Another fantastic episode of The Traitors tonight.
Isn't it brilliant? We know some people are manipulating us, lying to us and controlling the narrative. And everyone has an idea exactly who it is. We're almost always looking in the wrong places and are all too eager to pile into a witch hunt for a scapegoat. Your ordinary Faithful swirls in a morass of deflection and misinformation trying not to be murdered while the Traitors have a good laugh at how clever they are. As a metaphor for our times it can't be beaten.
And when they do find a Traitor, the Traitors get to recruit a Faithful to their ranks. (Or else, that Faithful gets murdered.)
Making the Faithful even more paranoid about who can be trusted.
(I can see JR getting removed. But at least one of Cat, Alan and whoever they recruit looks good to be there at the end...)
On top of all that, there's the "after you, Claude"* dynamic. If a faithful does, somehow, work out who is a traitor, it's dangerous to lead the charge against them, because you are putting yourself at the top of the kill list.
As a parable of the difficulty of being good in a fallen world, it's brilliant.
(* In this case, change that to after you, Claudia.)
'My teenage daughter fell victim to a satanic online group – and I felt powerless to help'
The online safety act may not be the answer, but what is?
Hardware control rather than software control is the only answer. Children are always going to be more tech savvy than their parents so trying to impose restrictions once the child has a device in their hands is going to be futile and just inconvenience the wrong people. I think smartphones should be banned for under 16s. After that, as much as I hate to make any assumptions in this case, it really requires strong and engaged parenting.
Yes it requires discussion between child and parents, or perhaps an older sibling, about what they are doing online.
Apple’s Parental Controls are really easy to set up, but the parents need to know that they are there. https://support.apple.com/en-us/105121 The really important thing is to set up the Apple ID with an email address that the parents control.
Android ecosystem is a hot mess for parental controls, and a dumb phone with supervised internet at home is probably the best option.
The department had attempted for more than two years to keep secret the highly critical report, written by the former Home Office special adviser Nick Timothy. It was released only after a legal challenge by The Times.
Timothy thinks that Civil Servants not wanting to work on Bravermans immigration agenda is being "detached from reality". I dont blame them at all. I wouldn't want to do so either, and would seek work elsewhere. Its Braverman who is detached from reality.
Not as much as Lam is though. Her proposal to deport 3.5 million people with ILR by reason of "cultural cohrrence" is really quite extraordinary. Going onto an income of less than £38 000 for six months is grounds for deportation, including it seems maternity or parenting leave.
She wants to deport about half my department of 250 people or their immediate families. It is madness.
If you look at the details of the bill, the sponsor is Chris Philp. Why everyone is piling on Lam is a bit odd as everyone points out she is a junior unlike Philp and Cleverly.
Q: How does the country have a sensible discussion about this issue and others without it descending into ad hominin attacks and misapplied quotes.
The video is from Lam, she is an Opposition whip and sometimes spoken of as potential Conservative leader. She isnt just some random MP. This is her video:
If you look at the shear amount of legislation in this area since 1983 (and the inherent complexities that arise) you can judge the direction of travel is a) more restrictions (and complexities) and b) no amount legislative changes will be enough for some. So we are left with shouting points rather than talking points with little or no resolution forthcoming.
'My teenage daughter fell victim to a satanic online group – and I felt powerless to help'
The online safety act may not be the answer, but what is?
The more I read about the statistics of young teenagers and the harm of being 'constantly online' via access to smartphones on mental health and a large number of other developmental areas, the worse it becomes.
It's not great for adults, but teenagers seem to be particularly susceptible given it is at a critical part of their development. Current research seems to suggest the harm is very statistically significant.
I wonder if we, as a society, need to start treating smartphones like tobacco or alcohol. Only available to those say aged 16 or older. The default for younger children, once old enough to have some independence going to school alone etc, should be feature phones with calling and texting only.
Yes they will still have access to home computers or tablets etc, but that is much more easily supervised and time limited. And the increase in harm has specifically been since smartphones became prevalent.
