Skip to content

Streeting overtakes Farage as the favourite to be next PM – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,783
edited 7:47AM in General
Streeting overtakes Farage as the favourite to be next PM – politicalbetting.com

This usually is a market where laying the favourite is profitable but in this instance I am not so sure given the clown car comedy act Starmer’s premiership has become.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,376
    Months back I identified Streeting as Labour's Liz Truss...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,723

    Months back I identified Streeting as Labour's Liz Truss...

    That's the sort of comment that gets PB into trouble, I fully expect to be hearing from Streeting's lawyers.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,907
    Would Streeting win a vote with members?
    I'm not so sure. If Starmer does go, people would want more of a change of direction.

    Angela Rayner might be the one.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,421

    Months back I identified Streeting as Labour's Liz Truss...

    Is Streeting on the Left of the Labour Party?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,376
    edited 8:04AM
    After this on the doctors strike I think he deserves to be favourite. Hard hitting but fair. In fact excellent in every way (its about half way down the page)

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/nov/12/keir-starmer-wes-streeting-labour-leadership-pmqs-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-uk-politics-live-news
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,135
    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 68,176
    Roger said:

    After this on the doctors strike I think he deserves to be favourite. Hard hitting but fair. In fact excellent in every way (its about half way down the page)

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/nov/12/keir-starmer-wes-streeting-labour-leadership-pmqs-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-uk-politics-live-news

    His problem is his narrow majority, but he would be a huge improvement on Starmer who is frankly shocking and so unexpected from his time as opposition leader
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 6,993
    Roger said:

    After this on the doctors strike I think he deserves to be favourite. Hard hitting but fair. In fact excellent in every way (its about half way down the page)

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/nov/12/keir-starmer-wes-streeting-labour-leadership-pmqs-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-uk-politics-live-news

    Hold on old boy

    The MP War Crimes website describes him as "clearly anti-Palestinian"

    Surely he deserves to suffer in pain for that?

    https://www.mpwarcrimes.co.uk/parliament/wes-streeting

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,488
    edited 8:13AM

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    Meanwhile, wealth and wealth-makers depart to places where the grass definitely is greener.

    And Labour will happily wave them off at Heathrow.

    Then start closing NHS hospitals.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 4,316
    If that change happens, I only hope that Labour (MPs and party) will get behind him and start being effective. IMHO we're at a point where almost any direction would be better than floating like this.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 68,176

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    I posted this on the last thread which affirms the damage Reeves inflicted on the economy in her last statement

    https://news.sky.com/story/economy-grew-by-0-1-in-third-quarter-official-figures-show-13469133
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,553
    Morning all :)

    I just wonder if the Labour mechanisms for choosing a new leader, while perfectly suited to a post election period in opposition, are going to be less than practical for choosing the leader of a Government in office.

    Brown had a coronation in 2007 when taking over from Blair and in the 1970s, when Wilson stepped down, only the MPs had a say. The Conservatives do things slightly differently but while Truss and Sunak went to the membership, Sunak himself, as I recall, had a coronation just a few weeks later.

    Perhaps Streeting will accumulate enough nominations to forego a contest and the handover would be swift but I'm far from convinced.

    Under the current arrangement, Lucy Powell would be Acting PM until the new leader was elected (and of course Labour's first woman Prime Minister).

    This is why I'm dubious about Starmer being in any way forced out - a managed coronation as with Blair and Brown is one thing but a contested leadership campaign over several weeks, well, it could work but would it be a good idea?

    In any case, while there are also arcane meanderings about being Party leader as distinct from being leader of the Parliamentary Party (doesn't have to be the same individual), the truth, as always, is it's up to the incumbent. We saw plenty of defiance from May, Johnson and Truss right up to the point when they were told (and then realised - it takes time for the pain to reach the brain in many creatures) they couldn't go on.

    Starmer is nowhere near that point in my view and he has the consoling truth there's little evidence anyone else from Labour in No.10 would be doing any better. There's an old adage that says if you don't hang together you'll all hang separately and that's probably Labour and Starmer's best advice for now.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,376
    Streeting = Truss

    Governing party gets ansty. PM is in political trouble, my majority isn't very big, we need a change. Step up someone with a big opinion of themself who is good at organising support.

    The Tories got the Trusster. Labour will get Streeting. And he won't last very long and be replaced by someone truly dull like Pat McFadden.

    What I would like though is for Labour not to rest on their laurels. The 2017 parliament had 2 Prime Ministers. The 2019 Parliament had 3 Prime Ministers. Come on Labour, go for the record!!!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,916

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    Meanwhile, wealth and wealth-makers depart to places where the grass definitely is greener.

    And Labour will happily wave them off at Heathrow.

    Then start closing NHS hospitals.
    Last two days...

    Karim Beguir — who sold his AI company to BioNTech for £562m — has moved residency to Switzerland, following other entrepreneurs out of Britain
    https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/instadeep-founder-leaves-uk-as-fears-grow-over-wealth-drain-9jl0f7wm2

    Herman Narula, the chief executive of the £2.5bn tech company Improbable, said he was preparing to emigrate to the United Arab Emirates over reports that Ms Reeves intended to unleash a so-called settling-up charge on entrepreneurs.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/11/11/britains-richest-young-entrepreneur-prepares-to-quit-uk/
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,376

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    Chaos my friend, beautiful grotesque chaos...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,290
    Northamptonshire Police Chief Constable found guilty of contempt of court (!)

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/nov/12/judges-set-to-decide-fate-of-police-chief-constable-guilty-of-contempt-of-court

    The court of appeal ruled on Tuesday that Northamptonshire police were in contempt and had been “willfully disobedient” for repeatedly failing to obey rulings to hand over video to a woman who complained she had been wrongly arrested by three officers.

    Nadine Buzzard-Quashie was arrested by Northamptonshire police in September 2021, triggering a four-year saga.



    The judgment said: “Her account of her arrest … was that she was physically assaulted by the officers who arrested her, she was physically thrown to the ground and had her face pushed into stinging nettles.”

    She wanted video footage of her arrest, including from police body-worn cameras, which the force did not provide.

    She complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office which made an order that all video should be handed over, which the force ignored, then a county court judge made another order, which the force failed to obey again.

    The force told courts it did not have any more video to hand over, then reversed its position at a hearing in October. The court of appeal judgment said: “This means that all the statements made to the court on behalf of the police force prior to mid-October 2025 were false.”

    On Tuesday three appeal court judges issued a blistering and unanimous ruling.

    Lady Justice Asplin, Lord Justice Coulson, and Lord Justice Fraser said “misleading and untrue statements … have been made to the court on behalf of the chief constable, both to the county court … and also to the court of appeal in relation to the application for permission to appeal and the appeal itself. To list every single statement made on behalf of the chief constable that has proved to be inaccurate over this lengthy period would lengthen this judgment considerably.”
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 6,993
    It pleases me that Victor Wembanyama plays for the Spurs
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,723
    Sandpit said:

    Northamptonshire Police Chief Constable found guilty of contempt of court (!)

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/nov/12/judges-set-to-decide-fate-of-police-chief-constable-guilty-of-contempt-of-court

    The court of appeal ruled on Tuesday that Northamptonshire police were in contempt and had been “willfully disobedient” for repeatedly failing to obey rulings to hand over video to a woman who complained she had been wrongly arrested by three officers.

    Nadine Buzzard-Quashie was arrested by Northamptonshire police in September 2021, triggering a four-year saga.



    The judgment said: “Her account of her arrest … was that she was physically assaulted by the officers who arrested her, she was physically thrown to the ground and had her face pushed into stinging nettles.”

    She wanted video footage of her arrest, including from police body-worn cameras, which the force did not provide.

    She complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office which made an order that all video should be handed over, which the force ignored, then a county court judge made another order, which the force failed to obey again.

    The force told courts it did not have any more video to hand over, then reversed its position at a hearing in October. The court of appeal judgment said: “This means that all the statements made to the court on behalf of the police force prior to mid-October 2025 were false.”

    On Tuesday three appeal court judges issued a blistering and unanimous ruling.

