two different guests this morning) between £50m and “hundreds of millions” per week.
As we are seeing with the life sciences industry, if you make the financial environment trickier for companies, especially global companies, they actually do vote with their feet.
I'm extremely sceptical of the pharma companies on this. They are effectively threatening to cancel investment in research facilities in the UK because we won't adjust NHS drug pricing. The Eli Lilly article in the FT just came across as rent-seeking behaviour, special pleading.
The government should call their bluff on this.
Plenty of global senior academics and bright students will be very wary of working or studying in the USA for the next decade. So I strongly concur.
Academics are not the pharma industry.
A good illustration is the invention and development of the therapeutic monoclonal antibody. British Nobel prize winners pioneered the field, and one of the most commercially valuable drugs in history (Humira) was developed in the UK.
It was licensed to a US manufacturer, and the UK's Cambridge Antibody, which pioneered both the drug and the underlying drug development platform, ended up with a very small percentage royalty from the $250bn or so revenue that it has generated since. CAT ended up being purchased by AZN for around £1bn.
CAT's exact contemporary, and a small biotech US competitor in the early development of antibody therapeutics, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, stayed independent and is now worth around $60bn.
The issue is that the government has regulated to require pension funds to invest in bonds and to invest globally. I believe the parliamentary pension fund, for example, has a *3%* allocation to UK equities.
Fundamentally they have deskilled the asset management industry and crushed the risk taking capability. There are now only 4-5 firms that regularly invest in biotech and that’s just not enough for a healthy ecosystem
It's a well known phenomenon that beating the market long term is very difficult by choosing specific stocks, so simply buying globally involves the least choice (on aggregate) and should do well long term. The only argument I can think against it is it leaves you maybe slightly exposed to US big tech - but those companies have done well long term.
S&P 500 has averaged something like 8% annually over the past century.
That should be everyone’s long-term investment, outside tax shelters such as pensions.
If your expenses are not in USD, you are taking on board a lot of currency risk if that is your only investment. If you are a Brit, with your expenses in Sterling, I'd probably split UK/US/RoW in roughly equal measures.
Pb scooped the BBC (and the government?) by a week or so.
The speed with which the government has acted on this is lamentable. We are probably within 10 days of production restarting and we are still talking about possible support. Many of the suppliers will have been without work for weeks already and for some it is probably too late.
I think the government needs to give much more serious consideration to cyber attacks, both in prevention and amelioration when they occur. We have seen a few major UK companies very badly damaged by this already. It is unlikely to stop. The economic effects are sufficiently large to engage the national interest.
They are just getting around to working that out, too.
The idea for JLR is to pay the suppliers to stockpile parts. That's not a thing which would be practical for more than a few weeks at most, and risks leaving them with a glut of stock which they'll then struggle to sell.
I think the reality is that there's no great way to mitigate a very lengthy disruption to a large company's business, other than to prevent it.
I wonder how much cyber protection and cyber insurance JLR had.
Insurance does nothing to help for the knock on effects. And the money could arguably be better spent on prevention.
If we are to start regularly paying out hundreds of millions to maintain UK firms (and perhaps we should) then lets add a levy to the biggest companies profits to cover those costs.
It’s not as simple as maintaining UK firms, JLR doesn’t need to have manufacturing here, it doesn’t need to use UK parts suppliers. JLR are losing (according to Today’s two different guests this morning) between £50m and “hundreds of millions” per week.
As we are seeing with the life sciences industry, if you make the financial environment trickier for companies, especially global companies, they actually do vote with their feet.
I'm extremely sceptical of the pharma companies on this. They are effectively threatening to cancel investment in research facilities in the UK because we won't adjust NHS drug pricing. The Eli Lilly article in the FT just came across as rent-seeking behaviour, special pleading.
The government should call their bluff on this.
Plenty of global senior academics and bright students will be very wary of working or studying in the USA for the next decade. So I strongly concur.
Academics are not the pharma industry.
A good illustration is the invention and development of the therapeutic monoclonal antibody. British Nobel prize winners pioneered the field, and one of the most commercially valuable drugs in history (Humira) was developed in the UK.
It was licensed to a US manufacturer, and the UK's Cambridge Antibody, which pioneered both the drug and the underlying drug development platform, ended up with a very small percentage royalty from the $250bn or so revenue that it has generated since. CAT ended up being purchased by AZN for around £1bn.
CAT's exact contemporary, and a small biotech US competitor in the early development of antibody therapeutics, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, stayed independent and is now worth around $60bn.
The issue is that the government has regulated to require pension funds to invest in bonds and to invest globally. I believe the parliamentary pension fund, for example, has a *3%* allocation to UK equities.