The smartphone ban in schools seems to have worked in Oz, and now is being extended to a nation wide Social Media ban for under 16s.
The department had attempted for more than two years to keep secret the highly critical report, written by the former Home Office special adviser Nick Timothy. It was released only after a legal challenge by The Times.
Timothy thinks that Civil Servants not wanting to work on Bravermans immigration agenda is being "detached from reality". I dont blame them at all. I wouldn't want to do so either, and would seek work elsewhere. Its Braverman who is detached from reality.
Not as much as Lam is though. Her proposal to deport 3.5 million people with ILR by reason of "cultural cohrrence" is really quite extraordinary. Going onto an income of less than £38 000 for six months is grounds for deportation, including it seems maternity or parenting leave.
She wants to deport about half my department of 250 people or their immediate families. It is madness.
If you look at the details of the bill, the sponsor is Chris Philp. Why everyone is piling on Lam is a bit odd as everyone points out she is a junior unlike Philp and Cleverly.
Q: How does the country have a sensible discussion about this issue and others without it descending into ad hominin attacks and misapplied quotes.
The video is from Lam, she is an Opposition whip and sometimes spoken of as potential Conservative leader. She isnt just some random MP. This is her video:
‘The police weren’t interested’: what’s driving the rise in private prosecutions? ... Theresa May’s decision to axe 21,000 police officers while she was home secretary. ... Between 2010 and 2014, after the coalition government ordered the MoJ to slash its budget by almost a quarter, the CPS lost 22% of its solicitors and 28% of its barristers. From 2010 to 2019, the MoJ closed more than half of all the courts in England and Wales, and sold off many court buildings. There are now almost 400,000 criminal cases waiting to be heard in England and Wales. ... the coalition government’s decision to make stealing goods under £200 into a “summary offence”, which carry shorter sentences, had effectively given criminals a free pass. “These thieves aren’t stupid,” said Neville, the former Met detective. “Why nick £200 when you can nick £199 five times?” ... The victims and courts bill currently making its way through parliament contains an explosive detail that could topple the entire business model. It proposes that lawyers should only be awarded “reasonably sufficient” costs from central funds. https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2025/oct/23/the-police-werent-interested-whats-driving-the-rise-in-private-prosecutions
Even though this has now been changed, the cat is out of the bag. Thieves have realised nobody is going to stop them, the police will never come looking for them, there is nothing to fear. And even if they do get caught, we are going to move to a system where a sentence for less than a year (which I am sure makes up a huge percentage of a tiny fraction who are ever caught) won't ever go to jail.
Is it beyond the wit of man to come up with an effective 21st century punishment that doesn't involve free food, accomodation that acts as a crime university for those starting out?
Don't get me wrong, very serious crimes need jail time for public protection alone, as well as punishment.
For thieves and the like, can we be a little more inventive? A spot fine of 10x the value of what you sold, to be deducted from any future salary or public benefits, for example. With an increasing multiple for repeat offenders.
It should be aim to be almost as quick as giving a parking ticket.
I think part of the problem is the threat of being stabbed. Recent case in Edinburgh where a couple of 16-year olds stole a few bikes from a bike rack in front of hundreds of people in a pub. Once upon a time, a posse of the regulars would have headed out and provided some physical deterrence. The same goes for shoplifting.
And this isn't irrational; a few days ago a video went viral of a group of teenages all carrying knives on Princes Street clearly searching for someone. Scary stuff.
I think the police just need to have a small squad on dirt bikes that nip around confiscating knives and illegal e-motorcycles from these kids. It doesn't need a huge investment - with the power of social media a bit of enforcement can reach the whole city and deterrence is achieved. The same goes for parking on zig-zags, phone use etc etc
The department had attempted for more than two years to keep secret the highly critical report, written by the former Home Office special adviser Nick Timothy. It was released only after a legal challenge by The Times.
Timothy thinks that Civil Servants not wanting to work on Bravermans immigration agenda is being "detached from reality". I dont blame them at all. I wouldn't want to do so either, and would seek work elsewhere. Its Braverman who is detached from reality.