    Lady Justice Asplin, Lord Justice Coulson, and Lord Justice Fraser said “misleading and untrue statements … have been made to the court on behalf of the chief constable, both to the county court … and also to the court of appeal in relation to the application for permission to appeal and the appeal itself. To list every single statement made on behalf of the chief constable that has proved to be inaccurate over this lengthy period would lengthen this judgment considerably.”

    I am shocked by this, I am sure Cyclefree will be too when she reads this story.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,370
    Is Labour really going to elect a fourth North London leader in a row?
    Probably, yes.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 83,230

    Streeting = Truss

    Governing party gets ansty. PM is in political trouble, my majority isn't very big, we need a change. Step up someone with a big opinion of themself who is good at organising support.

    The Tories got the Trusster. Labour will get Streeting. And he won't last very long and be replaced by someone truly dull like Pat McFadden.

    What I would like though is for Labour not to rest on their laurels. The 2017 parliament had 2 Prime Ministers. The 2019 Parliament had 3 Prime Ministers. Come on Labour, go for the record!!!

    The Truss comparison is a poor one, IMO.
    If he ever got the job (and it's a bit unclear to me how that's likely to happen), it would not be because he's ideologically aligned with the party membership, but rather because he would be seen (correctly or not) as more competent in actually getting things done that the current sub-par incumbent.

    And in the event of his actually getting the job, I seriously doubt that he'd quite so rapidly implode, and it wouldn't in any case be from the same disconnection with reality.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,233
    Roger said:

    After this on the doctors strike I think he deserves to be favourite. Hard hitting but fair. In fact excellent in every way (its about half way down the page)

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/nov/12/keir-starmer-wes-streeting-labour-leadership-pmqs-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-uk-politics-live-news

    You can listen to the whole speech here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjLU9_Hr7k0
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,920
    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,723
    edited 8:29AM
    Cookie said:

    Is Labour really going to elect a fourth North London leader in a row?
    Probably, yes.

    In what universe are Stepney/Ilford in North London?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,290

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    Meanwhile, wealth and wealth-makers depart to places where the grass definitely is greener.

    And Labour will happily wave them off at Heathrow.

    Then start closing NHS hospitals.
    Speaking of which:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/11/11/britains-richest-young-entrepreneur-prepares-to-quit-uk/

    A 37-year-old technology entrepreneur worth more than £700m is preparing to quit Britain for Dubai ahead of Rachel Reeves’s planned tax raid on wealthy emigrants.

    Herman Narula, the chief executive of the £2.5bn tech company Improbable, said he was preparing to emigrate to the United Arab Emirates over reports that Ms Reeves intended to unleash a so-called settling-up charge on entrepreneurs.

    Mr Narula, who is Britain’s richest self-made entrepreneur aged under 40, told The Telegraph: “I don’t particularly want to leave the UK – but I might want to one day and I don’t want to be banned from that option.”

    Mr Narula called introducing an exit tax “irresponsible” and warned it threatened to drive out entrepreneurs ahead of the Budget.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,553

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,233
    Foxy said:

    Roger said:

    After this on the doctors strike I think he deserves to be favourite. Hard hitting but fair. In fact excellent in every way (its about half way down the page)

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/nov/12/keir-starmer-wes-streeting-labour-leadership-pmqs-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-uk-politics-live-news

    I am not in the BMA, and don't support this strike. I don't think that there will be a big walkout as the enthusiasm seems to have faded.

    Streeting is generally failing because of his arrogance. He doesn't listen to people and is convinced of his own brilliance.

    Probably better than Starmer, but could well prove to be a Truss like figure. Tories love Thatcher cosplay in leadership contenders, Labour loves Blair cosplay, but both need to realise that times have changed. Theres no "putting the band back together".
    That middle bit is pretty much how he was on the local council - very able, good speaker, popular with the public he met, but with a level of self-belief well above his judgement and someone willing to sell any of his friends into slavery if it advanced his career.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 20,593

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    Chaos my friend, beautiful grotesque chaos...
    Presumably not with Ed Miliband, though.

    (One suggestion is that that tweet from 2015 has acted as a curse that will only be broken by giving him the job.)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,290

    Sandpit said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    Meanwhile, wealth and wealth-makers depart to places where the grass definitely is greener.

    And Labour will happily wave them off at Heathrow.

    Then start closing NHS hospitals.
    Speaking of which:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/11/11/britains-richest-young-entrepreneur-prepares-to-quit-uk/

    A 37-year-old technology entrepreneur worth more than £700m is preparing to quit Britain for Dubai ahead of Rachel Reeves’s planned tax raid on wealthy emigrants.

    Herman Narula, the chief executive of the £2.5bn tech company Improbable, said he was preparing to emigrate to the United Arab Emirates over reports that Ms Reeves intended to unleash a so-called settling-up charge on entrepreneurs.

    Mr Narula, who is Britain’s richest self-made entrepreneur aged under 40, told The Telegraph: “I don’t particularly want to leave the UK – but I might want to one day and I don’t want to be banned from that option.”

    Mr Narula called introducing an exit tax “irresponsible” and warned it threatened to drive out entrepreneurs ahead of the Budget.
    Not just a problem for the exit tax, although that's true, but flying a kite for every potential economic measure to see the reaction will lead to a great deal of cautious/safety first steps taken by people and businesses that will have a lasting impact even if the particular flown kite never gets implemented.

    Return to purdah, and stop chasing people and businesses away.
    That they’re even flying such kites, is already leading to decisions being made that cost the UK dearly.

    People are already restructuring companies and changing residency, knowing that even if the “exit tax” isn’t in the Budget this year, it’s still an indication of the thinking of government and the direction of travel.

    Even more than a few HMWs leaving is the investment not undertaken, the people and businesses deciding not to invest in the UK but to go elsewhere.

    Agree wholeheartedly with Purdah, there should be nothing in the media leaked out of the Treasury until the Chancellor sits down after delivering the statement.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,920

    It pleases me that Victor Wembanyama plays for the Spurs

    I do like your occasional uncontexted and completely baffling comments like these Blanche. They have the spirit of Eric Cantona about them.

    Let's have more please!

    (PS I recognise I am probably about to find out I'm the sole poster on PB who doesn't know what you are talking about.)
  • eekeek Posts: 31,877

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,376
    Nigelb said:

    Streeting = Truss

    Governing party gets ansty. PM is in political trouble, my majority isn't very big, we need a change. Step up someone with a big opinion of themself who is good at organising support.

    The Tories got the Trusster. Labour will get Streeting. And he won't last very long and be replaced by someone truly dull like Pat McFadden.

    What I would like though is for Labour not to rest on their laurels. The 2017 parliament had 2 Prime Ministers. The 2019 Parliament had 3 Prime Ministers. Come on Labour, go for the record!!!

    The Truss comparison is a poor one, IMO.
    If he ever got the job (and it's a bit unclear to me how that's likely to happen), it would not be because he's ideologically aligned with the party membership, but rather because he would be seen (correctly or not) as more competent in actually getting things done that the current sub-par incumbent.

    And in the event of his actually getting the job, I seriously doubt that he'd quite so rapidly implode, and it wouldn't in any case be from the same disconnection with reality.
    The Truss comparison is explicitly satire - she was utterly useless and imploded rapidly, and I expect a new Labour leader put in after a Downing Street coup to face a wall of insurmountable political issues.

    Our democracy is at stake here. We have had a succession of outrages:
    Musical chairs in the Tory party - 5 leaders in 8 years
    Illegal shut down of parliament
    Government minister roaring from the dispatch box that the parliament was a disgrace and should disband
    Leader of the House lying on the Treasury Bench in disdain
    Johnson's government falls apart despite large majority, to be replaced by Truss whose government implodes practically as it begins despite large majority
    3 Prime Ministers in one parliament, each claiming both to be legitimately holding an electoral mandate and to be a new government
    Starmer's government elected with a gargantuan majority off a small vote
    Starmer's government battling internally not to implode despite gargantuan majority

    And so it looks we then get to look forward to a Farage government with all the fun that comes with that.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 21,161

    Sandpit said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    Meanwhile, wealth and wealth-makers depart to places where the grass definitely is greener.

    And Labour will happily wave them off at Heathrow.

