I've never really had a pet and so do not understand the attraction on having a thing in the house that wees on the carpet. But for all those of you with a small dog, be prepared to blub your eyes out.
That looks like a massive earthquake/landslide that took out the whole of the mao-ntainside...
I’m aware that I’m guilty of taking the view which is most comforting to hold, but I’m deeply sceptical of the genius of China. They’ve built a metric shit-tonne of stuff over the past 20 years; it will be interesting to see how much of it is still standing in another 20. I would be unsurprised to find a large proportion of their flats live no longer than 40 years and have to be knocked down before they collapse. Which will at least solve their problems of massive oversupply of housing (how many empty units are there in China? Conservative estimates are that there is more empty housing in China than there is housing in the UK; more radical estimates are that there is enough empty housing in China to house the entire world). And similarly their transport projects are impressive, but impressive exercises in expensively shuttling empty air around. China’s economy doesn’t work like ours. They decide in advance what growth will be, then do as much *stuff* - whether needed or not – so that their GDP matches up to that. That way a reckoning lies.
But of course other view are available and I'd invite @Leon to present a counterpoint.
OTOH, we build a metric shit-ton of cheap and cheerful railway infrastructure in the first half of the 19th century and then went back and did it properly in the second half once it was up and earning and demand had been proven. Lots of bridges that lasted for a century or more started off as wooden structures that were replaced within a generation or so with these good quality rebuilds.
Wooden replaced with permanent was indeed a very strong element of Brunel's work - modular prefab designs where you could take out a single element and replace it during maintenance. Wasn't just the Cornish main line (though it lasted longest there) - there were major bridges closer to London, such as the Avon bridges at Bath and IIRC Bristol and the one at, is it Nuneham?, on the Oxford branch. The trouble with the latter was that the replacement in iron was a shite job foundation wise - hence the recent replacement and wholesale rebuild.
Mind, some of the bridges were built properly right from the start, and didn't need much reinforcement: the Royal Albert over the Tamar, and the Royal Border over the Tweed, and the flat brick arch over the Thames at Maidenhead, are good examples. On the other hand, the Dee Bridge, not so much ...
In one day a US President has welcomed a member of Al-Qaeda into the Oval Office and been credibly accused of spending hours alone with the victim of a notorious paedophile.
Amazing the extent to which this won't have an effect. PB is discussing buses.
Shows the danger of extrapolating the future from current trends. Already, fewer than 18 months after winning a landslide, the previous article was all about changing leader. There's another three years for the landscape to look radically different. The length of time to the next election is farther away than the time when Boris Johnson was PM.
If you extrapolate current trends the forecast would be even worse. All I've done is apply a Starmer standard election campaign to the current polling.
Boris Johnson was followed by Liz Truss. What happens if Starmer is replaced by someone less suited to be PM?
Surely more likely be “he lost 10/45 percentage points so 22.5% of his vote therefore he will lose 4.5pp at the next election and achieve 15%”
The BBC's "anti-bias" dossier that called out Panorama for splicing together disconnected quotes itself spliced together disconnected quotes.
According to Michael Prescott Trump actually said the following, which indicated there was no incitement to riot:
We are gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
What Trump actually, actually said it appears was the following, with the bit that Prescott cut out in italics and a clear incitement to riot;
We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.
Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.
I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
Did Mr Prescott not use ellipses - [...] most explicitly?
Mind it doesn't always work. Slab once put out a press release bitterly attacking the SNP for misquoting someone or other by leaving stuff out full stop. Slab hadn't realised what the funny characters meant.
He did not. No indication that these were disconnected quotes. He based his assertion that there was no incitement and that Panorama was misleading the viewer on his misquotation when the full quotation would have made clear there was incitement.
The BBC's "anti-bias" dossier that called out Panorama for splicing together disconnected quotes itself spliced together disconnected quotes.
According to Michael Prescott Trump actually said the following, which indicated there was no incitement to riot:
We are gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
What Trump actually, actually said it appears was the following, with the bit that Prescott cut out in italics and a clear incitement to riot;
We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.
Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.
I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
Did Mr Prescott not use ellipses - [...] most explicitly?
Mind it doesn't always work. Slab once put out a press release bitterly attacking the SNP for misquoting someone or other by leaving stuff out full stop. Slab hadn't realised what the funny characters meant.
He did not. No indication that these were disconnected quotes. He based his assertion that there was no incitement and that Panorama was misleading the viewer on his misquotation when the full quotation would have made clear there was incitement.
That looks like a massive earthquake/landslide that took out the whole of the mao-ntainside...
I’m aware that I’m guilty of taking the view which is most comforting to hold, but I’m deeply sceptical of the genius of China. They’ve built a metric shit-tonne of stuff over the past 20 years; it will be interesting to see how much of it is still standing in another 20. I would be unsurprised to find a large proportion of their flats live no longer than 40 years and have to be knocked down before they collapse. Which will at least solve their problems of massive oversupply of housing (how many empty units are there in China? Conservative estimates are that there is more empty housing in China than there is housing in the UK; more radical estimates are that there is enough empty housing in China to house the entire world). And similarly their transport projects are impressive, but impressive exercises in expensively shuttling empty air around. China’s economy doesn’t work like ours. They decide in advance what growth will be, then do as much *stuff* - whether needed or not – so that their GDP matches up to that. That way a reckoning lies.
But of course other view are available and I'd invite @Leon to present a counterpoint.
In 2024 China had an 80% share of global production of solar panels. In 2025 China holds a 75% share of global production for lithium-ion batteries. In 2024 China had a 57% share of commercial shipbuilding tonnage. One could go on and on.
There's definitely a lot of wasted investment in China, as money is spent building things in order to hit central targets. But their economic dominance in numerous sectors is real and should worry us.
Western economies found it hard enough to do without Russian oil and gas after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. If China invades Taiwan, would we dare to try to do without imports from China, or could they use the threat of an export ban to force us not to help Taiwan?
Western democracies are now so economically reliant on China that it poses a threat to our freedom and independence.
On topic, why has political leadership been so volatile in the last decade?
Were May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak and Starmer really so bad as politicians compared with their predecessors? I’d argue that among that crew one stands out as being morally unsuited for the position: Boris. Yet of those, he was the one who managed to hang on with decent polling - actually leading the opposition - for the longest time.
The rest, even Truss, might not have been stellar leaders but the rapidity of their falls from grace seems to me to point to something else. Something in the zeitgeist. See also the tribulations of the last 2 German administrations, or the chaos in France.
But what?
Brexit? That was certainly a factor in the downfall of May, but the others? Not so much.
Social media? I think this is part of it. Not only does it divide, it also undermines official narratives (good), allows foreign governments to influence and shape discourse (bad), allows smaller political party voices airtime (good) and encourages character assassination (bad).
Economics: we have a toxic mix in the developed world of a shrinking working age population, GDP stagnation, reduced upward mobility and declining public services. PMs of the past didn’t have to deal with that. They had other challenges, like unemployment or inflation, but ones that seemed somehow soluble - not least because there were always other developed countries showing the way.
A reminder, that even though some of the punishments were grotesquely unjust following the summer kerfuffles of 2024, people do like to see a bit of leg with law and order. If it wasnt all the other bad stuff about Starmer and his government coming out at the same time, it would have seen his popularity push into Blair levels.
On topic, why has political leadership been so volatile in the last decade?
Were May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak and Starmer really so bad as politicians compared with their predecessors? I’d argue that among that crew one stands out as being morally unsuited for the position: Boris. Yet of those, he was the one who managed to hang on with decent polling - actually leading the opposition - for the longest time.
The rest, even Truss, might not have been stellar leaders but the rapidity of their falls from grace seems to me to point to something else. Something in the zeitgeist. See also the tribulations of the last 2 German administrations, or the chaos in France.
But what?
Brexit? That was certainly a factor in the downfall of May, but the others? Not so much.
Social media? I think this is part of it. Not only does it divide, it also undermines official narratives (good), allows foreign governments to influence and shape discourse (bad), allows smaller political party voices airtime (good) and encourages character assassination (bad).
Economics: we have a toxic mix in the developed world of a shrinking working age population, GDP stagnation, reduced upward mobility and declining public services. PMs of the past didn’t have to deal with that. They had other challenges, like unemployment or inflation, but ones that seemed somehow soluble - not least because there were always other developed countries showing the way.
Interesting comment. I'd emphasize three economic factors: the demographic transition, the financialisation of the economy (things like private equity buying Morrisons in order to asset strip it, rather than because they think they can create a more profitable supermarket business), and the West losing economic competition with China.
On social media I wonder why this has had overall a negative effect rather than a positive effect? My working assumption is that it's the effect of algorithms designed to hold people's attention (in order to sell advertising) that is the problematic aspect. I think if we banned online advertising then social media might change in a more beneficial direction.
The BBC's "anti-bias" dossier that called out Panorama for splicing together disconnected quotes itself spliced together disconnected quotes.
According to Michael Prescott Trump actually said the following, which indicated there was no incitement to riot:
We are gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
What Trump actually, actually said it appears was the following, with the bit that Prescott cut out in italics and a clear incitement to riot;
We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.
Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.