Not as much as Lam is though. Her proposal to deport 3.5 million people with ILR by reason of "cultural cohrrence" is really quite extraordinary. Going onto an income of less than £38 000 for six months is grounds for deportation, including it seems maternity or parenting leave.
She wants to deport about half my department of 250 people or their immediate families. It is madness.
If you look at the details of the bill, the sponsor is Chris Philp. Why everyone is piling on Lam is a bit odd as everyone points out she is a junior unlike Philp and Cleverly.
Q: How does the country have a sensible discussion about this issue and others without it descending into ad hominin attacks and misapplied quotes.
The video is from Lam, she is an Opposition whip and sometimes spoken of as potential Conservative leader. She isnt just some random MP. This is her video:
I think much of the reaction is from those who up until recently were bigging up Lam as the great white(lol) hope of the Conservative Party.
My thesis on the extreme credulousness of righties is firming up.
Leaving aside the label of who is and who is not a rightie, have a read of the bios of both Lam and Kemi. Then assume you have a big project with significant impact and work out who you would chose for that project. Lam is a seriously competent person who may go far with the right breaks - or could end up like a Heseltine or Portillo.
The department had attempted for more than two years to keep secret the highly critical report, written by the former Home Office special adviser Nick Timothy. It was released only after a legal challenge by The Times.
Timothy thinks that Civil Servants not wanting to work on Bravermans immigration agenda is being "detached from reality". I dont blame them at all. I wouldn't want to do so either, and would seek work elsewhere. Its Braverman who is detached from reality.
Not as much as Lam is though. Her proposal to deport 3.5 million people with ILR by reason of "cultural cohrrence" is really quite extraordinary. Going onto an income of less than £38 000 for six months is grounds for deportation, including it seems maternity or parenting leave.
She wants to deport about half my department of 250 people or their immediate families. It is madness.
If you look at the details of the bill, the sponsor is Chris Philp. Why everyone is piling on Lam is a bit odd as everyone points out she is a junior unlike Philp and Cleverly.
Q: How does the country have a sensible discussion about this issue and others without it descending into ad hominin attacks and misapplied quotes.
The video is from Lam, she is an Opposition whip and sometimes spoken of as potential Conservative leader. She isnt just some random MP. This is her video:
I think much of the reaction is from those who up until recently were bigging up Lam as the great white(lol) hope of the Conservative Party.
My thesis on the extreme credulousness of righties is firming up.
Leaving aside the label of who is and who is not a rightie, have a read of the bios of both Lam and Kemi. Then assume you have a big project with significant impact and work out who you would chose for that project. Lam is a seriously competent person who may go far with the right breaks - or could end up like a Heseltine or Portillo.
Heseltine was Deputy Prime Minister and had a long and distinguished political career in multiple cabinet roles.
Portillo was Secretary of State for Defence and Shadow Chancellor.
Don't like either of them but the implication they didn't 'go far' inherent in your phrasing seems a bit harsh.
‘The police weren’t interested’: what’s driving the rise in private prosecutions? ... Theresa May’s decision to axe 21,000 police officers while she was home secretary. ... Between 2010 and 2014, after the coalition government ordered the MoJ to slash its budget by almost a quarter, the CPS lost 22% of its solicitors and 28% of its barristers. From 2010 to 2019, the MoJ closed more than half of all the courts in England and Wales, and sold off many court buildings. There are now almost 400,000 criminal cases waiting to be heard in England and Wales. ... the coalition government’s decision to make stealing goods under £200 into a “summary offence”, which carry shorter sentences, had effectively given criminals a free pass. “These thieves aren’t stupid,” said Neville, the former Met detective. “Why nick £200 when you can nick £199 five times?” ... The victims and courts bill currently making its way through parliament contains an explosive detail that could topple the entire business model. It proposes that lawyers should only be awarded “reasonably sufficient” costs from central funds. https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2025/oct/23/the-police-werent-interested-whats-driving-the-rise-in-private-prosecutions
Even though this has now been changed, the cat is out of the bag. Thieves have realised nobody is going to stop them, the police will never come looking for them, there is nothing to fear. And even if they do get caught, we are going to move to a system where a sentence for less than a year (which I am sure makes up a huge percentage of a tiny fraction who are ever caught) won't ever go to jail.