    Then start closing NHS hospitals.
    Speaking of which:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/11/11/britains-richest-young-entrepreneur-prepares-to-quit-uk/

    A 37-year-old technology entrepreneur worth more than £700m is preparing to quit Britain for Dubai ahead of Rachel Reeves’s planned tax raid on wealthy emigrants.

    Herman Narula, the chief executive of the £2.5bn tech company Improbable, said he was preparing to emigrate to the United Arab Emirates over reports that Ms Reeves intended to unleash a so-called settling-up charge on entrepreneurs.

    Mr Narula, who is Britain’s richest self-made entrepreneur aged under 40, told The Telegraph: “I don’t particularly want to leave the UK – but I might want to one day and I don’t want to be banned from that option.”

    Mr Narula called introducing an exit tax “irresponsible” and warned it threatened to drive out entrepreneurs ahead of the Budget.
    Not just a problem for the exit tax, although that's true, but flying a kite for every potential economic measure to see the reaction will lead to a great deal of cautious/safety first steps taken by people and businesses that will have a lasting impact even if the particular flown kite never gets implemented.

    Return to purdah, and stop chasing people and businesses away.
    If he wants to live in that sewer he is welcome to.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,793
    Streeting is still a risky bet. There will be another challenger on the ballot, when it inevitably comes, and the labour membership is more likely than not to get behind a Burnham-backed challenger who offers a clearer break with Starmer's faction.

    Evens on Starmer going in 2026 still looks the safer bet.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 45,253
    stodge said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
    They can be as sanctimonious as thyer like but there is no alternative to cuts across the board , every penny of public spending needs to be looked at. The country is almost bankrupt and will soon run out of credit cards. The cuts will only be bigger the longer they are delayed.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,920
    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    Blimey, we'll have an announcement about tidal barrages next.

    I notice the small reactor announcement has pissed off the US ambassador, which is a plus in my book.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,135

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    Blimey, we'll have an announcement about tidal barrages next.

    I notice the small reactor announcement has pissed off the US ambassador, which is a plus in my book.
    Why was the ambassador irked?
  • TazTaz Posts: 22,192

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    Meanwhile, wealth and wealth-makers depart to places where the grass definitely is greener.

    And Labour will happily wave them off at Heathrow.

    Then start closing NHS hospitals.
    Or tax the rest of us more.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 45,253

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Milliband was on LBC saying they were the cure for all ills and how they had picked RR over the yanks versions , which has pissed eth yanks off. He did also say they would give yank companies business at the next site though.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 53,233

    Streeting is still a risky bet. There will be another challenger on the ballot, when it inevitably comes, and the labour membership is more likely than not to get behind a Burnham-backed challenger who offers a clearer break with Starmer's faction.

    Evens on Starmer going in 2026 still looks the safer bet.

    I'm laying off a little of the green while he's in the news, just for balance
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 83,230
    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    It's actually for three SMRs.
    The idea is that it's a pilot for refining the manufacturing techniques for making the things on something like an assembly line.

    And it does mean that it's likely to be producing power in the next decade rather than the one after.

    Amusing that the nimbys are already out opposing it as "unproven technology", which is complete bollocks.
    What's unproven are the economics of the whole idea.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 21,161
    malcolmg said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Milliband was on LBC saying they were the cure for all ills and how they had picked RR over the yanks versions , which has pissed eth yanks off. He did also say they would give yank companies business at the next site though.
    Surely it makes more sense to benefit from economies of scale by reusing the same design.
  • TazTaz Posts: 22,192

    It pleases me that Victor Wembanyama plays for the Spurs

    I do like your occasional uncontexted and completely baffling comments like these Blanche. They have the spirit of Eric Cantona about them.

    Let's have more please!

    (PS I recognise I am probably about to find out I'm the sole poster on PB who doesn't know what you are talking about.)
    Not quite just you !
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,376
    On the budget, there is an immediate Smash The Glass policy which would improve most aspects of the economy:

    Decouple Electricity Pricing from Gas.

    The cost of living is so high and inflation keeps coming back. Electric prices are at the heart of much of this. When Spain decoupled prices they saw rapid significant falls in prices.

    Whatever else gets announced, if they don't smash the glass then they may as well not bother.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,135

    malcolmg said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Milliband was on LBC saying they were the cure for all ills and how they had picked RR over the yanks versions , which has pissed eth yanks off. He did also say they would give yank companies business at the next site though.
    Surely it makes more sense to benefit from economies of scale by reusing the same design.
    Agree entirely, this could well be the Government kowtowing to the idiot across the Pond.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 83,230

    Nigelb said:

    Streeting = Truss

    Governing party gets ansty. PM is in political trouble, my majority isn't very big, we need a change. Step up someone with a big opinion of themself who is good at organising support.

    The Tories got the Trusster. Labour will get Streeting. And he won't last very long and be replaced by someone truly dull like Pat McFadden.

    What I would like though is for Labour not to rest on their laurels. The 2017 parliament had 2 Prime Ministers. The 2019 Parliament had 3 Prime Ministers. Come on Labour, go for the record!!!

    The Truss comparison is a poor one, IMO.
    If he ever got the job (and it's a bit unclear to me how that's likely to happen), it would not be because he's ideologically aligned with the party membership, but rather because he would be seen (correctly or not) as more competent in actually getting things done that the current sub-par incumbent.

    And in the event of his actually getting the job, I seriously doubt that he'd quite so rapidly implode, and it wouldn't in any case be from the same disconnection with reality.
    The Truss comparison is explicitly satire - she was utterly useless and imploded rapidly, and I expect a new Labour leader put in after a Downing Street coup to face a wall of insurmountable political issues.

    Our democracy is at stake here. We have had a succession of outrages:
    Musical chairs in the Tory party - 5 leaders in 8 years
    Illegal shut down of parliament
    Government minister roaring from the dispatch box that the parliament was a disgrace and should disband
    Leader of the House lying on the Treasury Bench in disdain
    Johnson's government falls apart despite large majority, to be replaced by Truss whose government implodes practically as it begins despite large majority
    3 Prime Ministers in one parliament, each claiming both to be legitimately holding an electoral mandate and to be a new government
    Starmer's government elected with a gargantuan majority off a small vote
    Starmer's government battling internally not to implode despite gargantuan majority

    And so it looks we then get to look forward to a Farage government with all the fun that comes with that.
    That's certainly a possibility.
    But it remains the case that Starmer simply doesn't seem to be up to the job.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,370

    stodge said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
    My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

    1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
    2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
    3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
    4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
    5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
    6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
    7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
    8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
    9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
    10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
    11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export
    It's not often I can agree with all 11 points of an eleven point manifesti, but I'll sign up for this.

    Usually lists of demands focus on what money should be spent on. We can all do that. What money should not be spent on is the much more pressing concern.
  • FossFoss Posts: 2,052

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    Blimey, we'll have an announcement about tidal barrages next.

    I notice the small reactor announcement has pissed off the US ambassador, which is a plus in my book.
    Why was the ambassador irked?
    Lost sale of Westinghouse kit.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,920

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    Blimey, we'll have an announcement about tidal barrages next.

    I notice the small reactor announcement has pissed off the US ambassador, which is a plus in my book.
    Why was the ambassador irked?
    "The decision to opt for small modular reactors at Wylfa was criticised by the US ambassador Warren Stephens, who said he was "extremely disappointed" by the decision.
    He had been urging ministers to commit to a large-scale plant, with US firm Westinghouse having reportedly presented plans to build a new gigawatt station at the site."


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,290
    Nigelb said:

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    It's actually for three SMRs.
    The idea is that it's a pilot for refining the manufacturing techniques for making the things on something like an assembly line.

    And it does mean that it's likely to be producing power in the next decade rather than the one after.

    Amusing that the nimbys are already out opposing it as "unproven technology", which is complete bollocks.
    What's unproven are the economics of the whole idea.
    Yes the first two or three are going to be prototypes, after which they should be able to make them (relatively) quickly on a production line and ship them to site - in contrast to a more regular nuclear design which is all built on site.

    There’s also huge export potential to the first company getting their production line up and running, the three companies competing so far are in UK, US, and China.