I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
If I were an impartiality advisor tasked with assessing the impartiality of an ... impartiality adviser, I'd note that this guy is a highly experienced journalist and PR executive. Unless he's extraordinarily incompetent, then that's not a simple mistake.
That he seems to have done more or less exactly what he condemns the subject of his report for doing, and leaked that report to a newspaper not entirely sympathetic to the BBC, does not suggest to me a seeker after truth and justice.
That looks like a massive earthquake/landslide that took out the whole of the mao-ntainside...
I’m aware that I’m guilty of taking the view which is most comforting to hold, but I’m deeply sceptical of the genius of China. They’ve built a metric shit-tonne of stuff over the past 20 years; it will be interesting to see how much of it is still standing in another 20. I would be unsurprised to find a large proportion of their flats live no longer than 40 years and have to be knocked down before they collapse. Which will at least solve their problems of massive oversupply of housing (how many empty units are there in China? Conservative estimates are that there is more empty housing in China than there is housing in the UK; more radical estimates are that there is enough empty housing in China to house the entire world). And similarly their transport projects are impressive, but impressive exercises in expensively shuttling empty air around. China’s economy doesn’t work like ours. They decide in advance what growth will be, then do as much *stuff* - whether needed or not – so that their GDP matches up to that. That way a reckoning lies.
But of course other view are available and I'd invite @Leon to present a counterpoint.
In 2024 China had an 80% share of global production of solar panels. In 2025 China holds a 75% share of global production for lithium-ion batteries. In 2024 China had a 57% share of commercial shipbuilding tonnage. One could go on and on.
There's definitely a lot of wasted investment in China, as money is spent building things in order to hit central targets. But their economic dominance in numerous sectors is real and should worry us.
Western economies found it hard enough to do without Russian oil and gas after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. If China invades Taiwan, would we dare to try to do without imports from China, or could they use the threat of an export ban to force us not to help Taiwan?
Western democracies are now so economically reliant on China that it poses a threat to our freedom and independence.
I agree, and we should definitely look to depend less on China. My point is that the more you look at China, the less impressive it appears. I would argue that this should in fact make it easier to become less reliant on Chinese products. Though it still takes some effort to do so.
That looks like a massive earthquake/landslide that took out the whole of the mao-ntainside...
I’m aware that I’m guilty of taking the view which is most comforting to hold, but I’m deeply sceptical of the genius of China. They’ve built a metric shit-tonne of stuff over the past 20 years; it will be interesting to see how much of it is still standing in another 20. I would be unsurprised to find a large proportion of their flats live no longer than 40 years and have to be knocked down before they collapse. Which will at least solve their problems of massive oversupply of housing (how many empty units are there in China? Conservative estimates are that there is more empty housing in China than there is housing in the UK; more radical estimates are that there is enough empty housing in China to house the entire world). And similarly their transport projects are impressive, but impressive exercises in expensively shuttling empty air around. China’s economy doesn’t work like ours. They decide in advance what growth will be, then do as much *stuff* - whether needed or not – so that their GDP matches up to that. That way a reckoning lies.
But of course other view are available and I'd invite @Leon to present a counterpoint.
In 2024 China had an 80% share of global production of solar panels. In 2025 China holds a 75% share of global production for lithium-ion batteries. In 2024 China had a 57% share of commercial shipbuilding tonnage. One could go on and on.
There's definitely a lot of wasted investment in China, as money is spent building things in order to hit central targets. But their economic dominance in numerous sectors is real and should worry us.
Western economies found it hard enough to do without Russian oil and gas after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. If China invades Taiwan, would we dare to try to do without imports from China, or could they use the threat of an export ban to force us not to help Taiwan?
Western democracies are now so economically reliant on China that it poses a threat to our freedom and independence.
I agree, and we should definitely look to depend less on China. My point is that the more you look at China, the less impressive it appears. I would argue that this should in fact make it easier to become less reliant on Chinese products. Though it still takes some effort to do so.
Mainly, this requires to stand up to their efforts to take over whole sectors of world production.
That looks like a massive earthquake/landslide that took out the whole of the mao-ntainside...
I’m aware that I’m guilty of taking the view which is most comforting to hold, but I’m deeply sceptical of the genius of China. They’ve built a metric shit-tonne of stuff over the past 20 years; it will be interesting to see how much of it is still standing in another 20. I would be unsurprised to find a large proportion of their flats live no longer than 40 years and have to be knocked down before they collapse. Which will at least solve their problems of massive oversupply of housing (how many empty units are there in China? Conservative estimates are that there is more empty housing in China than there is housing in the UK; more radical estimates are that there is enough empty housing in China to house the entire world). And similarly their transport projects are impressive, but impressive exercises in expensively shuttling empty air around. China’s economy doesn’t work like ours. They decide in advance what growth will be, then do as much *stuff* - whether needed or not – so that their GDP matches up to that. That way a reckoning lies.
But of course other view are available and I'd invite @Leon to present a counterpoint.
OTOH, we build a metric shit-ton of cheap and cheerful railway infrastructure in the first half of the 19th century and then went back and did it properly in the second half once it was up and earning and demand had been proven. Lots of bridges that lasted for a century or more started off as wooden structures that were replaced within a generation or so with these good quality rebuilds.
When the Chinese get their own William McGonagall, we'll know they've really got the hang of the whole Industrial Revolution thing.
The BBC's "anti-bias" dossier that called out Panorama for splicing together disconnected quotes itself spliced together disconnected quotes.
According to Michael Prescott Trump actually said the following, which indicated there was no incitement to riot:
We are gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
What Trump actually, actually said it appears was the following, with the bit that Prescott cut out in italics and a clear incitement to riot;
We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.
Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.
I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
Did Mr Prescott not use ellipses - [...] most explicitly?
Mind it doesn't always work. Slab once put out a press release bitterly attacking the SNP for misquoting someone or other by leaving stuff out full stop. Slab hadn't realised what the funny characters meant.
He did not. No indication that these were disconnected quotes. He based his assertion that there was no incitement and that Panorama was misleading the viewer on his misquotation when the full quotation would have made clear there was incitement.
Arguably worse than what Panorama did.
Thanks. How utterly extraordinary.
Not really, it was a politically motivated hatchet job. The Newsagent podcast on this is the most revealing about what has been going on inside BBC news. Clearly they're not impartial, but their accounts have not been rebutted (just ignored).
On topic, why has political leadership been so volatile in the last decade?
Were May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak and Starmer really so bad as politicians compared with their predecessors? I’d argue that among that crew one stands out as being morally unsuited for the position: Boris. Yet of those, he was the one who managed to hang on with decent polling - actually leading the opposition - for the longest time.
The rest, even Truss, might not have been stellar leaders but the rapidity of their falls from grace seems to me to point to something else. Something in the zeitgeist. See also the tribulations of the last 2 German administrations, or the chaos in France.
But what?
Brexit? That was certainly a factor in the downfall of May, but the others? Not so much.
Social media? I think this is part of it. Not only does it divide, it also undermines official narratives (good), allows foreign governments to influence and shape discourse (bad), allows smaller political party voices airtime (good) and encourages character assassination (bad).
Economics: we have a toxic mix in the developed world of a shrinking working age population, GDP stagnation, reduced upward mobility and declining public services. PMs of the past didn’t have to deal with that. They had other challenges, like unemployment or inflation, but ones that seemed somehow soluble - not least because there were always other developed countries showing the way.
You are right that things no longer stay stable. I guess social media does play a part. A government cant really manage a message. Maybe Cameron and Osborne were the last government that could. As soon as they are elected they are knee deep in problems. In a state the spends so much doing so many things, there is always something going wrong somewhere and theyll be a phone to record it.
In 1997 the Blair government had a hand on the press, and there was no alternative, except newsgroups (i was a uk.politics.misc veteran), even a decade later, there was no real alternative. Now its the alternatives that are pushing the agenda around. Kids watch youtube for what seems like an unhealthy amount of time, with many oldiwinks just having GBNews on rolling as background in the house. I would be bold to say that there's no such thing as a political honeymoon in the age of social media.
On topic, why has political leadership been so volatile in the last decade?
Were May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak and Starmer really so bad as politicians compared with their predecessors? I’d argue that among that crew one stands out as being morally unsuited for the position: Boris. Yet of those, he was the one who managed to hang on with decent polling - actually leading the opposition - for the longest time.
The rest, even Truss, might not have been stellar leaders but the rapidity of their falls from grace seems to me to point to something else. Something in the zeitgeist. See also the tribulations of the last 2 German administrations, or the chaos in France.
But what?
Brexit? That was certainly a factor in the downfall of May, but the others? Not so much.
Social media? I think this is part of it. Not only does it divide, it also undermines official narratives (good), allows foreign governments to influence and shape discourse (bad), allows smaller political party voices airtime (good) and encourages character assassination (bad).
Economics: we have a toxic mix in the developed world of a shrinking working age population, GDP stagnation, reduced upward mobility and declining public services. PMs of the past didn’t have to deal with that. They had other challenges, like unemployment or inflation, but ones that seemed somehow soluble - not least because there were always other developed countries showing the way.