Fundamentally they have deskilled the asset management industry and crushed the risk taking capability. There are now only 4-5 firms that regularly invest in biotech and that’s just not enough for a healthy ecosystem
It's a well known phenomenon that beating the market long term is very difficult by choosing specific stocks, so simply buying globally involves the least choice (on aggregate) and should do well long term. The only argument I can think against it is it leaves you maybe slightly exposed to US big tech - but those companies have done well long term.
S&P 500 has averaged something like 8% annually over the past century.
That should be everyone’s long-term investment, outside tax shelters such as pensions.
If your expenses are not in USD, you are taking on board a lot of currency risk if that is your only investment. If you are a Brit, with your expenses in Sterling, I'd probably split UK/US/RoW in roughly equal measures.
That’s fair enough, but the UK/US currency risk isn’t massive, and I’ll personally keep throwing a couple of bags of sand at the S&P every month because I live in a USD country.
The swan thing looks like another trap for the left, just like the Jenrick fare-dodging videos.
How ? It just makes him look unserious and believing in conspiracy theories .
You'd hope that we Brits are a bit more sceptical and worldly wise than all those credulous Americans. But then you look at some of the stuff that someone of middling intelligence like our Leon often comes out with, and begin to wonder.
He's on retainer to spread that
Swan eating has been recorded amongst East European migrants for two decades - multiple reports
It is also documented by Ben Judah in his book on Underclass London, "This is London". That's Ben Judah who is now a senior Labour government advisor
As for the carp claim, there is actually a man employed to go round stopping Eastern Europeans eating carp
"My job is telling people from eastern Europe not to eat carp from UK rivers"
Best selling car marque in Bridgend is MG. Sinclair Mercedes Benz has added BYD to its portfolio. FRF Vauxhall and Peugeot is now also a LeapMotor dealer, whilst Bassetts Nissan has been replaced by Bassetts Omoda-Jaecoo.
A Chinese Range Rover copy for the price of a high end Corsa, JLR are b@ggered.
The swan thing looks like another trap for the left, just like the Jenrick fare-dodging videos.
How ? It just makes him look unserious and believing in conspiracy theories .
You'd hope that we Brits are a bit more sceptical and worldly wise than all those credulous Americans. But then you look at some of the stuff that someone of middling intelligence like our Leon often comes out with, and begin to wonder.
He's on retainer to spread that
Swan eating has been recorded amongst East European migrants for two decades - multiple reports
It is also documented by Ben Judah in his book on Underclass London, "This is London". That's Ben Judah who is now a senior Labour government advisor
As for the carp claim, there is actually a man employed to go round stopping Eastern Europeans eating carp
"My job is telling people from eastern Europe not to eat carp from UK rivers"
Apart from that, a great day for the anti-Farage crowd, tho we expect no better from a dribble-flecked clown like @IanB2 so he can be forgiven
Pedantically rivers wouldn't be the issue, its carp fisheries that would be worried. You don't want Big Bertha, you champion specimen 50 lb carp heading home to someone's dinner table.
Comments
I’m pleased that the relationship six months later appears to be a lot better.
“Trump hangs autopen photo instead of Biden portrait in new presidential gallery”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/25/trump-hangs-autopen-photo-instead-of-biden-portrait-in-new-presidential-gallery
Trump blamed the Ukrainians for starting the war.
Trump rolled out the red carpet to Putin in Alaska.
You call it a reset. I call it confused and confusing.
https://tomharwood.substack.com/p/the-truth-about-the-boriswave
Not sure I buy it, but some interesting points.
Chyyyyyyyna is more interesting, perhaps. They have already been heavily sustaining Russia, whilst balancing it with external relationships.
But *could* they sustain Russia without full-blown support eg sending troops and tanks, and avoid a bigger downside from other relationships? Maybe air decfences are a possibility?
Russia is not a large economy, so what does Russia offer beyond gas/oil, and a black hole? Perhaps strategic land?
I'm not aware of any so far, but eventually Trump will get onto 'persecuted Christians in China', and how he has to protect them.
Didn’t you once have a brain? Was it Brexit?
❗️Can everyone please STOP using the hashtag #RussianFuelCrisis because it is causing HUGE tailbacks all across russia. Causing people to panic buy which makes the situation EVEN WORSE.
So 🙏 DON'T retweet and DON'T use the hashtag #RussianFuelCrisis ever again!!
I don't see a Reform majority at the moment, nor indeed more than 250 seats. But that would still be extraordinary.
McSweeney is extremely un-noisy, certainly compared to eg Cumming and Campbell. I don’t think I’ve seen any kind of public statement by him.
Government is on the hook for the loans if they go bankrupt. Not to mention the complexity of existing credit agreements that need to be reviewed at each firm (the government would want seniority).