    The Americans are struggling to find a buyer for the prototypes, which is going to have to be a state or federal government because of the risk, and the West has no interest in the Chinese one and vice-versa.

    If we can beat the Americans to mass production, there’s a huge first-mover advantage in the commercial market.
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 6,993

    It pleases me that Victor Wembanyama plays for the Spurs

    I do like your occasional uncontexted and completely baffling comments like these Blanche. They have the spirit of Eric Cantona about them.

    Let's have more please!

    (PS I recognise I am probably about to find out I'm the sole poster on PB who doesn't know what you are talking about.)
    Wembanyama is a basketball player. I gather he's rather good. I heard of him through random shit Twix feeds me, and through the BBC Sports website which seems to feature much NBA these days

    My first thought when I saw his name was that it was just like the footballer Wanyama's name with some extra letters

    Then I saw that he's called Victor, as is Wanyama

    This morning the Beeb has a story about his team, the San Antonio Spurs, losing. I didn't know before this that he played for the Spurs

    Wanyama played for Tottenham
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 83,230

    Labour still have the same structural problems if Streeting takes over - they’re unwilling to cut spending and deregulate and take tough decisions in that forum.

    Maybe Streeting will be a better messenger than Starmer and maybe he would effect change in that area but it has to be just as likely he doubles down on high-tax high-spend policies to shore up the left flank.

    It’s hard to see things being worse for Labour from a PR standpoint so on that point alone maybe they should go with him, but the cause of the next fiscal crisis isn’t going away.

    It's possible that he could be an improvement simply by delivering on some of Labour's manifesto pledges - planning reform, for example. Just having a more decisive PM not scared of his own shadow might well improve things.

    But none of the problems are going to change, and Streeting hardly commands support across the party either.
  • TazTaz Posts: 22,192

    stodge said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
    My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

    1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
    2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
    3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
    4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
    5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
    6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
    7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
    8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
    9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
    10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
    11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export
    There was a reparations conference chaired by the APPG on it very recently.

    Notable that the legal firm behind the equal pay grift, Leigh Day, were in attendance.

    It’s not going away and we can expect legal challenges coming in due course.

    Starmer has said he won’t pay reparations but it is something that many in Labour, and some in other parties, support.

    https://www.appg-ar.org/uk-reparations-conference-2025-register
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,135
    Taz said:

    stodge said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
    My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

    1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
    2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
    3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
    4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
    5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
    6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
    7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
    8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
    9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
    10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
    11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export
    There was a reparations conference chaired by the APPG on it very recently.

    Notable that the legal firm behind the equal pay grift, Leigh Day, were in attendance.

    It’s not going away and we can expect legal challenges coming in due course.

    Starmer has said he won’t pay reparations but it is something that many in Labour, and some in other parties, support.

    https://www.appg-ar.org/uk-reparations-conference-2025-register
    A deeply depressing prospect.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,920

    stodge said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
    My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

    1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
    2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
    3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
    4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
    5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
    6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
    7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
    8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
    9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
    10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
    11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export
    Blimey, I agree with most of that!

    Except:

    7) I would have some sort way of increasing taxes on the wealthy, maybe through land or property tax. Let's also make sure UK citizens pay their appropriate share of taxes wherever they live. Sure, if they love their country so much less than money, they can give up their UK citizenship.

    8) Roll NI into ICT to increase the tax take there rather than just up ICT. Or up ICT and reduce NI as has been mooted.

    I'd also add:

    12) Tighten the criteria for PIP, especially around mental health (as opposed to mental disabilities like learning difficulties) - use some of the money saved to invest in mental health care services.

    The rest is spot on imo.
  • eekeek Posts: 31,877
    Taz said:

    stodge said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
    My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

    1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
    2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
    3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
    4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
    5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
    6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
    7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
    8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
    9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
    10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
    11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export
    There was a reparations conference chaired by the APPG on it very recently.

    Notable that the legal firm behind the equal pay grift, Leigh Day, were in attendance.

    It’s not going away and we can expect legal challenges coming in due course.

    Starmer has said he won’t pay reparations but it is something that many in Labour, and some in other parties, support.

    https://www.appg-ar.org/uk-reparations-conference-2025-register
    When the partners of Leigh Day give away 30% of their personal wealth to reparations - then we can start talking...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,488
    Sandpit said:

    Northamptonshire Police Chief Constable found guilty of contempt of court (!)

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/nov/12/judges-set-to-decide-fate-of-police-chief-constable-guilty-of-contempt-of-court

    The court of appeal ruled on Tuesday that Northamptonshire police were in contempt and had been “willfully disobedient” for repeatedly failing to obey rulings to hand over video to a woman who complained she had been wrongly arrested by three officers.

    Nadine Buzzard-Quashie was arrested by Northamptonshire police in September 2021, triggering a four-year saga.



    The judgment said: “Her account of her arrest … was that she was physically assaulted by the officers who arrested her, she was physically thrown to the ground and had her face pushed into stinging nettles.”

    She wanted video footage of her arrest, including from police body-worn cameras, which the force did not provide.

    She complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office which made an order that all video should be handed over, which the force ignored, then a county court judge made another order, which the force failed to obey again.

    The force told courts it did not have any more video to hand over, then reversed its position at a hearing in October. The court of appeal judgment said: “This means that all the statements made to the court on behalf of the police force prior to mid-October 2025 were false.”

    On Tuesday three appeal court judges issued a blistering and unanimous ruling.

    Lady Justice Asplin, Lord Justice Coulson, and Lord Justice Fraser said “misleading and untrue statements … have been made to the court on behalf of the chief constable, both to the county court … and also to the court of appeal in relation to the application for permission to appeal and the appeal itself. To list every single statement made on behalf of the chief constable that has proved to be inaccurate over this lengthy period would lengthen this judgment considerably.”

    Nadine Buzzard-Quashie - that name is going to take some beating today!

    A good friend of mne - English as cream tea and cricket, but married an Egyptian, so not an English surname - was the victim of similar outrageous behaviour by police in Wales.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 68,176
    Another day, another sleaze story when it was all going to be so different

    https://news.sky.com/story/investigation-demanded-into-keir-starmers-comms-chiefs-lobbying-links-13469229
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 16,899

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    Meanwhile, wealth and wealth-makers depart to places where the grass definitely is greener.

    And Labour will happily wave them off at Heathrow.

    Then start closing NHS hospitals.
    Last two days...

    Karim Beguir — who sold his AI company to BioNTech for £562m — has moved residency to Switzerland, following other entrepreneurs out of Britain
    https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/instadeep-founder-leaves-uk-as-fears-grow-over-wealth-drain-9jl0f7wm2

    Herman Narula, the chief executive of the £2.5bn tech company Improbable, said he was preparing to emigrate to the United Arab Emirates over reports that Ms Reeves intended to unleash a so-called settling-up charge on entrepreneurs.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/11/11/britains-richest-young-entrepreneur-prepares-to-quit-uk/
    Reform and the Jenrickites will presumably be happy to see two immigrants leave the country.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,290
    edited 8:59AM
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    Meanwhile, wealth and wealth-makers depart to places where the grass definitely is greener.

    And Labour will happily wave them off at Heathrow.

    Then start closing NHS hospitals.
    Speaking of which:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/11/11/britains-richest-young-entrepreneur-prepares-to-quit-uk/

    A 37-year-old technology entrepreneur worth more than £700m is preparing to quit Britain for Dubai ahead of Rachel Reeves’s planned tax raid on wealthy emigrants.

    Herman Narula, the chief executive of the £2.5bn tech company Improbable, said he was preparing to emigrate to the United Arab Emirates over reports that Ms Reeves intended to unleash a so-called settling-up charge on entrepreneurs.

    Mr Narula, who is Britain’s richest self-made entrepreneur aged under 40, told The Telegraph: “I don’t particularly want to leave the UK – but I might want to one day and I don’t want to be banned from that option.”

    Mr Narula called introducing an exit tax “irresponsible” and warned it threatened to drive out entrepreneurs ahead of the Budget.
    It is one of the reason that us poor bloody PAYE employees pay so much tax.