You are right that things no longer stay stable. I guess social media does play a part. A government cant really manage a message. Maybe Cameron and Osborne were the last government that could. As soon as they are elected they are knee deep in problems. In a state the spends so much doing so many things, there is always something going wrong somewhere and theyll be a phone to record it.
In 1997 the Blair government had a hand on the press, and there was no alternative, except newsgroups (i was a uk.politics.misc veteran), even a decade later, there was no real alternative. Now its the alternatives that are pushing the agenda around. Kids watch youtube for what seems like an unhealthy amount of time, with many oldiwinks just having GBNews on rolling as background in the house. I would be bold to say that there's no such thing as a political honeymoon in the age of social media.
Someone posted, upthread, an example of an *MP* who is so mired in social media that he doesn't understand the difference between the US and UK constitutions.
That looks like a massive earthquake/landslide that took out the whole of the mao-ntainside...
I’m aware that I’m guilty of taking the view which is most comforting to hold, but I’m deeply sceptical of the genius of China. They’ve built a metric shit-tonne of stuff over the past 20 years; it will be interesting to see how much of it is still standing in another 20. I would be unsurprised to find a large proportion of their flats live no longer than 40 years and have to be knocked down before they collapse. Which will at least solve their problems of massive oversupply of housing (how many empty units are there in China? Conservative estimates are that there is more empty housing in China than there is housing in the UK; more radical estimates are that there is enough empty housing in China to house the entire world). And similarly their transport projects are impressive, but impressive exercises in expensively shuttling empty air around. China’s economy doesn’t work like ours. They decide in advance what growth will be, then do as much *stuff* - whether needed or not – so that their GDP matches up to that. That way a reckoning lies.
But of course other view are available and I'd invite @Leon to present a counterpoint.
In 2024 China had an 80% share of global production of solar panels. In 2025 China holds a 75% share of global production for lithium-ion batteries. In 2024 China had a 57% share of commercial shipbuilding tonnage. One could go on and on.
There's definitely a lot of wasted investment in China, as money is spent building things in order to hit central targets. But their economic dominance in numerous sectors is real and should worry us.
Western economies found it hard enough to do without Russian oil and gas after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. If China invades Taiwan, would we dare to try to do without imports from China, or could they use the threat of an export ban to force us not to help Taiwan?
Western democracies are now so economically reliant on China that it poses a threat to our freedom and independence.
Irrespective of the absolute efficiency of their system, they've succeeded in showing that a highly authoritarian regime can also implement a capitalist market economy (directed centrally) and make remarkable economic progress.
That in itself is a serious threat to the Westen system of liberal democracies. Far more so than ever the Soviet system was.
The BBC's "anti-bias" dossier that called out Panorama for splicing together disconnected quotes itself spliced together disconnected quotes.
According to Michael Prescott Trump actually said the following, which indicated there was no incitement to riot:
We are gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
What Trump actually, actually said it appears was the following, with the bit that Prescott cut out in italics and a clear incitement to riot;
We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.
Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.
I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
If I were an impartiality advisor tasked with assessing the impartiality of an ... impartiality adviser, I'd note that this guy is a highly experienced journalist and PR executive. Unless he's extraordinarily incompetent, then that's not a simple mistake.
That he seems to have done more or less exactly what he condemns the subject of his report for doing, and leaked that report to a newspaper not entirely sympathetic to the BBC, does not suggest to me a seeker after truth and justice.
The way this Prescott Panorama business is developing, has anyone checked there really is a President Trump?
@LostPassword That's a very interesting header, thank you. Rather leaves me wondering why SKS got into politics at all. He'd had a fairly successful career in law, I gather.
That looks like a massive earthquake/landslide that took out the whole of the mao-ntainside...
I’m aware that I’m guilty of taking the view which is most comforting to hold, but I’m deeply sceptical of the genius of China. They’ve built a metric shit-tonne of stuff over the past 20 years; it will be interesting to see how much of it is still standing in another 20. I would be unsurprised to find a large proportion of their flats live no longer than 40 years and have to be knocked down before they collapse. Which will at least solve their problems of massive oversupply of housing (how many empty units are there in China? Conservative estimates are that there is more empty housing in China than there is housing in the UK; more radical estimates are that there is enough empty housing in China to house the entire world). And similarly their transport projects are impressive, but impressive exercises in expensively shuttling empty air around. China’s economy doesn’t work like ours. They decide in advance what growth will be, then do as much *stuff* - whether needed or not – so that their GDP matches up to that. That way a reckoning lies.
But of course other view are available and I'd invite @Leon to present a counterpoint.
In 2024 China had an 80% share of global production of solar panels. In 2025 China holds a 75% share of global production for lithium-ion batteries. In 2024 China had a 57% share of commercial shipbuilding tonnage. One could go on and on.
There's definitely a lot of wasted investment in China, as money is spent building things in order to hit central targets. But their economic dominance in numerous sectors is real and should worry us.
Western economies found it hard enough to do without Russian oil and gas after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. If China invades Taiwan, would we dare to try to do without imports from China, or could they use the threat of an export ban to force us not to help Taiwan?
Western democracies are now so economically reliant on China that it poses a threat to our freedom and independence.
Irrespective of the absolute efficiency of their system, they've succeeded in showing that a highly authoritarian regime can also implement a capitalist market economy (directed centrally) and make remarkable economic progress.
That in itself is a serious threat to the Westen system of liberal democracies. Far more so than ever the Soviet system was.
Yes, it wasnt the oppression, corruption or torture that brought the soviets down it was economic stagnation in a world of growth and of plenty. So many on the left seem to think that low/no economic growth of communism was a feature, it wasnt it was a bug, and an unwanted one.
UK governmental is working with the National Cyber Security Centre to understand and "mitigate" any risk that China-made imported electric buses could be remotely accessed and potentially disabled.
This follows concerns raised by Norwegian public transport service operator, Ruter, which conducted cybersecurity tests on a new vehicle made by bus maker Yutong and said it identified vulnerabilities in its on-board systems.
Did we not once discuss the danger of Tesla remotely disabling cars?
@LostPassword That's a very interesting header, thank you. Rather leaves me wondering why SKS got into politics at all. He'd had a fairly successful career in law, I gather.
It is said Keir Starmer's political ambition was to be Attorney General in a Labour government.
A couple of days ago I mentioned that I was mystery shopping the Forest of Dean heritage railway wrt accessibility.
This is the reply, to which I give about 7.5 out of 10 - that is, quite good, especially around prompt individual attention given to my query. So well done the FODway. I'll copy to the other project I was talking about, and ask them to make sure that latest accessibility standards are a foundational aspect of their project.
There are other things for a 9/10 or 1 10/10, such as secure, inclusive parking for adapted cycles and mobility aids, gradients, offsite safe routes to get there etc, but I'd need a more detailed conversation to explore those.
----------------- Good morning, Matt
Many thanks for your enquiry.
We are able to accommodate both manual and electric wheelchairs. We provide a ramped access to the train for boarding and disembarking at our stations, and there are disabled toilets at our main station, Norchard, and also Lydney Junction and Parkend. Our porters will be happy to assist.
If you are thinking of visiting, especially during busier days, or booking an experience such as a Santa Special, we ask that you let us know when booking so we can check availability of wheelchair spaces and reserve these for you, as there is limited room on board. For those who are able to transfer from wheelchair to a seat, we are happy to store wheelchairs and reserve tables closest to the ramped access.
We regret there is no wheelchair access for the First Class saloon, due to the nature of the carriage.
Finally, we recommend starting your journey at Norchard station, as we have a large car park including disabled spaces, plus a wheelchair accessible museum, shop and café. There are also half price discounts for carers for our steam train rides, and an £8 discount per carer for our Santa Specials.
Please let us know if you have any further queries, or need help booking something.
In one day a US President has welcomed a member of Al-Qaeda into the Oval Office and been credibly accused of spending hours alone with the victim of a notorious paedophile.
Amazing the extent to which this won't have an effect. PB is discussing buses.
I prefer trains.
To rely on a bus, in Sadiq Khan's London, is like engaging in a crap shoot with the Devil.
UK governmental is working with the National Cyber Security Centre to understand and "mitigate" any risk that China-made imported electric buses could be remotely accessed and potentially disabled.
This follows concerns raised by Norwegian public transport service operator, Ruter, which conducted cybersecurity tests on a new vehicle made by bus maker Yutong and said it identified vulnerabilities in its on-board systems.
Did we not once discuss the danger of Tesla remotely disabling cars?
It isnt the same though. Tesla is a traded company, and can be regulated. There are competitive checks and balances in there, that dont always get it right, but it isnt the same. I have a chinese EV but its pretty damn dumb, it can't even get BST right..
UK governmental is working with the National Cyber Security Centre to understand and "mitigate" any risk that China-made imported electric buses could be remotely accessed and potentially disabled.
This follows concerns raised by Norwegian public transport service operator, Ruter, which conducted cybersecurity tests on a new vehicle made by bus maker Yutong and said it identified vulnerabilities in its on-board systems.
Did we not once discuss the danger of Tesla remotely disabling cars?
It isnt the same though. Tesla is a traded company, and can be regulated. There are competitive checks and balances in there, that dont always get it right, but it isnt the same. I have a chinese EV but its pretty damn dumb, it can't even get BST right..