Is it beyond the wit of man to come up with an effective 21st century punishment that doesn't involve free food, accomodation that acts as a crime university for those starting out?
Don't get me wrong, very serious crimes need jail time for public protection alone, as well as punishment.
For thieves and the like, can we be a little more inventive? A spot fine of 10x the value of what you sold, to be deducted from any future salary or public benefits, for example. With an increasing multiple for repeat offenders.
It should be aim to be almost as quick as giving a parking ticket.
Huge use of ankle tags monitored by AI. Offenders are fitted with ankle tags with high pitched alarms. Their place of work and home (and if no other family living with them a supermarket) are entered into the system which works out an approved route which the offender has to follow for duration of sentence.
Deviation from route and permitted places sets off alarm. Repeat offences end in jail time. Period of tagging prevents them from going to pubs, cafes, cinema, mates houses etc etc so restricts life as punishment, reduces their chances of getting into trouble by restricting where they can go.
Plus a loud noise if two tags come within 10 feet of each other
‘The police weren’t interested’: what’s driving the rise in private prosecutions? ... Theresa May’s decision to axe 21,000 police officers while she was home secretary. ... Between 2010 and 2014, after the coalition government ordered the MoJ to slash its budget by almost a quarter, the CPS lost 22% of its solicitors and 28% of its barristers. From 2010 to 2019, the MoJ closed more than half of all the courts in England and Wales, and sold off many court buildings. There are now almost 400,000 criminal cases waiting to be heard in England and Wales. ... the coalition government’s decision to make stealing goods under £200 into a “summary offence”, which carry shorter sentences, had effectively given criminals a free pass. “These thieves aren’t stupid,” said Neville, the former Met detective. “Why nick £200 when you can nick £199 five times?” ... The victims and courts bill currently making its way through parliament contains an explosive detail that could topple the entire business model. It proposes that lawyers should only be awarded “reasonably sufficient” costs from central funds. https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2025/oct/23/the-police-werent-interested-whats-driving-the-rise-in-private-prosecutions
Even though this has now been changed, the cat is out of the bag. Thieves have realised nobody is going to stop them, the police will never come looking for them, there is nothing to fear. And even if they do get caught, we are going to move to a system where a sentence for less than a year (which I am sure makes up a huge percentage of a tiny fraction who are ever caught) won't ever go to jail.
Is it beyond the wit of man to come up with an effective 21st century punishment that doesn't involve free food, accomodation that acts as a crime university for those starting out?
Don't get me wrong, very serious crimes need jail time for public protection alone, as well as punishment.
For thieves and the like, can we be a little more inventive? A spot fine of 10x the value of what you sold, to be deducted from any future salary or public benefits, for example. With an increasing multiple for repeat offenders.
It should be aim to be almost as quick as giving a parking ticket.
Huge use of ankle tags monitored by AI. Offenders are fitted with ankle tags with high pitched alarms. Their place of work and home (and if no other family living with them a supermarket) are entered into the system which works out an approved route which the offender has to follow for duration of sentence.
Deviation from route and permitted places sets off alarm. Repeat offences end in jail time. Period of tagging prevents them from going to pubs, cafes, cinema, mates houses etc etc so restricts life as punishment, reduces their chances of getting into trouble by restricting where they can go.
Plus a loud noise if two tags come within 10 feet of each other
Ukraine’s own special sanctions on Rosneft adding to those of the US.
Ryazan oil refinery is the third-largest in Russia. Most recently hit near the beginning of September, it has been hit on seven different days in 2025 and a couple of times in 2024.
Four of the five largest oil refineries in Russia have been hit in October.