    Rich tech entrepeneurs pile up vast fortunes, with the earnings coming mostly from developed countries like our own, but shield their profits abroad via shell companies in low tax jurisdictions. They want all the advantages of the developed country lifestyle but are not willing to contribute their fair share.

    It is something that does need to be addressed, and not just in the UK. Otherwise we have the sort of situation of the nobility in Pre-revolutionary France of an untaxed class exempt from the laws. Sooner or later the tumbrils will have to roll.

    I am not convinced that an exit tax is the best way, but there does need to be an answer.
    Oh I agree, even when writing from a low-tax jurisdiction.

    Where we differ, is that I would argue for carrots rather than sticks for entrepreneurs, who are more than ever mobile individuals who can choose where to live and work.

    No you can’t compete directly against an oil state with no personal income or capital gains taxes, but what you can do as the UK government is aim to take a smaller slice of a larger pie.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,376
    IanB2 said:

    Roger said:

    After this on the doctors strike I think he deserves to be favourite. Hard hitting but fair. In fact excellent in every way (its about half way down the page)

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/nov/12/keir-starmer-wes-streeting-labour-leadership-pmqs-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-uk-politics-live-news

    You can listen to the whole speech here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjLU9_Hr7k0
    Thanks for that. It was interesting and he's articulate but it wasn't the same piece as quoted in the Guardian where he gave the doctors both barrels. Reading the comments below were interesting. Hopefully more reflective of Sky viewers than the medical profession who might one day be treating us!
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 21,161
    eek said:

    Taz said:

    stodge said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
    My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

    1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
    2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
    3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
    4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
    5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
    6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
    7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
    8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
    9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
    10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
    11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export
    There was a reparations conference chaired by the APPG on it very recently.

    Notable that the legal firm behind the equal pay grift, Leigh Day, were in attendance.

    It’s not going away and we can expect legal challenges coming in due course.

    Starmer has said he won’t pay reparations but it is something that many in Labour, and some in other parties, support.

    https://www.appg-ar.org/uk-reparations-conference-2025-register
    When the partners of Leigh Day give away 30% of their personal wealth to reparations - then we can start talking...
    Don’t worry Rachel is on it
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,488
    On topic, I thought Wes Streeting was in the pocket of private medicine? Not sure how well that will play with the members...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 53,925

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    Blimey, we'll have an announcement about tidal barrages next.

    I notice the small reactor announcement has pissed off the US ambassador, which is a plus in my book.
    Why was the ambassador irked?
    "The decision to opt for small modular reactors at Wylfa was criticised by the US ambassador Warren Stephens, who said he was "extremely disappointed" by the decision.
    He had been urging ministers to commit to a large-scale plant, with US firm Westinghouse having reportedly presented plans to build a new gigawatt station at the site."


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo
    Trumpism has consequences. Other countries do not want to rely on the whims of a Mad King.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,135

    stodge said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
    My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

    1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
    2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
    3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
    4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
    5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
    6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
    7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
    8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
    9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
    10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
    11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export
    Blimey, I agree with most of that!

    Except:

    7) I would have some sort way of increasing taxes on the wealthy, maybe through land or property tax. Let's also make sure UK citizens pay their appropriate share of taxes wherever they live. Sure, if they love their country so much less than money, they can give up their UK citizenship.

    8) Roll NI into ICT to increase the tax take there rather than just up ICT. Or up ICT and reduce NI as has been mooted.

    I'd also add:

    12) Tighten the criteria for PIP, especially around mental health (as opposed to mental disabilities like learning difficulties) - use some of the money saved to invest in mental health care services.

    The rest is spot on imo.
    I agree with your NI/Income Tax idea, and the PIP tightening.

    I do disagree with the idea of overseas and wealth taxes, though. It'd become widely reciprocated and reduce global labour mobility and encourage the wealthy to dwell or move elsewhere.

    Interesting that there's broad agreement, though, given we have a different general perspective (left/right) politically.
  • TazTaz Posts: 22,192
    eek said:

    Taz said:

    stodge said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
    My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

    1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
    2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
    3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
    4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
    5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
    6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
    7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
    8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
    9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
    10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
    11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export
    There was a reparations conference chaired by the APPG on it very recently.

    Notable that the legal firm behind the equal pay grift, Leigh Day, were in attendance.

    It’s not going away and we can expect legal challenges coming in due course.

    Starmer has said he won’t pay reparations but it is something that many in Labour, and some in other parties, support.

    https://www.appg-ar.org/uk-reparations-conference-2025-register
    When the partners of Leigh Day give away 30% of their personal wealth to reparations - then we can start talking...
    They’ll probably offer a donation from their fees, if they win.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 83,230
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    It's actually for three SMRs.
    The idea is that it's a pilot for refining the manufacturing techniques for making the things on something like an assembly line.

    And it does mean that it's likely to be producing power in the next decade rather than the one after.

    Amusing that the nimbys are already out opposing it as "unproven technology", which is complete bollocks.
    What's unproven are the economics of the whole idea.
    Yes the first two or three are going to be prototypes, after which they should be able to make them (relatively) quickly on a production line and ship them to site - in contrast to a more regular nuclear design which is all built on site.

    There’s also huge export potential to the first company getting their production line up and running, the three companies competing so far are in UK, US, and China.

    The Americans are struggling to find a buyer for the prototypes, which is going to have to be a state or federal government because of the risk, and the West has no interest in the Chinese one and vice-versa.

    If we can beat the Americans to mass production, there’s a huge first-mover advantage in the commercial market.
    Chinese conventional nuclear building is already a lot closer to "production line" than anything we yet do.

    Their nuclear plants are now built to a standard pattern, often with three or four next to each other on a site - and they're building a lot of them (29 under construction). That, and the absence of anything like our decades long planning nightmares, will make them rather cheaper to build.

    The economics of SMRs - and their export potential - are still pretty unclear.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,488

    Another day, another sleaze story when it was all going to be so different

    https://news.sky.com/story/investigation-demanded-into-keir-starmers-comms-chiefs-lobbying-links-13469229

    This lot are just as egregious as the Tories were. The Tories got beasted by the voters for it.

    Labour appear to have looked across the Dispatch Box for 14 years - and learned nothing. Their current polling flatters them.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,376

    Roger said:

    After this on the doctors strike I think he deserves to be favourite. Hard hitting but fair. In fact excellent in every way (its about half way down the page)

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/nov/12/keir-starmer-wes-streeting-labour-leadership-pmqs-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-uk-politics-live-news

    Hold on old boy

    The MP War Crimes website describes him as "clearly anti-Palestinian"

    Surely he deserves to suffer in pain for that?

    https://www.mpwarcrimes.co.uk/parliament/wes-streeting

    Interesting. Thanks
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,920
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    Meanwhile, wealth and wealth-makers depart to places where the grass definitely is greener.

    And Labour will happily wave them off at Heathrow.

    Then start closing NHS hospitals.
    Speaking of which:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/11/11/britains-richest-young-entrepreneur-prepares-to-quit-uk/

    A 37-year-old technology entrepreneur worth more than £700m is preparing to quit Britain for Dubai ahead of Rachel Reeves’s planned tax raid on wealthy emigrants.

    Herman Narula, the chief executive of the £2.5bn tech company Improbable, said he was preparing to emigrate to the United Arab Emirates over reports that Ms Reeves intended to unleash a so-called settling-up charge on entrepreneurs.

    Mr Narula, who is Britain’s richest self-made entrepreneur aged under 40, told The Telegraph: “I don’t particularly want to leave the UK – but I might want to one day and I don’t want to be banned from that option.”

    Mr Narula called introducing an exit tax “irresponsible” and warned it threatened to drive out entrepreneurs ahead of the Budget.
    It is one of the reason that us poor bloody PAYE employees pay so much tax.

    Rich tech entrepeneurs pile up vast fortunes, with the earnings coming mostly from developed countries like our own, but shield their profits abroad via shell companies in low tax jurisdictions. They want all the advantages of the developed country lifestyle but are not willing to contribute their fair share.

    It is something that does need to be addressed, and not just in the UK. Otherwise we have the sort of situation of the nobility in Pre-revolutionary France of an untaxed class exempt from the laws. Sooner or later the tumbrils will have to roll.