Do Labour MPs realise that if they sack Starmer then there will be significant and building pressure for a GE before 2029 to establish "mandate"?
Do they also realise that most of them will lose their seat?
Turkeys etc etc...
Pressure is meaningless. Sunak didn't hold an election in 2023.
Sunak didn't have the rightwing press hounding him daily to hold an election.
I recall *all* of the press hounding Sunak at the end.
You mis-recall then. The Mail, Exress and Telegraph all advocated voting for the Conservatives and thus PM Sunak at the election.
There was, though, IIRC, some poll evidence to suggest that the majority of Mail readers did not vote Conservative.
Very different point
True, but it does suggest that readership of a newspaper does not guarantee subservience to it's political viewpoint.
And, to develop the earlier point the Tory press might have been calling for an election to avoid a greater disaster later on! In the light of what we know now, just imagine what might have happened to the Conservatives if Sunak had clung on until the autumn.
..In a recent podcast about rhetoric David Runciman made the uncontentious point that Keir Starmer is very bad at rhetoric, the fundamental political skill of communicating to the public to build support. Not only is Keir Starmer not good at this, he fundamentally misunderstood the need to be good at it...
Luke Tryl* made a similar point yesterday when he said that this had become a "can't do", rather than "can do" government. The electorate aren't entirely idiotic, and know that there are constraints on government's resources, and ability to do things - but all of Tryl's polling/focus group work indicated that voters strongly prefer leaders who say what they will do (even if it's often bullshit**), rather than going on about how hard it all is.
That might not be so much of a problem if this government actually got on with some of the positive stuff they can do ... but largely they haven't.
(* apologies to @ydoethur for mentioning a former Director, Corporate Strategy at Ofsted.) (** no apologies to Farage, or the Green hypnotist.)
The problem is that the Starmer (and the Government) are so Process State oriented, that they can't conceive of getting rid of, or reducing the Process. The only fix available to them is more Process.
So their "fixes" to home building have resulted in the construction industry going into a slump, for example.
And they treat legal reversals in the courts as if the courts were the Third & Highest Chamber of Parliament.
That's a very shrewd comment I think. Processes often exist for a reason, but they should always be a means to an end rather than an end in themselves.
Over and over again, under this government, with say the fetishisation of OBR forecasts to justify shafting the economy, the adherence to an obviously disastrous planning system, the pointless surrender of a British territory because of a non-deciision by an international court, or the multiplication of pointless studies and impact assessment that stop desperately needed infrastructure being built, or whatever, we see pointless following of process even when it's counter-productive to what they're trying to achieve.
As usual, the last government did it too, but the current government has carried it to extremes.
The solutions are obvious in outline, if difficult in detail: weed out nuisance lawsuits and challenges, end the inquiry-industrial complex and all its associated parasites and don't be afraid to use Parliament to overrule the courts when economic growth or national security are threatened.
Of course, a socialist trained lawyer from the quangocracy is the absolute last person you'd expect to do any of that, or even see the need for it, so depressingly we can expect more of the same for the next three years at least.
The whole COP thing results in a fuckload of carbon emissions!
It does indeed.
Perhaps the rest of us might be persuaded to take the whole thing more seriously, if they had it sponsored by Webex and done remotely, as an example of how to actually save on carbon emissions.
@LostPassword That's a very interesting header, thank you. Rather leaves me wondering why SKS got into politics at all. He'd had a fairly successful career in law, I gather.
Have to admit to surprise at how useless Starmer has been as PM. Uniquely amongst recent leaders he came into the job with a track record of successfully running a complex organisation, unlike say Johnson or Truss who were obviously unsuited for the role.
The BBC's "anti-bias" dossier that called out Panorama for splicing together disconnected quotes itself spliced together disconnected quotes.
According to Michael Prescott Trump actually said the following, which indicated there was no incitement to riot:
We are gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
What Trump actually, actually said it appears was the following, with the bit that Prescott cut out in italics and a clear incitement to riot;
We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.
Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.
I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
Did Mr Prescott not use ellipses - [...] most explicitly?
Mind it doesn't always work. Slab once put out a press release bitterly attacking the SNP for misquoting someone or other by leaving stuff out full stop. Slab hadn't realised what the funny characters meant.
He did not. No indication that these were disconnected quotes. He based his assertion that there was no incitement and that Panorama was misleading the viewer on his misquotation when the full quotation would have made clear there was incitement.
Arguably worse than what Panorama did.
Thanks. How utterly extraordinary.
Not really, it was a politically motivated hatchet job. The Newsagent podcast on this is the most revealing about what has been going on inside BBC news. Clearly they're not impartial, but their accounts have not been rebutted (just ignored).
The News Agents podcast is an excellent rebuttal of @Cyclefree's BBC critique from yesterday.
The irony is we are criticising the BBC for a poor edit, the biased dossier which raised this does itself have a similarly poor edit; and the subject of complaint is the most egregious liar in democratic political history.
The tail is not so much wagging the dog, it is throttling it.
The blame the Tories narrative doesn't seem to have worked for Labour on any area they have tried, even when they probably do have some what of a point.
On topic, why has political leadership been so volatile in the last decade?
Were May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak and Starmer really so bad as politicians compared with their predecessors? I’d argue that among that crew one stands out as being morally unsuited for the position: Boris. Yet of those, he was the one who managed to hang on with decent polling - actually leading the opposition - for the longest time.
The rest, even Truss, might not have been stellar leaders but the rapidity of their falls from grace seems to me to point to something else. Something in the zeitgeist. See also the tribulations of the last 2 German administrations, or the chaos in France.
But what?
Brexit? That was certainly a factor in the downfall of May, but the others? Not so much.
Social media? I think this is part of it. Not only does it divide, it also undermines official narratives (good), allows foreign governments to influence and shape discourse (bad), allows smaller political party voices airtime (good) and encourages character assassination (bad).
Economics: we have a toxic mix in the developed world of a shrinking working age population, GDP stagnation, reduced upward mobility and declining public services. PMs of the past didn’t have to deal with that. They had other challenges, like unemployment or inflation, but ones that seemed somehow soluble - not least because there were always other developed countries showing the way.
You are right that things no longer stay stable. I guess social media does play a part. A government cant really manage a message. Maybe Cameron and Osborne were the last government that could. As soon as they are elected they are knee deep in problems. In a state the spends so much doing so many things, there is always something going wrong somewhere and theyll be a phone to record it.
In 1997 the Blair government had a hand on the press, and there was no alternative, except newsgroups (i was a uk.politics.misc veteran), even a decade later, there was no real alternative. Now its the alternatives that are pushing the agenda around. Kids watch youtube for what seems like an unhealthy amount of time, with many oldiwinks just having GBNews on rolling as background in the house. I would be bold to say that there's no such thing as a political honeymoon in the age of social media.
And that has infected conventional media as well Partly because they are in competition for attention and money.
So all news is now done on the cheap; Newsnight is only the most visible example of that. Finding out what's actually going on when people don't want you to know is difficult and expensive. Passing on a conversation from a Top Source (Hi Morgan! We know you're reading!) who wants that message to leak is easy and cheap. As is getting some professional talking heads to talk for a bit.
It's an interesting question- how much news is all the news you need, as Cambridge's Star FM used to put it? Probably more than two minutes a day, but surely less than 24 hours. The failings of the government are a good way to fill time, though.
On topic, why has political leadership been so volatile in the last decade?
Were May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak and Starmer really so bad as politicians compared with their predecessors? I’d argue that among that crew one stands out as being morally unsuited for the position: Boris. Yet of those, he was the one who managed to hang on with decent polling - actually leading the opposition - for the longest time.
The rest, even Truss, might not have been stellar leaders but the rapidity of their falls from grace seems to me to point to something else. Something in the zeitgeist. See also the tribulations of the last 2 German administrations, or the chaos in France.
But what?
Brexit? That was certainly a factor in the downfall of May, but the others? Not so much.
Social media? I think this is part of it. Not only does it divide, it also undermines official narratives (good), allows foreign governments to influence and shape discourse (bad), allows smaller political party voices airtime (good) and encourages character assassination (bad).
Economics: we have a toxic mix in the developed world of a shrinking working age population, GDP stagnation, reduced upward mobility and declining public services. PMs of the past didn’t have to deal with that. They had other challenges, like unemployment or inflation, but ones that seemed somehow soluble - not least because there were always other developed countries showing the way.
You are right that things no longer stay stable. I guess social media does play a part. A government cant really manage a message. Maybe Cameron and Osborne were the last government that could. As soon as they are elected they are knee deep in problems. In a state the spends so much doing so many things, there is always something going wrong somewhere and theyll be a phone to record it.
In 1997 the Blair government had a hand on the press, and there was no alternative, except newsgroups (i was a uk.politics.misc veteran), even a decade later, there was no real alternative. Now its the alternatives that are pushing the agenda around. Kids watch youtube for what seems like an unhealthy amount of time, with many oldiwinks just having GBNews on rolling as background in the house. I would be bold to say that there's no such thing as a political honeymoon in the age of social media.