‘The police weren’t interested’: what’s driving the rise in private prosecutions? ... Theresa May’s decision to axe 21,000 police officers while she was home secretary. ... Between 2010 and 2014, after the coalition government ordered the MoJ to slash its budget by almost a quarter, the CPS lost 22% of its solicitors and 28% of its barristers. From 2010 to 2019, the MoJ closed more than half of all the courts in England and Wales, and sold off many court buildings. There are now almost 400,000 criminal cases waiting to be heard in England and Wales. ... the coalition government’s decision to make stealing goods under £200 into a “summary offence”, which carry shorter sentences, had effectively given criminals a free pass. “These thieves aren’t stupid,” said Neville, the former Met detective. “Why nick £200 when you can nick £199 five times?” ... The victims and courts bill currently making its way through parliament contains an explosive detail that could topple the entire business model. It proposes that lawyers should only be awarded “reasonably sufficient” costs from central funds. https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2025/oct/23/the-police-werent-interested-whats-driving-the-rise-in-private-prosecutions
Even though this has now been changed, the cat is out of the bag. Thieves have realised nobody is going to stop them, the police will never come looking for them, there is nothing to fear. And even if they do get caught, we are going to move to a system where a sentence for less than a year (which I am sure makes up a huge percentage of a tiny fraction who are ever caught) won't ever go to jail.
Is it beyond the wit of man to come up with an effective 21st century punishment that doesn't involve free food, accomodation that acts as a crime university for those starting out?
Don't get me wrong, very serious crimes need jail time for public protection alone, as well as punishment.
For thieves and the like, can we be a little more inventive? A spot fine of 10x the value of what you sold, to be deducted from any future salary or public benefits, for example. With an increasing multiple for repeat offenders.
It should be aim to be almost as quick as giving a parking ticket.
Whatever the punishment, the process needs to be much swifter. Justice delayed is justice denied and there is very little evidence that the police and court backlogs are being sorted, and the drop in productivity over the last 5 years is shocking.
If we take a cheeseparing attitude to public services then expect them to be crap and dysfunctional, and for the rest of us to suffer the consequences. But oh, no we must have tax cuts for millionaires...
The department had attempted for more than two years to keep secret the highly critical report, written by the former Home Office special adviser Nick Timothy. It was released only after a legal challenge by The Times.
Timothy thinks that Civil Servants not wanting to work on Bravermans immigration agenda is being "detached from reality". I dont blame them at all. I wouldn't want to do so either, and would seek work elsewhere. Its Braverman who is detached from reality.
Not as much as Lam is though. Her proposal to deport 3.5 million people with ILR by reason of "cultural cohrrence" is really quite extraordinary. Going onto an income of less than £38 000 for six months is grounds for deportation, including it seems maternity or parenting leave.
She wants to deport about half my department of 250 people or their immediate families. It is madness.
If you look at the details of the bill, the sponsor is Chris Philp. Why everyone is piling on Lam is a bit odd as everyone points out she is a junior unlike Philp and Cleverly.
Q: How does the country have a sensible discussion about this issue and others without it descending into ad hominin attacks and misapplied quotes.
The video is from Lam, she is an Opposition whip and sometimes spoken of as potential Conservative leader. She isnt just some random MP. This is her video:
I think much of the reaction is from those who up until recently were bigging up Lam as the great white(lol) hope of the Conservative Party.
My thesis on the extreme credulousness of righties is firming up.
Leaving aside the label of who is and who is not a rightie, have a read of the bios of both Lam and Kemi. Then assume you have a big project with significant impact and work out who you would chose for that project. Lam is a seriously competent person who may go far with the right breaks - or could end up like a Heseltine or Portillo.
A seriously competent person who thinks a group of legally settled people should ‘go home’ and talks of ‘cultural coherence’? Dunno, I’d say even ending up as a Portillo or Heseltine is a ship that has sailed. Of course a successor to Farage might be an option.
The department had attempted for more than two years to keep secret the highly critical report, written by the former Home Office special adviser Nick Timothy. It was released only after a legal challenge by The Times.
Timothy thinks that Civil Servants not wanting to work on Bravermans immigration agenda is being "detached from reality". I dont blame them at all. I wouldn't want to do so either, and would seek work elsewhere. Its Braverman who is detached from reality.