    I am not convinced that an exit tax is the best way, but there does need to be an answer.
    I believe a properly implemented UK FATCA is the answer. Also, how about some restrictions or additional taxes on non-UK citizens ownership of UK property (to ensure those who give up UK citizenship can't freely enjoy the benefits)?
  • FossFoss Posts: 2,052
    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    Blimey, we'll have an announcement about tidal barrages next.

    I notice the small reactor announcement has pissed off the US ambassador, which is a plus in my book.
    Why was the ambassador irked?
    "The decision to opt for small modular reactors at Wylfa was criticised by the US ambassador Warren Stephens, who said he was "extremely disappointed" by the decision.
    He had been urging ministers to commit to a large-scale plant, with US firm Westinghouse having reportedly presented plans to build a new gigawatt station at the site."


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo
    Trumpism has consequences. Other countries do not want to rely on the whims of a Mad King.
    It's a different product; it's like asking why someone bought a transit van rather than a 20 tonner. I'm sure the French are disappointed we're not buying their big kit too...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,488
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    It's actually for three SMRs.
    The idea is that it's a pilot for refining the manufacturing techniques for making the things on something like an assembly line.

    And it does mean that it's likely to be producing power in the next decade rather than the one after.

    Amusing that the nimbys are already out opposing it as "unproven technology", which is complete bollocks.
    What's unproven are the economics of the whole idea.
    Yes the first two or three are going to be prototypes, after which they should be able to make them (relatively) quickly on a production line and ship them to site - in contrast to a more regular nuclear design which is all built on site.

    There’s also huge export potential to the first company getting their production line up and running, the three companies competing so far are in UK, US, and China.

    The Americans are struggling to find a buyer for the prototypes, which is going to have to be a state or federal government because of the risk, and the West has no interest in the Chinese one and vice-versa.

    If we can beat the Americans to mass production, there’s a huge first-mover advantage in the commercial market.
    Chinese conventional nuclear building is already a lot closer to "production line" than anything we yet do.

    Their nuclear plants are now built to a standard pattern, often with three or four next to each other on a site - and they're building a lot of them (29 under construction). That, and the absence of anything like our decades long planning nightmares, will make them rather cheaper to build.

    The economics of SMRs - and their export potential - are still pretty unclear.
    I speak regularly to a gentleman who has spent 40 years building nuclear power stations in China. As a result, I'm well informed on this matter.

    SMRs are fuelled by Hopium.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,916
    edited 9:06AM

    Another day, another sleaze story when it was all going to be so different

    https://news.sky.com/story/investigation-demanded-into-keir-starmers-comms-chiefs-lobbying-links-13469229

    Tom Baldwin is reported there as simply a journalist....he was the bloody senior political adviser then head of comms for the Labour party under Ed Miliband.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,290
    Foss said:

    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    Blimey, we'll have an announcement about tidal barrages next.

    I notice the small reactor announcement has pissed off the US ambassador, which is a plus in my book.
    Why was the ambassador irked?
    "The decision to opt for small modular reactors at Wylfa was criticised by the US ambassador Warren Stephens, who said he was "extremely disappointed" by the decision.
    He had been urging ministers to commit to a large-scale plant, with US firm Westinghouse having reportedly presented plans to build a new gigawatt station at the site."


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo
    Trumpism has consequences. Other countries do not want to rely on the whims of a Mad King.
    It's a different product; it's like asking why someone bought a transit van rather than a 20 tonner. I'm sure the French are disappointed we're not buying their big kit too...
    Miliband isn’t saying it directly, but it’s clearly a political and strategic decision.

    Of course he’s giving the contract to the British company, what did anyone else expect?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 53,925
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    It's actually for three SMRs.
    The idea is that it's a pilot for refining the manufacturing techniques for making the things on something like an assembly line.

    And it does mean that it's likely to be producing power in the next decade rather than the one after.

    Amusing that the nimbys are already out opposing it as "unproven technology", which is complete bollocks.
    What's unproven are the economics of the whole idea.
    Yes the first two or three are going to be prototypes, after which they should be able to make them (relatively) quickly on a production line and ship them to site - in contrast to a more regular nuclear design which is all built on site.

    There’s also huge export potential to the first company getting their production line up and running, the three companies competing so far are in UK, US, and China.

    The Americans are struggling to find a buyer for the prototypes, which is going to have to be a state or federal government because of the risk, and the West has no interest in the Chinese one and vice-versa.

    If we can beat the Americans to mass production, there’s a huge first-mover advantage in the commercial market.
    Chinese conventional nuclear building is already a lot closer to "production line" than anything we yet do.

    Their nuclear plants are now built to a standard pattern, often with three or four next to each other on a site - and they're building a lot of them (29 under construction). That, and the absence of anything like our decades long planning nightmares, will make them rather cheaper to build.

    The economics of SMRs - and their export potential - are still pretty unclear.
    There was some other good news our of China recently. It looks as if their CO2 targets are going to be met earlier than thought. As well as nuclear they are building vast amounts of other renewables.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/nov/11/china-co2-emissions-flat-or-falling-for-past-18-months-analysis-finds?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,488
    edited 9:08AM

    stodge said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
    My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

    1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
    2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
    3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
    4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
    5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
    6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
    7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
    8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
    9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
    10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
    11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export
    Blimey, I agree with most of that!

    Except:

    7) I would have some sort way of increasing taxes on the wealthy, maybe through land or property tax. Let's also make sure UK citizens pay their appropriate share of taxes wherever they live. Sure, if they love their country so much less than money, they can give up their UK citizenship.

    8) Roll NI into ICT to increase the tax take there rather than just up ICT. Or up ICT and reduce NI as has been mooted.

    I'd also add:

    12) Tighten the criteria for PIP, especially around mental health (as opposed to mental disabilities like learning difficulties) - use some of the money saved to invest in mental health care services.

    The rest is spot on imo.
    Are you listening, Kemi? Mel?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,723
    Binman punched naked charity cyclist after mistaking him for pervert

    Lee Turnage, 46, injured cyclist riding in World Naked Bike Ride before also assaulting two arresting police officers


    A binman punched a naked cyclist taking part in a charity event after mistaking him for a “pervert”.

    Lee Turnage, 46, injured the cyclist who was riding in the World Naked Bike Ride event on August 9, a court heard.

    He was also found with a knife and attacked two police officers who tried to arrest him outside The Leather Bottle pub in Colchester, Essex.

    One of the officers needed medical treatment to glue part of his ear back on as a result of the attack, Ipswich Crown Court was told.

    Steven Dyble, mitigating, said the incident began when Turnage “encountered a number of middle-aged men cycling in the nude”.

    “That is not to the defendant’s taste, but he reacted very badly to what he thought of, to use the vernacular, as perverts cycling naked in what was a residential area,” Mr Dyble said.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/12/binman-punched-naked-charity-cyclist-mistaking-pervert/?recomm_id=ebd5c3d1-e51a-46c1-8727-90266e276e26
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,553

    stodge said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
    My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

    1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
    2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
    3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
    4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
    5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
    6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
    7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
    8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
    9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
    10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
    11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export
    Thank you for the response.

    I'm not sure some of the points would make that much difference when you are borrowing £150 billion per annum and the sheer vitriol directed toward the WASPI women from some on here is hard to believe - you'd almost think they had invaded Ukraine.

    We are still in the post-COVID era - to be honest, I suspect a Labour Chancellor would have done exactly what Sunak did in 2020 but the ramifications of £300 billion or so of extra borrowing live with us. Had Sunak instigated a one off COVID tax in 2022 or 2023 to redress the balance that might have helped but that's water under the proverbial for now.

    I can agree on the Triple Lock but the "sell" of that to an ageing population is likely to be the political equivalent of putting your head in a bucketful of scorpions.

    I accept the need to simplify taxation (no argument) but I'm less convinced about planning regulations. They do serve a purpose and people should have the right to object to developments which, while economically advantageous, are disadvantageous for them in their community. The key is to ensure all applications provide and budget for sufficient infrastructure to deal with the population increase in a given area - that means extra medical centres, schools (perhaps), and transport as well as utilities and waste.