Lend the money to JLR with a parent company guarantee. And/or provide a guarantee facility through each firm’s bank.
Though one shudders to think what such a brew might contain.
Sounds like the Sir Humphreys were in charge when Boris was in power, even more so than normal; I'd agree with that.
Council tax is about local services not redistribution. There is some element of greater contribution from the wealthy but fundamentally people use the same amount of rubbish collection etc
American pharma is inherently political, and they work in a way that’s totally antithetical to a British audience.
Personally I think the NHS model is less than ideal, but the single biggest argument in favour of it is central negotiations with suppliers.
However, if doing all three, it needs political backing, persuasion and significant, quick expansion of housing and infrastructure alongside it. None of which they could be bothered with.
So Boriswave it shall be.
I entirely agree with your sentiment, I'm just a bit nervous that a progressive system would cause such outrage in the SE establishment that an excellent policy would be undermined.
Fundamentally they have deskilled the asset management industry and crushed the risk taking capability. There are now only 4-5 firms that regularly invest in biotech and that’s just not enough for a healthy ecosystem
Taiwan is a vanity play. Siberia has oil, metals and not least, fresh water, all of which China needs.
Now gilts, bonds - that's err. That's not really a story you'd want to have been a part of over the previous 10 years...
It is quite funny the way that sort of investment is classified as "low risk" though when it's done absolutely shite https://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/v/vanguard-funds-uk-gilt-etf-gbp#
I expect that he will wind his neck in a little for a time; this is perhaps too "nutter" for the non-core votes he needs.
Presumably they do some polling for direction, as with all the others?
*Swan bollocks, a much prized Roma delicacy I believe.
https://x.com/jayinkyiv/status/1971088120872567074
At this point, the enemy is basically out of air defences except for those protecting the Kremlin and Putin’s dacha on the coast.
That should be everyone’s long-term investment, outside tax shelters such as pensions.
But that’s not enough to win an election .
Though you have to think that Cummings would have been able to see what the consequences of the Boriswave would be, and prevented it from happening, but even his vision needed testing from time to time.
Russia has absolutely no chance of defending its Eastern borders against a Chinese invasion.
So I don't find speculation about China taking Siberia remotely credible.
https://www.facebook.com/watch?v=1340921714351463
(What's going on with his eyebrows? Is he one of those people who naturally has a monobrow and he's shaved a little path between them? I have some sympathy with him if so. Probably there's no good solution.)
The fella interviewing him, by the way, is Mike Sweeney - local radio presenter and very much not the sort of person the BBC habitually employs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Sweeney_(DJ)
"Sweeney attended Mount Carmel School in Salford, after which he worked at Associated Electrical Industries in Trafford Park. He was a platelayer at the docks, a labourer, a miner, a van driver, building site labourer and a computer programmer.[citation needed] He performed in a local band, the Salford Jets ... He plays football, has boxed for Salford Lads' Club and also swum for the city."
They are stuck in there purely to stop Putin losing face (and ultimately, his neck). Crimea ties down air defence systems that should be protecting hydrocarbons infrastructure across Mother Russia - that is, until they get taken out (with their supporting radar). Crimea is a graveyard for high value kit - and not much more, strategically.
Golfers hole out. Hole a chip shot that would be running way past the pin but hits the flag and you have lucked out.
More likely the meaning just reversed over time as with so many words, terrific, awesome, bad, sick, etc. It is just part of how language evolves.
The economies of both russia and china do appear to be pretty screwed at the moment, it’ll be interesting to watch what happens there in the next few years.
Still no critique of Farage's shambolic fortnight.
Stew!
In just the first six months of 2025, China installed more solar capacity than the United States has managed in its history
NY Times
https://x.com/FindoutnowUK/status/1971182502351175801?s=19
Meanwhile China creates global dominance in EVs and batteries and generation...
China currently installs 100 solar panels every second.
All 4 Non-Ref parties within 5 %
It is also documented by Ben Judah in his book on Underclass London, "This is London". That's Ben Judah who is now a senior Labour government advisor
As for the carp claim, there is actually a man employed to go round stopping Eastern Europeans eating carp
"My job is telling people from eastern Europe not to eat carp from UK rivers"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-35028556
Apart from that, a great day for the anti-Farage crowd, tho we expect no better from a dribble-flecked clown like @IanB2 so he can be forgiven
Best selling car marque in Bridgend is MG. Sinclair Mercedes Benz has added BYD to its portfolio. FRF Vauxhall and Peugeot is now also a LeapMotor dealer, whilst Bassetts Nissan has been replaced by Bassetts Omoda-Jaecoo.
A Chinese Range Rover copy for the price of a high end Corsa, JLR are b@ggered.