Not as much as Lam is though. Her proposal to deport 3.5 million people with ILR by reason of "cultural cohrrence" is really quite extraordinary. Going onto an income of less than £38 000 for six months is grounds for deportation, including it seems maternity or parenting leave.
She wants to deport about half my department of 250 people or their immediate families. It is madness.
If you look at the details of the bill, the sponsor is Chris Philp. Why everyone is piling on Lam is a bit odd as everyone points out she is a junior unlike Philp and Cleverly.
Q: How does the country have a sensible discussion about this issue and others without it descending into ad hominin attacks and misapplied quotes.
The video is from Lam, she is an Opposition whip and sometimes spoken of as potential Conservative leader. She isnt just some random MP. This is her video:
I think much of the reaction is from those who up until recently were bigging up Lam as the great white(lol) hope of the Conservative Party.
My thesis on the extreme credulousness of righties is firming up.
Leaving aside the label of who is and who is not a rightie, have a read of the bios of both Lam and Kemi. Then assume you have a big project with significant impact and work out who you would chose for that project. Lam is a seriously competent person who may go far with the right breaks - or could end up like a Heseltine or Portillo.
Heseltine was Deputy Prime Minister and had a long and distinguished political career in multiple cabinet roles.
Portillo was Secretary of State for Defence and Shadow Chancellor.
Don't like either of them but the implication they didn't 'go far' inherent in your phrasing seems a bit harsh.
Besides, Hezza built up a business that made him wealthy enough to buy all his own furniture. Lam worked for Goldman Sachs for six years before becoming a Spad. And now a Spode.
She's clearly smart, but what has she actually done?
‘The police weren’t interested’: what’s driving the rise in private prosecutions? ... Theresa May’s decision to axe 21,000 police officers while she was home secretary. ... Between 2010 and 2014, after the coalition government ordered the MoJ to slash its budget by almost a quarter, the CPS lost 22% of its solicitors and 28% of its barristers. From 2010 to 2019, the MoJ closed more than half of all the courts in England and Wales, and sold off many court buildings. There are now almost 400,000 criminal cases waiting to be heard in England and Wales. ... the coalition government’s decision to make stealing goods under £200 into a “summary offence”, which carry shorter sentences, had effectively given criminals a free pass. “These thieves aren’t stupid,” said Neville, the former Met detective. “Why nick £200 when you can nick £199 five times?” ... The victims and courts bill currently making its way through parliament contains an explosive detail that could topple the entire business model. It proposes that lawyers should only be awarded “reasonably sufficient” costs from central funds. https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2025/oct/23/the-police-werent-interested-whats-driving-the-rise-in-private-prosecutions
Even though this has now been changed, the cat is out of the bag. Thieves have realised nobody is going to stop them, the police will never come looking for them, there is nothing to fear. And even if they do get caught, we are going to move to a system where a sentence for less than a year (which I am sure makes up a huge percentage of a tiny fraction who are ever caught) won't ever go to jail.
Is it beyond the wit of man to come up with an effective 21st century punishment that doesn't involve free food, accomodation that acts as a crime university for those starting out?
Don't get me wrong, very serious crimes need jail time for public protection alone, as well as punishment.
For thieves and the like, can we be a little more inventive? A spot fine of 10x the value of what you sold, to be deducted from any future salary or public benefits, for example. With an increasing multiple for repeat offenders.
It should be aim to be almost as quick as giving a parking ticket.
Huge use of ankle tags monitored by AI. Offenders are fitted with ankle tags with high pitched alarms. Their place of work and home (and if no other family living with them a supermarket) are entered into the system which works out an approved route which the offender has to follow for duration of sentence.
Deviation from route and permitted places sets off alarm. Repeat offences end in jail time. Period of tagging prevents them from going to pubs, cafes, cinema, mates houses etc etc so restricts life as punishment, reduces their chances of getting into trouble by restricting where they can go.
Plus a loud noise if two tags come within 10 feet of each other
Charity skydives to raise money for the NHS cost more in fixing associated injuries than they raise.