    This year's Budget is more about slowing the borrowing train than stopping it and throwing it into reverse. Many post-industrial countries face the same issues we do and irrespective of the political stripe of their Government and the competence of their Finance/Treasury Ministers are struggling to come up with meaningful solutions.

    I'd also offer the not unreasonable and cynical thought if there were a simple solution or solutions, Hunt and Sunak would have instigated them but they didn't. Rather like the "small boats", the economy is proving an intractable problem where oft-touted "radical" solutions would prove electorally or legally impossible to implement.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 45,834
    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    Blimey, we'll have an announcement about tidal barrages next.

    I notice the small reactor announcement has pissed off the US ambassador, which is a plus in my book.
    Why was the ambassador irked?
    "The decision to opt for small modular reactors at Wylfa was criticised by the US ambassador Warren Stephens, who said he was "extremely disappointed" by the decision.
    He had been urging ministers to commit to a large-scale plant, with US firm Westinghouse having reportedly presented plans to build a new gigawatt station at the site."


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo
    Trumpism has consequences. Other countries do not want to rely on the whims of a Mad King.
    Thank goodness the Eye of Trump is focussed on..er..other matters otherwise the UK would no doubt have huge tarrifs lumped on in retaliation for this terrible slight.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 35,595

    Another day, another sleaze story when it was all going to be so different

    https://news.sky.com/story/investigation-demanded-into-keir-starmers-comms-chiefs-lobbying-links-13469229

    Tim Allan was great as Buzz Lightyear, leave him alone.

    Anyway it's not like he's had a beer and a curry.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,376

    Months back I identified Streeting as Labour's Liz Truss...

    It's a bit early to claim credit before it's happened
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 31,376
    Several videos online of plastic patriots in Worcester putting up Temu flags with cable ties on lampposts. Abusive to old guy whose land is millimetres from one lamppost. And patronising to a woman.

    Entertainingly the plastic patriot starts talking about how taking their flag down would be "theft". No luv, you're putting it up illegally. Taking it down is not "theft".

    And of course the patriot is cable tying the flag to the lamppost upside down. Because of course he is.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,488
    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    It's actually for three SMRs.
    The idea is that it's a pilot for refining the manufacturing techniques for making the things on something like an assembly line.

    And it does mean that it's likely to be producing power in the next decade rather than the one after.

    Amusing that the nimbys are already out opposing it as "unproven technology", which is complete bollocks.
    What's unproven are the economics of the whole idea.
    Yes the first two or three are going to be prototypes, after which they should be able to make them (relatively) quickly on a production line and ship them to site - in contrast to a more regular nuclear design which is all built on site.

    There’s also huge export potential to the first company getting their production line up and running, the three companies competing so far are in UK, US, and China.

    The Americans are struggling to find a buyer for the prototypes, which is going to have to be a state or federal government because of the risk, and the West has no interest in the Chinese one and vice-versa.

    If we can beat the Americans to mass production, there’s a huge first-mover advantage in the commercial market.
    Chinese conventional nuclear building is already a lot closer to "production line" than anything we yet do.

    Their nuclear plants are now built to a standard pattern, often with three or four next to each other on a site - and they're building a lot of them (29 under construction). That, and the absence of anything like our decades long planning nightmares, will make them rather cheaper to build.

    The economics of SMRs - and their export potential - are still pretty unclear.
    There was some other good news our of China recently. It looks as if their CO2 targets are going to be met earlier than thought. As well as nuclear they are building vast amounts of other renewables.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/nov/11/china-co2-emissions-flat-or-falling-for-past-18-months-analysis-finds?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
    In just the last six months, China has built more solar capacity than the whole of that in the US - from the start.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,916
    Feels very convenient Sky News had a sleazy story ready to go the day after yesterday....
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 21,161

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    It's actually for three SMRs.
    The idea is that it's a pilot for refining the manufacturing techniques for making the things on something like an assembly line.

    And it does mean that it's likely to be producing power in the next decade rather than the one after.

    Amusing that the nimbys are already out opposing it as "unproven technology", which is complete bollocks.
    What's unproven are the economics of the whole idea.
    Yes the first two or three are going to be prototypes, after which they should be able to make them (relatively) quickly on a production line and ship them to site - in contrast to a more regular nuclear design which is all built on site.

    There’s also huge export potential to the first company getting their production line up and running, the three companies competing so far are in UK, US, and China.

    The Americans are struggling to find a buyer for the prototypes, which is going to have to be a state or federal government because of the risk, and the West has no interest in the Chinese one and vice-versa.

    If we can beat the Americans to mass production, there’s a huge first-mover advantage in the commercial market.
    Chinese conventional nuclear building is already a lot closer to "production line" than anything we yet do.

    Their nuclear plants are now built to a standard pattern, often with three or four next to each other on a site - and they're building a lot of them (29 under construction). That, and the absence of anything like our decades long planning nightmares, will make them rather cheaper to build.

    The economics of SMRs - and their export potential - are still pretty unclear.
    There was some other good news our of China recently. It looks as if their CO2 targets are going to be met earlier than thought. As well as nuclear they are building vast amounts of other renewables.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/nov/11/china-co2-emissions-flat-or-falling-for-past-18-months-analysis-finds?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
    In just the last six months, China has built more solar capacity than the whole of that in the US - from the start.
    Solar is woke
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,324
    0.1% growth in the last quarter. Unless we had fewer than 70,000 net migration it was likely a drop in gdp per cap. I'd have thought the combo of this, weakening wage growth and Rachel's theft income tax hike the BoE should defo drop rates next meeting ?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 12,532
    edited 9:18AM

    Another day, another sleaze story when it was all going to be so different

    https://news.sky.com/story/investigation-demanded-into-keir-starmers-comms-chiefs-lobbying-links-13469229

    This lot are just as egregious as the Tories were. The Tories got beasted by the voters for it.

    Labour appear to have looked across the Dispatch Box for 14 years - and learned nothing. Their current polling flatters them.
    Genuine question - is constant stream of minor scandals just a function of Labour actually having standards, opening themselves up for investigation? And therefore providing lots of material for the press?

    I think you'd be forgiven for assuming that this stuff was going on to at least the same extent under the Conservatives, just that they were better a suppressing/ignoring it.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,290

    Sandpit said:

    Northamptonshire Police Chief Constable found guilty of contempt of court (!)

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/nov/12/judges-set-to-decide-fate-of-police-chief-constable-guilty-of-contempt-of-court

    The court of appeal ruled on Tuesday that Northamptonshire police were in contempt and had been “willfully disobedient” for repeatedly failing to obey rulings to hand over video to a woman who complained she had been wrongly arrested by three officers.

    Nadine Buzzard-Quashie was arrested by Northamptonshire police in September 2021, triggering a four-year saga.



    The judgment said: “Her account of her arrest … was that she was physically assaulted by the officers who arrested her, she was physically thrown to the ground and had her face pushed into stinging nettles.”

    She wanted video footage of her arrest, including from police body-worn cameras, which the force did not provide.

    She complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office which made an order that all video should be handed over, which the force ignored, then a county court judge made another order, which the force failed to obey again.

    The force told courts it did not have any more video to hand over, then reversed its position at a hearing in October. The court of appeal judgment said: “This means that all the statements made to the court on behalf of the police force prior to mid-October 2025 were false.”

    On Tuesday three appeal court judges issued a blistering and unanimous ruling.

    Lady Justice Asplin, Lord Justice Coulson, and Lord Justice Fraser said “misleading and untrue statements … have been made to the court on behalf of the chief constable, both to the county court … and also to the court of appeal in relation to the application for permission to appeal and the appeal itself. To list every single statement made on behalf of the chief constable that has proved to be inaccurate over this lengthy period would lengthen this judgment considerably.”

    I am shocked by this, I am sure Cyclefree will be too when she reads this story.
    It’s pretty unusual for the CC to be found guilty of contempt, no?