Someone posted, upthread, an example of an *MP* who is so mired in social media that he doesn't understand the difference between the US and UK constitutions.
Not quite.
When my mentor was lord chancellor he got to appoint judges as he saw fit. It’s since been decided that’s too much political involvement so we have moved to a situation whereby the lord chancellor appoints the judges but has to take the recommendation of (I think) the master of the rolls.
So we’ve created a self perpetuating oligarchy of lawyers rather than have democratic oversight of the judicial system
I don't know anyone who thinks "The polling is a mirage created by BBC bias in favour of Farage." or "The voters have no alternative but to vote Labour". Maybe a few still think "The government always becomes unpopular and then recovers as the general election approaches".
No matter what Starmer does or says he will no longer get a fair hearing. The public are done with him. Rather like Brown towards the end of his reign. Best thing for Starmer to do for the UK is take the unpopular decisions then step down.
@LostPassword That's a very interesting header, thank you. Rather leaves me wondering why SKS got into politics at all. He'd had a fairly successful career in law, I gather.
@LostPassword That's a very interesting header, thank you. Rather leaves me wondering why SKS got into politics at all. He'd had a fairly successful career in law, I gather.
A couple of days ago I mentioned that I was mystery shopping the Forest of Dean heritage railway wrt accessibility.
This is the reply, to which I give about 7.5 out of 10 - that is, quite good, especially around prompt individual attention given to my query. So well done the FODway. I'll copy to the other project I was talking about, and ask them to make sure that latest accessibility standards are a foundational aspect of their project.
There are other things for a 9/10 or 1 10/10, such as secure, inclusive parking for adapted cycles and mobility aids, gradients, offsite safe routes to get there etc, but I'd need a more detailed conversation to explore those.
----------------- Good morning, Matt
Many thanks for your enquiry.
We are able to accommodate both manual and electric wheelchairs. We provide a ramped access to the train for boarding and disembarking at our stations, and there are disabled toilets at our main station, Norchard, and also Lydney Junction and Parkend. Our porters will be happy to assist.
If you are thinking of visiting, especially during busier days, or booking an experience such as a Santa Special, we ask that you let us know when booking so we can check availability of wheelchair spaces and reserve these for you, as there is limited room on board. For those who are able to transfer from wheelchair to a seat, we are happy to store wheelchairs and reserve tables closest to the ramped access.
We regret there is no wheelchair access for the First Class saloon, due to the nature of the carriage.
Finally, we recommend starting your journey at Norchard station, as we have a large car park including disabled spaces, plus a wheelchair accessible museum, shop and café. There are also half price discounts for carers for our steam train rides, and an £8 discount per carer for our Santa Specials.
Please let us know if you have any further queries, or need help booking something.
Kind Regards
That looks to me to be a very good response and they are doing everything they reasonably can to accommodate wheelchair users.
Where did they fall down so that you docked 2.5/10 points?
That looks like a massive earthquake/landslide that took out the whole of the mao-ntainside...
I’m aware that I’m guilty of taking the view which is most comforting to hold, but I’m deeply sceptical of the genius of China. They’ve built a metric shit-tonne of stuff over the past 20 years; it will be interesting to see how much of it is still standing in another 20. I would be unsurprised to find a large proportion of their flats live no longer than 40 years and have to be knocked down before they collapse. Which will at least solve their problems of massive oversupply of housing (how many empty units are there in China? Conservative estimates are that there is more empty housing in China than there is housing in the UK; more radical estimates are that there is enough empty housing in China to house the entire world). And similarly their transport projects are impressive, but impressive exercises in expensively shuttling empty air around. China’s economy doesn’t work like ours. They decide in advance what growth will be, then do as much *stuff* - whether needed or not – so that their GDP matches up to that. That way a reckoning lies.
But of course other view are available and I'd invite @Leon to present a counterpoint.
In 2024 China had an 80% share of global production of solar panels. In 2025 China holds a 75% share of global production for lithium-ion batteries. In 2024 China had a 57% share of commercial shipbuilding tonnage. One could go on and on.
There's definitely a lot of wasted investment in China, as money is spent building things in order to hit central targets. But their economic dominance in numerous sectors is real and should worry us.
Western economies found it hard enough to do without Russian oil and gas after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. If China invades Taiwan, would we dare to try to do without imports from China, or could they use the threat of an export ban to force us not to help Taiwan?
Western democracies are now so economically reliant on China that it poses a threat to our freedom and independence.
Irrespective of the absolute efficiency of their system, they've succeeded in showing that a highly authoritarian regime can also implement a capitalist market economy (directed centrally) and make remarkable economic progress.
That in itself is a serious threat to the Westen system of liberal democracies. Far more so than ever the Soviet system was.
Well up to a point. The lot of yer average Chinese person would appear to have imoroved considerably in the last 40 years, but a) I am sceptical it has done so by more than the counterfactual in which the other lot were in power (and I think Taiwan illustrates this), b) I am sceptical that the lot of yer avergae Chinese person is quite as rosy as CCP stats say, and c) I am deeply sceptical that the future trajectory in respect of (b) is positive. The latter is my point. I'm all in in treating China as a hostile foreign power with whom we should disentangle. I just don't agree that the China model is, economically, a threat. Communism will be the downfall of the CCP just as it was of the USSR.
UK governmental is working with the National Cyber Security Centre to understand and "mitigate" any risk that China-made imported electric buses could be remotely accessed and potentially disabled.
This follows concerns raised by Norwegian public transport service operator, Ruter, which conducted cybersecurity tests on a new vehicle made by bus maker Yutong and said it identified vulnerabilities in its on-board systems.
Typical of this shit country that will buy any shit foreign crap based on saving a few pounds and end up spending loads more and yet are forever whining about lack of money.
Jeffrey Epstein: "Have them ask my houseman about donald [Trump] almost walking through the door leaving his nose print on the glass as young women were swimming in the pool and he was so focused he walked straight into the door."
UK governmental is working with the National Cyber Security Centre to understand and "mitigate" any risk that China-made imported electric buses could be remotely accessed and potentially disabled.
This follows concerns raised by Norwegian public transport service operator, Ruter, which conducted cybersecurity tests on a new vehicle made by bus maker Yutong and said it identified vulnerabilities in its on-board systems.
Now about all those CCTV cameras, especially "smart" ones that are everywhere in the UK. I am pretty sure the vast vast vast majority are Chinese from Hikvision or Dahua.
Do Labour MPs realise that if they sack Starmer then there will be significant and building pressure for a GE before 2029 to establish "mandate"?
Do they also realise that most of them will lose their seat?
Turkeys etc etc...
Of course, such a lack of mandate can and regularly is, ignored. No incoming Prime Minister has ever stood outside No. 10 and said (as part of their incoming speech), "Despite our system not requiring it, I will as a matter of good faith and belief in the British public, be seeking a GE mandate to confirm the decision just reached by the [Conservative Party membership/Labour Party membership/Unions/MPs] and I therefore announce a GE to be held in [six to eight weeks] time."
@LostPassword That's a very interesting header, thank you. Rather leaves me wondering why SKS got into politics at all. He'd had a fairly successful career in law, I gather.
Have to admit to surprise at how useless Starmer has been as PM. Uniquely amongst recent leaders he came into the job with a track record of successfully running a complex organisation, unlike say Johnson or Truss who were obviously unsuited for the role.
What went wrong?
Inexperience at politics, due to being catapulted too high too fast.
His ambition may well have been Lord Chancellor, but the people in front of him were mown down, leaving him as the last least-bad lefty standing.
On topic, why has political leadership been so volatile in the last decade?
Were May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak and Starmer really so bad as politicians compared with their predecessors? I’d argue that among that crew one stands out as being morally unsuited for the position: Boris. Yet of those, he was the one who managed to hang on with decent polling - actually leading the opposition - for the longest time.
The rest, even Truss, might not have been stellar leaders but the rapidity of their falls from grace seems to me to point to something else. Something in the zeitgeist. See also the tribulations of the last 2 German administrations, or the chaos in France.
But what?
Brexit? That was certainly a factor in the downfall of May, but the others? Not so much.
Social media? I think this is part of it. Not only does it divide, it also undermines official narratives (good), allows foreign governments to influence and shape discourse (bad), allows smaller political party voices airtime (good) and encourages character assassination (bad).
Economics: we have a toxic mix in the developed world of a shrinking working age population, GDP stagnation, reduced upward mobility and declining public services. PMs of the past didn’t have to deal with that. They had other challenges, like unemployment or inflation, but ones that seemed somehow soluble - not least because there were always other developed countries showing the way.
You are right that things no longer stay stable. I guess social media does play a part. A government cant really manage a message. Maybe Cameron and Osborne were the last government that could. As soon as they are elected they are knee deep in problems. In a state the spends so much doing so many things, there is always something going wrong somewhere and theyll be a phone to record it.
In 1997 the Blair government had a hand on the press, and there was no alternative, except newsgroups (i was a uk.politics.misc veteran), even a decade later, there was no real alternative. Now its the alternatives that are pushing the agenda around. Kids watch youtube for what seems like an unhealthy amount of time, with many oldiwinks just having GBNews on rolling as background in the house. I would be bold to say that there's no such thing as a political honeymoon in the age of social media.