Look at pb last week. Society points fingers at us oldies and fatties but it is the keen, super-fit, outdoorsy @BlancheLivermore and @JosiasJessop in the tender care of Foxy's mates at the local infirmary. Physical exercise – why take the risk?
Today certainly looks a good choice for a sofa day.
The department had attempted for more than two years to keep secret the highly critical report, written by the former Home Office special adviser Nick Timothy. It was released only after a legal challenge by The Times.
Timothy thinks that Civil Servants not wanting to work on Bravermans immigration agenda is being "detached from reality". I dont blame them at all. I wouldn't want to do so either, and would seek work elsewhere. Its Braverman who is detached from reality.
Not as much as Lam is though. Her proposal to deport 3.5 million people with ILR by reason of "cultural cohrrence" is really quite extraordinary. Going onto an income of less than £38 000 for six months is grounds for deportation, including it seems maternity or parenting leave.
She wants to deport about half my department of 250 people or their immediate families. It is madness.
If you look at the details of the bill, the sponsor is Chris Philp. Why everyone is piling on Lam is a bit odd as everyone points out she is a junior unlike Philp and Cleverly.
Q: How does the country have a sensible discussion about this issue and others without it descending into ad hominin attacks and misapplied quotes.
The video is from Lam, she is an Opposition whip and sometimes spoken of as potential Conservative leader. She isnt just some random MP. This is her video:
I think much of the reaction is from those who up until recently were bigging up Lam as the great white(lol) hope of the Conservative Party.
My thesis on the extreme credulousness of righties is firming up.
Leaving aside the label of who is and who is not a rightie, have a read of the bios of both Lam and Kemi. Then assume you have a big project with significant impact and work out who you would chose for that project. Lam is a seriously competent person who may go far with the right breaks - or could end up like a Heseltine or Portillo.
Heseltine was Deputy Prime Minister and had a long and distinguished political career in multiple cabinet roles.
Portillo was Secretary of State for Defence and Shadow Chancellor.
Don't like either of them but the implication they didn't 'go far' inherent in your phrasing seems a bit harsh.
Besides, Hezza built up a business that made him wealthy enough to buy all his own furniture. Lam worked for Goldman Sachs for six years before becoming a Spad. And now a Spode.
She's clearly smart, but what has she actually done?
She's dressed to look like Thatcher which I would have thought is qualification enough.
Comments
As a parable of the difficulty of being good in a fallen world, it's brilliant.
(* In this case, change that to after you, Claudia.)
Apple’s Parental Controls are really easy to set up, but the parents need to know that they are there.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/105121
The really important thing is to set up the Apple ID with an email address that the parents control.
Android ecosystem is a hot mess for parental controls, and a dumb phone with supervised internet at home is probably the best option.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/oct/13/two-years-after-school-phone-bans-were-implemented-in-australia-whats-changed-the-impacts-were-clear?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Perhaps it should extend to the over 60's too!
My thesis on the extreme credulousness of righties is firming up.
And this isn't irrational; a few days ago a video went viral of a group of teenages all carrying knives on Princes Street clearly searching for someone. Scary stuff.
I think the police just need to have a small squad on dirt bikes that nip around confiscating knives and illegal e-motorcycles from these kids. It doesn't need a huge investment - with the power of social media a bit of enforcement can reach the whole city and deterrence is achieved. The same goes for parking on zig-zags, phone use etc etc
Portillo was Secretary of State for Defence and Shadow Chancellor.
Don't like either of them but the implication they didn't 'go far' inherent in your phrasing seems a bit harsh.
NEW THREAD
How about 'The Grand Old Duke of York?'
Four of the five largest oil refineries in Russia have been hit in October.
https://x.com/KHoholenko/status/1980913491838931285/photo/1
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/performance-tracker-2025/criminal-justice/overview
If we take a cheeseparing attitude to public services then expect them to be crap and dysfunctional, and for the rest of us to suffer the consequences. But oh, no we must have tax cuts for millionaires...
Of course a successor to Farage might be an option.
She's clearly smart, but what has she actually done?