Someone posted, upthread, an example of an *MP* who is so mired in social media that he doesn't understand the difference between the US and UK constitutions.
Not quite.
When my mentor was lord chancellor he got to appoint judges as he saw fit. It’s since been decided that’s too much political involvement so we have moved to a situation whereby the lord chancellor appoints the judges but has to take the recommendation of (I think) the master of the rolls.
So we’ve created a self perpetuating oligarchy of lawyers rather than have democratic oversight of the judicial system
The appointment of the judiciary, especially at the highest level, sets a problem that can't be resolved, since the judiciary are the body who can require the government (which automatically commands the democratic consent of parliament) to obey it. Setting government above courts is the Russian and now USA approach. Good luck. A democratic system of appointment, whether by election or by a government stooge, gives courts only the same authority as the rest of the system.
It is essential to have some bodies who are beyond democracy, in order to hold the ring and hold it to account. An obvious example is the Boundary Commission. Another in part is the monarchy. That and the judiciary are among the most delicate and fragile elements of the set up. IMHO it's best not to look hard at it unless you have to. There is no logical and consistent answer to 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes' because there can't be.
Our top judges are of startlingly stellar quality. If only our politicians were half as good.
It's a shame he's not running in a meaningful election again, because Dirty Donald is the kind of quality insult he used to be so good at. Cruel, but also getting close to the heart of the matter.
The BBC's "anti-bias" dossier that called out Panorama for splicing together disconnected quotes itself spliced together disconnected quotes.
According to Michael Prescott Trump actually said the following, which indicated there was no incitement to riot:
We are gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
What Trump actually, actually said it appears was the following, with the bit that Prescott cut out in italics and a clear incitement to riot;
We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.
Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.
I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
If I were an impartiality advisor tasked with assessing the impartiality of an ... impartiality adviser, I'd note that this guy is a highly experienced journalist and PR executive. Unless he's extraordinarily incompetent, then that's not a simple mistake.
That he seems to have done more or less exactly what he condemns the subject of his report for doing, and leaked that report to a newspaper not entirely sympathetic to the BBC, does not suggest to me a seeker after truth and justice.
Describing him as a "whistleblower" is a bit of a nonsense. He's blowing something, yes, but it isn't a whistle.
On topic, why has political leadership been so volatile in the last decade?
Were May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak and Starmer really so bad as politicians compared with their predecessors? I’d argue that among that crew one stands out as being morally unsuited for the position: Boris. Yet of those, he was the one who managed to hang on with decent polling - actually leading the opposition - for the longest time.
The rest, even Truss, might not have been stellar leaders but the rapidity of their falls from grace seems to me to point to something else. Something in the zeitgeist. See also the tribulations of the last 2 German administrations, or the chaos in France.
But what?
Brexit? That was certainly a factor in the downfall of May, but the others? Not so much.
Social media? I think this is part of it. Not only does it divide, it also undermines official narratives (good), allows foreign governments to influence and shape discourse (bad), allows smaller political party voices airtime (good) and encourages character assassination (bad).
Economics: we have a toxic mix in the developed world of a shrinking working age population, GDP stagnation, reduced upward mobility and declining public services. PMs of the past didn’t have to deal with that. They had other challenges, like unemployment or inflation, but ones that seemed somehow soluble - not least because there were always other developed countries showing the way.
You are right that things no longer stay stable. I guess social media does play a part. A government cant really manage a message. Maybe Cameron and Osborne were the last government that could. As soon as they are elected they are knee deep in problems. In a state the spends so much doing so many things, there is always something going wrong somewhere and theyll be a phone to record it.
In 1997 the Blair government had a hand on the press, and there was no alternative, except newsgroups (i was a uk.politics.misc veteran), even a decade later, there was no real alternative. Now its the alternatives that are pushing the agenda around. Kids watch youtube for what seems like an unhealthy amount of time, with many oldiwinks just having GBNews on rolling as background in the house. I would be bold to say that there's no such thing as a political honeymoon in the age of social media.
Someone posted, upthread, an example of an *MP* who is so mired in social media that he doesn't understand the difference between the US and UK constitutions.
Not quite.
When my mentor was lord chancellor he got to appoint judges as he saw fit. It’s since been decided that’s too much political involvement so we have moved to a situation whereby the lord chancellor appoints the judges but has to take the recommendation of (I think) the master of the rolls.
So we’ve created a self perpetuating oligarchy of lawyers rather than have democratic oversight of the judicial system
The appointment of the judiciary, especially at the highest level, sets a problem that can't be resolved, since the judiciary are the body who can require the government (which automatically commands the democratic consent of parliament) to obey it. Setting government above courts is the Russian and now USA approach. Good luck. A democratic system of appointment, whether by election or by a government stooge, gives courts only the same authority as the rest of the system.
It is essential to have some bodies who are beyond democracy, in order to hold the ring and hold it to account. An obvious example is the Boundary Commission. Another in part is the monarchy. That and the judiciary are among the most delicate and fragile elements of the set up. IMHO it's best not to look hard at it unless you have to. There is no logical and consistent answer to 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes' because there can't be.
Our top judges are of startlingly stellar quality. If only our politicians were half as good.
What's the Latin for 'Don't spit on your luck'?
Neither the Boundary Commission nor the Monarchy are beyond democratic control.
The terms of reference of both are set by Parliament. Which then lets them operate, within those limits.
If the Boundary Commission or the Monarchy were seriously going against the wishes of Parliament, their fries would be done in the time it took to pass the bill abolishing them.
As we've previously discussed, we are heading to a place where *some* lawyers are want to knit constitutional law from "common law rights". Laws that parliament wouldn't be able to touch or amend.
'Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of former President John F. Kennedy, announced late Tuesday that he would run for Congress in 2026.
Schlossberg, 32, said he would seek a seat representing New York’s 12th congressional district, which is held by Rep. Jerry Nadler, who announced in September that he wouldn’t run for reelection.'
More than 4million Universal Credit claimants now have no requirement to work - that's predominantly people who are sick along with students and those with caring responsibilities
The rise is extraordinary - it's gone up from from 2.896million in October 2024 to 4.027million in October 2025, a **39% rise** in the space of a year
The government has long-grassed any significant welfare reforms after being forced to abandon changes following a mass revolt by Labour MPs. Few think they are possible given Starmer's fragile authority
It can be a factual apology. There is nothing wrong with apologising when you get it wrong (or get caught doing so), what is important is that it doesnt clip their wings if there is something else to go after with Trump.
UK governmental is working with the National Cyber Security Centre to understand and "mitigate" any risk that China-made imported electric buses could be remotely accessed and potentially disabled.
This follows concerns raised by Norwegian public transport service operator, Ruter, which conducted cybersecurity tests on a new vehicle made by bus maker Yutong and said it identified vulnerabilities in its on-board systems.
Now about all those CCTV cameras, especially "smart" ones that are everywhere in the UK. I am pretty sure the vast vast vast majority are Chinese from Hikvision or Dahua.
Yes, these have a reputation for data slurping, even a few mobile phones were coming with slurping turned on. You might not like Apple, but they are most certainly not a conduit, willingly or unwillingly of the American government. The assumption is that every chinese company is a willing and enthusiastic agent of the Chinese state.
UK governmental is working with the National Cyber Security Centre to understand and "mitigate" any risk that China-made imported electric buses could be remotely accessed and potentially disabled.
This follows concerns raised by Norwegian public transport service operator, Ruter, which conducted cybersecurity tests on a new vehicle made by bus maker Yutong and said it identified vulnerabilities in its on-board systems.
Did we not once discuss the danger of Tesla remotely disabling cars?
It isnt the same though. Tesla is a traded company, and can be regulated. There are competitive checks and balances in there, that dont always get it right, but it isnt the same. I have a chinese EV but its pretty damn dumb, it can't even get BST right..
On topic, why has political leadership been so volatile in the last decade?
Were May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak and Starmer really so bad as politicians compared with their predecessors? I’d argue that among that crew one stands out as being morally unsuited for the position: Boris. Yet of those, he was the one who managed to hang on with decent polling - actually leading the opposition - for the longest time.
The rest, even Truss, might not have been stellar leaders but the rapidity of their falls from grace seems to me to point to something else. Something in the zeitgeist. See also the tribulations of the last 2 German administrations, or the chaos in France.
But what?
Brexit? That was certainly a factor in the downfall of May, but the others? Not so much.
Social media? I think this is part of it. Not only does it divide, it also undermines official narratives (good), allows foreign governments to influence and shape discourse (bad), allows smaller political party voices airtime (good) and encourages character assassination (bad).
Economics: we have a toxic mix in the developed world of a shrinking working age population, GDP stagnation, reduced upward mobility and declining public services. PMs of the past didn’t have to deal with that. They had other challenges, like unemployment or inflation, but ones that seemed somehow soluble - not least because there were always other developed countries showing the way.
You are right that things no longer stay stable. I guess social media does play a part. A government cant really manage a message. Maybe Cameron and Osborne were the last government that could. As soon as they are elected they are knee deep in problems. In a state the spends so much doing so many things, there is always something going wrong somewhere and theyll be a phone to record it.
In 1997 the Blair government had a hand on the press, and there was no alternative, except newsgroups (i was a uk.politics.misc veteran), even a decade later, there was no real alternative. Now its the alternatives that are pushing the agenda around. Kids watch youtube for what seems like an unhealthy amount of time, with many oldiwinks just having GBNews on rolling as background in the house. I would be bold to say that there's no such thing as a political honeymoon in the age of social media.
Someone posted, upthread, an example of an *MP* who is so mired in social media that he doesn't understand the difference between the US and UK constitutions.
Not quite.
When my mentor was lord chancellor he got to appoint judges as he saw fit. It’s since been decided that’s too much political involvement so we have moved to a situation whereby the lord chancellor appoints the judges but has to take the recommendation of (I think) the master of the rolls.
So we’ve created a self perpetuating oligarchy of lawyers rather than have democratic oversight of the judicial system
The appointment of the judiciary, especially at the highest level, sets a problem that can't be resolved, since the judiciary are the body who can require the government (which automatically commands the democratic consent of parliament) to obey it. Setting government above courts is the Russian and now USA approach. Good luck. A democratic system of appointment, whether by election or by a government stooge, gives courts only the same authority as the rest of the system.
It is essential to have some bodies who are beyond democracy, in order to hold the ring and hold it to account. An obvious example is the Boundary Commission. Another in part is the monarchy. That and the judiciary are among the most delicate and fragile elements of the set up. IMHO it's best not to look hard at it unless you have to. There is no logical and consistent answer to 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes' because there can't be.
Our top judges are of startlingly stellar quality. If only our politicians were half as good.
What's the Latin for 'Don't spit on your luck'?
What's the evidence that our top judges are of startlingly stellar quality?
Meanwhile, in "so this is how the world ends" news,
Exclusive: Adolf Hitler’s DNA has been sequenced by scientists
It has: - shown he had a disorder which impacted his sexual development - debunked rumours about his ancestry - shown a high likelihood that he had a neurodivergent condition and/or bipolar disorder
UK governmental is working with the National Cyber Security Centre to understand and "mitigate" any risk that China-made imported electric buses could be remotely accessed and potentially disabled.
This follows concerns raised by Norwegian public transport service operator, Ruter, which conducted cybersecurity tests on a new vehicle made by bus maker Yutong and said it identified vulnerabilities in its on-board systems.
Now about all those CCTV cameras, especially "smart" ones that are everywhere in the UK. I am pretty sure the vast vast vast majority are Chinese from Hikvision or Dahua.
Yes, these have a reputation for data slurping, even a few mobile phones were coming with slurping turned on. You might not like Apple, but they are most certainly not a conduit, willingly or unwillingly of the American government. The assumption is that every chinese company is a willing and enthusiastic agent of the Chinese state.
If the Chinese government are actively watching my CCTV would they kindly let me know if ever they spot a burgler?
(Seriously, the West is utterly doomed; I just hope the process takes 30+ years so that I escape the worst effects.)
Question for @Foxy if you have time and inclination to answer..
Please could you tell me, how high is a C-Reactive Protein level of 279 mg/dL?
High enough that you should be seeing someone not posting on here
Without wishing to worry anyone - if I was seeing that number, it would go straight to hospital. Right now.
Where are you getting it from?
That was what my reading was when I was in hospital just over three weeks ago. They gave me loads of antibiotics and I feel better, but I don't know if I'm well
When I went to hospital, it was because I had excruciating pain in my chest; I didn't think I felt otherwise unwell. The follow up from the hospital was to tell me to get a chest x-ray in eight weeks, but nothing about a follow-up blood test, which my Dad thought was insane
After many long phone calls, I finally managed today to get my doctors surgery to get my GP to look at the details and get me booked in for a blood test. They offered me their earliest appointment for a blood test - in nine days time; I'm hoping to go back to work a week today
After some slightly terse discussion about the practicalities of their earliest appointment, they've booked me in for 7:30am tomorrow
The blame the Tories narrative doesn't seem to have worked for Labour on any area they have tried, even when they probably do have some what of a point.
The Cons left a basketcase of a state. Almost every sphere of state services has got rapidly more expensive, rapidly more people working for it and in many cases no improvement in outputs.
It's a shame that the new government with such a majority didnt take the opportunity to nuts and bolts work out why things cost so much more but feel like so little is delivered.
A small example, a local council i am aware of has a 5% cap (as they all do), their inflationary contract increases costs are based on the rpi just announced. The variance in what was expected to what was budgeted for is the equivalent of a 10% increase in council tax. And thats a standing still change, doesnt even account for all the other things they need to reign in to balance their books.
Meanwhile, in "so this is how the world ends" news,
Exclusive: Adolf Hitler’s DNA has been sequenced by scientists
It has: - shown he had a disorder which impacted his sexual development - debunked rumours about his ancestry - shown a high likelihood that he had a neurodivergent condition and/or bipolar disorder
Meanwhile, in "so this is how the world ends" news,
Exclusive: Adolf Hitler’s DNA has been sequenced by scientists
It has: - shown he had a disorder which impacted his sexual development - debunked rumours about his ancestry - shown a high likelihood that he had a neurodivergent condition and/or bipolar disorder
More than 4million Universal Credit claimants now have no requirement to work - that's predominantly people who are sick along with students and those with caring responsibilities
The rise is extraordinary - it's gone up from from 2.896million in October 2024 to 4.027million in October 2025, a **39% rise** in the space of a year
The government has long-grassed any significant welfare reforms after being forced to abandon changes following a mass revolt by Labour MPs. Few think they are possible given Starmer's fragile authority
Good header by LP btw. Starmer and Badenoch are both now a similar (1.9) price to go next year. If Badenoch survives 2026 I think she'll probably make it all the way to the GE. Starmer, I don't know. Normally I lay £££ into this sort of sentiment but not so much this time. He will have to go if he can't reinvent himself and that seems doubtful. In an odd sort of way he's too authentic to do that successfully.
Comments
Do they also realise that most of them will lose their seat?
Turkeys etc etc...
FACEPALM (slapping sound)
(Can I suggest the loo next time?)
Mind, some of the bridges were built properly right from the start, and didn't need much reinforcement: the Royal Albert over the Tamar, and the Royal Border over the Tweed, and the flat brick arch over the Thames at Maidenhead, are good examples. On the other hand, the Dee Bridge, not so much ...
Amazing the extent to which this won't have an effect. PB is discussing buses.
Arguably worse than what Panorama did.
https://x.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1988641901801599328?s=19
There's definitely a lot of wasted investment in China, as money is spent building things in order to hit central targets. But their economic dominance in numerous sectors is real and should worry us.
Western economies found it hard enough to do without Russian oil and gas after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. If China invades Taiwan, would we dare to try to do without imports from China, or could they use the threat of an export ban to force us not to help Taiwan?
Western democracies are now so economically reliant on China that it poses a threat to our freedom and independence.
Were May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak and Starmer really so bad as politicians compared with their predecessors? I’d argue that among that crew one stands out as being morally unsuited for the position: Boris. Yet of those, he was the one who managed to hang on with decent polling - actually leading the opposition - for the longest time.
The rest, even Truss, might not have been stellar leaders but the rapidity of their falls from grace seems to me to point to something else. Something in the zeitgeist. See also the tribulations of the last 2 German administrations, or the chaos in France.
But what?
Brexit? That was certainly a factor in the downfall of May, but the others? Not so much.
Social media? I think this is part of it. Not only does it divide, it also undermines official narratives (good), allows foreign governments to influence and shape discourse (bad), allows smaller political party voices airtime (good) and encourages character assassination (bad).
Economics: we have a toxic mix in the developed world of a shrinking working age population, GDP stagnation, reduced upward mobility and declining public services. PMs of the past didn’t have to deal with that. They had other challenges, like unemployment or inflation, but ones that seemed somehow soluble - not least because there were always other developed countries showing the way.
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1988612288476238156?s=19
Apropos of nothing in particular:
Have any of you guys ever seen the movie "Wag the Dog"?
On social media I wonder why this has had overall a negative effect rather than a positive effect? My working assumption is that it's the effect of algorithms designed to hold people's attention (in order to sell advertising) that is the problematic aspect. I think if we banned online advertising then social media might change in a more beneficial direction.
https://bsky.app/profile/coachfinstock.bsky.social/post/3m5h3gwuyik2k
Unless he's extraordinarily incompetent, then that's not a simple mistake.
That he seems to have done more or less exactly what he condemns the subject of his report for doing, and leaked that report to a newspaper not entirely sympathetic to the BBC, does not suggest to me a seeker after truth and justice.
Blame! Canada!
My point is that the more you look at China, the less impressive it appears.
I would argue that this should in fact make it easier to become less reliant on Chinese products. Though it still takes some effort to do so.
The Newsagent podcast on this is the most revealing about what has been going on inside BBC news.
Clearly they're not impartial, but their accounts have not been rebutted (just ignored).
In 1997 the Blair government had a hand on the press, and there was no alternative, except newsgroups (i was a uk.politics.misc veteran), even a decade later, there was no real alternative. Now its the alternatives that are pushing the agenda around.
Kids watch youtube for what seems like an unhealthy amount of time, with many oldiwinks just having GBNews on rolling as background in the house.
I would be bold to say that there's no such thing as a political honeymoon in the age of social media.
That in itself is a serious threat to the Westen system of liberal democracies. Far more so than ever the Soviet system was.
He has the campaigning skills of May, the integrity of Johnson, the judgment of Truss and the common touch of Sunak.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/news/treasury-rules-out-pensions-lump-sum-raid/ (£££)
Another leaked budget measure unleaked (if that's a word, which I very much doubt).
This is the reply, to which I give about 7.5 out of 10 - that is, quite good, especially around prompt individual attention given to my query. So well done the FODway. I'll copy to the other project I was talking about, and ask them to make sure that latest accessibility standards are a foundational aspect of their project.
There are other things for a 9/10 or 1 10/10, such as secure, inclusive parking for adapted cycles and mobility aids, gradients, offsite safe routes to get there etc, but I'd need a more detailed conversation to explore those.
-----------------
Good morning, Matt
Many thanks for your enquiry.
We are able to accommodate both manual and electric wheelchairs. We provide a ramped access to the train for boarding and disembarking at our stations, and there are disabled toilets at our main station, Norchard, and also Lydney Junction and Parkend. Our porters will be happy to assist.
If you are thinking of visiting, especially during busier days, or booking an experience such as a Santa Special, we ask that you let us know when booking so we can check availability of wheelchair spaces and reserve these for you, as there is limited room on board. For those who are able to transfer from wheelchair to a seat, we are happy to store wheelchairs and reserve tables closest to the ramped access.
We regret there is no wheelchair access for the First Class saloon, due to the nature of the carriage.
Finally, we recommend starting your journey at Norchard station, as we have a large car park including disabled spaces, plus a wheelchair accessible museum, shop and café. There are also half price discounts for carers for our steam train rides, and an £8 discount per carer for our Santa Specials.
Please let us know if you have any further queries, or need help booking something.
Kind Regards
To rely on a bus, in Sadiq Khan's London, is like engaging in a crap shoot with the Devil.
And, to develop the earlier point the Tory press might have been calling for an election to avoid a greater disaster later on! In the light of what we know now, just imagine what might have happened to the Conservatives if Sunak had clung on until the autumn.
Over and over again, under this government, with say the fetishisation of OBR forecasts to justify shafting the economy, the adherence to an obviously disastrous planning system, the pointless surrender of a British territory because of a non-deciision by an international court, or the multiplication of pointless studies and impact assessment that stop desperately needed infrastructure being built, or whatever, we see pointless following of process even when it's counter-productive to what they're trying to achieve.
As usual, the last government did it too, but the current government has carried it to extremes.
The solutions are obvious in outline, if difficult in detail: weed out nuisance lawsuits and challenges, end the inquiry-industrial complex and all its associated parasites and don't be afraid to use Parliament to overrule the courts when economic growth or national security are threatened.
Of course, a socialist trained lawyer from the quangocracy is the absolute last person you'd expect to do any of that, or even see the need for it, so depressingly we can expect more of the same for the next three years at least.
Perhaps the rest of us might be persuaded to take the whole thing more seriously, if they had it sponsored by Webex and done remotely, as an example of how to actually save on carbon emissions.
Jeffrey Epstein in 2018: "i know how dirty donald is."
https://bsky.app/profile/kylegriffin1.bsky.social/post/3m5h36rix3c2v
What went wrong?
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-news-agents/id1640878689?i=1000736136498
The irony is we are criticising the BBC for a poor edit, the biased dossier which raised this does itself have a similarly poor edit; and the subject of complaint is the most egregious liar in democratic political history.
The tail is not so much wagging the dog, it is throttling it.
Please could you tell me, how high is a C-Reactive Protein level of 279 mg/dL?
So all news is now done on the cheap; Newsnight is only the most visible example of that. Finding out what's actually going on when people don't want you to know is difficult and expensive.
Passing on a conversation from a Top Source (Hi Morgan! We know you're reading!) who wants that message to leak is easy and cheap. As is getting some professional talking heads to talk for a bit.
It's an interesting question- how much news is all the news you need, as Cambridge's Star FM used to put it? Probably more than two minutes a day, but surely less than 24 hours. The failings of the government are a good way to fill time, though.
When my mentor was lord chancellor he got to appoint judges as he saw fit. It’s since been decided that’s too much political involvement so we have moved to a situation whereby the lord chancellor appoints the judges but has to take the recommendation of (I think) the master of the rolls.
So we’ve created a self perpetuating oligarchy of lawyers rather than have democratic oversight of the judicial system
I don't know anyone who thinks "The polling is a mirage created by BBC bias in favour of Farage." or "The voters have no alternative but to vote Labour". Maybe a few still think "The government always becomes unpopular and then recovers as the general election approaches".
No matter what Starmer does or says he will no longer get a fair hearing. The public are done with him. Rather like Brown towards the end of his reign. Best thing for Starmer to do for the UK is take the unpopular decisions then step down.
CON gain Bootle?
(It's probably Reform, but wouldn't it be comedy if it wasn't).
Where did they fall down so that you docked 2.5/10 points?
I'm all in in treating China as a hostile foreign power with whom we should disentangle. I just don't agree that the China model is, economically, a threat. Communism will be the downfall of the CCP just as it was of the USSR.
Jeffrey Epstein: "Have them ask my houseman about donald [Trump] almost walking through the door leaving his nose print on the glass as young women were swimming in the pool and he was so focused he walked straight into the door."
https://x.com/OfTheBraveUSA/status/1988657188919980537?s=20
Probably be a good thing, but they never do it.
Where are you getting it from?
BBC prepared to apologise to Trump to resolve billion-dollar legal threat
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/nov/12/bbc-prepared-to-apologise-to-trump-to-resolve-billion-dollar-legal-threat
His ambition may well have been Lord Chancellor, but the people in front of him were mown down, leaving him as the last least-bad lefty standing.
See Sunak on the other side. And Badenoch.
This is going to take a while to fix.
It is essential to have some bodies who are beyond democracy, in order to hold the ring and hold it to account. An obvious example is the Boundary Commission. Another in part is the monarchy. That and the judiciary are among the most delicate and fragile elements of the set up. IMHO it's best not to look hard at it unless you have to. There is no logical and consistent answer to 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes' because there can't be.
Our top judges are of startlingly stellar quality. If only our politicians were half as good.
What's the Latin for 'Don't spit on your luck'?
The terms of reference of both are set by Parliament. Which then lets them operate, within those limits.
If the Boundary Commission or the Monarchy were seriously going against the wishes of Parliament, their fries would be done in the time it took to pass the bill abolishing them.
As we've previously discussed, we are heading to a place where *some* lawyers are want to knit constitutional law from "common law rights". Laws that parliament wouldn't be able to touch or amend.
Schlossberg, 32, said he would seek a seat representing New York’s 12th congressional district, which is held by Rep. Jerry Nadler, who announced in September that he wouldn’t run for reelection.'
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/jfks-grandson-jack-schlossberg-announces-2026-run-nadlers/story?id=127440606
The rise is extraordinary - it's gone up from from 2.896million in October 2024 to 4.027million in October 2025, a **39% rise** in the space of a year
The government has long-grassed any significant welfare reforms after being forced to abandon changes following a mass revolt by Labour MPs. Few think they are possible given Starmer's fragile authority
https://x.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1988302427519676480?s=20
The Prime Minister is facing a crisis of contempt among his own MPs
By Ailbhe Rea"
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2025/11/does-keir-starmer-realise-how-much-trouble-hes-in
Exclusive: Adolf Hitler’s DNA has been sequenced by scientists
It has:
- shown he had a disorder which impacted his sexual development
- debunked rumours about his ancestry
- shown a high likelihood that he had a neurodivergent condition and/or bipolar disorder
https://bsky.app/profile/hackblackburn.bsky.social/post/3m5h6brssqc2i
(Seriously, the West is utterly doomed; I just hope the process takes 30+ years so that I escape the worst effects.)
When I went to hospital, it was because I had excruciating pain in my chest; I didn't think I felt otherwise unwell. The follow up from the hospital was to tell me to get a chest x-ray in eight weeks, but nothing about a follow-up blood test, which my Dad thought was insane
After many long phone calls, I finally managed today to get my doctors surgery to get my GP to look at the details and get me booked in for a blood test. They offered me their earliest appointment for a blood test - in nine days time; I'm hoping to go back to work a week today
After some slightly terse discussion about the practicalities of their earliest appointment, they've booked me in for 7:30am tomorrow
It's a shame that the new government with such a majority didnt take the opportunity to nuts and bolts work out why things cost so much more but feel like so little is delivered.
A small example, a local council i am aware of has a 5% cap (as they all do), their inflationary contract increases costs are based on the rpi just announced. The variance in what was expected to what was budgeted for is the equivalent of a 10% increase in council tax. And thats a standing still change, doesnt even account for all the other things they need to reign in to balance their books.
https://x.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1988667359666790523?s=19
I think there's even a post somewhere offering an award for the fuckwit who would make this mistake first. Send me your bank deets.
Edit: oh it's a Times journo. We are doomed.