    Presumably the man himself is now going to have to show up at the court of appeal, to explain his force’s behaviour in the case?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,916
    edited 9:23AM
    Eabhal said:

    Another day, another sleaze story when it was all going to be so different

    https://news.sky.com/story/investigation-demanded-into-keir-starmers-comms-chiefs-lobbying-links-13469229

    This lot are just as egregious as the Tories were. The Tories got beasted by the voters for it.

    Labour appear to have looked across the Dispatch Box for 14 years - and learned nothing. Their current polling flatters them.
    Genuine question - is constant stream of minor scandals just a function of Labour actually having standards, opening themselves up for investigation? And therefore providing lots of material for the press?

    I think you'd be forgiven for assuming that this stuff was going on to at least the same extent under the Conservatives, just that they were better a suppressing/ignoring it.
    What "opening up" e.g. Starmer tried to hide repeatedly he had any involvement with football regulator appointment. He tried to dodge this for weeks with non answers. Its a minor story, of course donors and mates have long got preferential treatment, but there was certainly no opening up about this.

    Dave Lammy lied, Rachel Reeves lied, Big Ange lied, that is how they got into trouble. Again no opening up there. Certainly true the last lot did, but the new lot, same as the old lot, just hide a bit more behind legalise of the process.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,376
    Foxy said:

    Roger said:

    After this on the doctors strike I think he deserves to be favourite. Hard hitting but fair. In fact excellent in every way (its about half way down the page)

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/nov/12/keir-starmer-wes-streeting-labour-leadership-pmqs-kemi-badenoch-conservatives-uk-politics-live-news

    I am not in the BMA, and don't support this strike. I don't think that there will be a big walkout as the enthusiasm seems to have faded.

    Streeting is generally failing because of his arrogance. He doesn't listen to people and is convinced of his own brilliance.

    Probably better than Starmer, but could well prove to be a Truss like figure. Tories love Thatcher cosplay in leadership contenders, Labour loves Blair cosplay, but both need to realise that times have changed. Theres no "putting the band back together".
    But what's the alternative? Either Labour finds a leader in a relatively short time or the civilised vote fractures and Farage wins with maybe 25% of the vote
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 45,834

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    It's actually for three SMRs.
    The idea is that it's a pilot for refining the manufacturing techniques for making the things on something like an assembly line.

    And it does mean that it's likely to be producing power in the next decade rather than the one after.

    Amusing that the nimbys are already out opposing it as "unproven technology", which is complete bollocks.
    What's unproven are the economics of the whole idea.
    Yes the first two or three are going to be prototypes, after which they should be able to make them (relatively) quickly on a production line and ship them to site - in contrast to a more regular nuclear design which is all built on site.

    There’s also huge export potential to the first company getting their production line up and running, the three companies competing so far are in UK, US, and China.

    The Americans are struggling to find a buyer for the prototypes, which is going to have to be a state or federal government because of the risk, and the West has no interest in the Chinese one and vice-versa.

    If we can beat the Americans to mass production, there’s a huge first-mover advantage in the commercial market.
    Chinese conventional nuclear building is already a lot closer to "production line" than anything we yet do.

    Their nuclear plants are now built to a standard pattern, often with three or four next to each other on a site - and they're building a lot of them (29 under construction). That, and the absence of anything like our decades long planning nightmares, will make them rather cheaper to build.

    The economics of SMRs - and their export potential - are still pretty unclear.
    There was some other good news our of China recently. It looks as if their CO2 targets are going to be met earlier than thought. As well as nuclear they are building vast amounts of other renewables.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/nov/11/china-co2-emissions-flat-or-falling-for-past-18-months-analysis-finds?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
    In just the last six months, China has built more solar capacity than the whole of that in the US - from the start.
    Solar is woke
    Solar is heating woks.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,245
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    It's actually for three SMRs.
    The idea is that it's a pilot for refining the manufacturing techniques for making the things on something like an assembly line.

    And it does mean that it's likely to be producing power in the next decade rather than the one after.

    Amusing that the nimbys are already out opposing it as "unproven technology", which is complete bollocks.
    What's unproven are the economics of the whole idea.
    Yes the first two or three are going to be prototypes, after which they should be able to make them (relatively) quickly on a production line and ship them to site - in contrast to a more regular nuclear design which is all built on site.

    There’s also huge export potential to the first company getting their production line up and running, the three companies competing so far are in UK, US, and China.

    The Americans are struggling to find a buyer for the prototypes, which is going to have to be a state or federal government because of the risk, and the West has no interest in the Chinese one and vice-versa.

    If we can beat the Americans to mass production, there’s a huge first-mover advantage in the commercial market.
    Chinese conventional nuclear building is already a lot closer to "production line" than anything we yet do.

    Their nuclear plants are now built to a standard pattern, often with three or four next to each other on a site - and they're building a lot of them (29 under construction). That, and the absence of anything like our decades long planning nightmares, will make them rather cheaper to build.

    The economics of SMRs - and their export potential - are still pretty unclear.
    Because China has a huge domestic market it is able to do everything at scale, learning by doing and slashing costs. This is also the logic of the EU's single market, which - however imperfect and incomplete it may be - we have chosen to leave.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,920
    edited 9:22AM

    Several videos online of plastic patriots in Worcester putting up Temu flags with cable ties on lampposts. Abusive to old guy whose land is millimetres from one lamppost. And patronising to a woman.

    Entertainingly the plastic patriot starts talking about how taking their flag down would be "theft". No luv, you're putting it up illegally. Taking it down is not "theft".

    And of course the patriot is cable tying the flag to the lamppost upside down. Because of course he is.

    I read that as plastic parrot. Offensive to parrots probably. Then again they are making a loud noise repeating offensive rubbish they don't understand.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 7,786

    stodge said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    What then (to use your terminology) is the alternative?

    I presume you'd like to see taxes cut and spending cut - I suspect spending will be cut in the Budget but presumably you want to see some serious reductions? I presume it'll be the services people actually depend on which will bear the brunt rather than, let's say, defence which is sacrosanct.

    Which services and whose benefits would you cut? Would you cut pensions (or just those in the public sector)?

    As always, those advocating spending cuts are usually unaffected by any such cuts and it's not unreasonable of those who will be affected to ask why they should take the pain.
    My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

    1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
    2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
    3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
    4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
    5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
    6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
    7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
    8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
    9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
    10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
    11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export
    Blimey, I agree with most of that!

    Except:

    7) I would have some sort way of increasing taxes on the wealthy, maybe through land or property tax. Let's also make sure UK citizens pay their appropriate share of taxes wherever they live. Sure, if they love their country so much less than money, they can give up their UK citizenship.

    8) Roll NI into ICT to increase the tax take there rather than just up ICT. Or up ICT and reduce NI as has been mooted.

    I'd also add:

    12) Tighten the criteria for PIP, especially around mental health (as opposed to mental disabilities like learning difficulties) - use some of the money saved to invest in mental health care services.

    The rest is spot on imo.
    Re your No. 7, even the US allows their nationals to factor in what they are paying in taxes in the country they are living in so there are allowances and credits and there are double taxation agreements.

    What, in your opinion is “their appropriate share of taxes”?

    Are you suggesting that the UK would just tax people at the UK rate wherever they are living and paying tax? Why would people keep uk citizenship if they have to pay tax for services they do not remotely use just because the UK can’t manage its spending properly?

    So if they do introduce taxation on UK citizens abroad it’s not remotely going to raise the sort of sums you think.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,245
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Say Starmer just goes and Streeting replaces him.

    What then?

    There's still a very difficult economic picture and there's still an army of backbench Labour MPs who think their job is to fling money at people to make themselves feel better, rather than manage the public finances.

    Still, the reputation of Sunak and Hunt is only improving each day this nonsense continues. We'll see (eventually) if Starmer and Reeves can get a grip.

    My suspicion is it'll go something like this: taxes rise on the evil private sector, more money flung at the virtuous public sector, the economy is harmed so tax receipts don't match expectations, meaning more steps are needed at the next Budget which then harms the economy more, rinse and repeat.

    Hopefully I'll be wrong.

    Meanwhile, wealth and wealth-makers depart to places where the grass definitely is greener.

    And Labour will happily wave them off at Heathrow.

    Then start closing NHS hospitals.
    Speaking of which:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/11/11/britains-richest-young-entrepreneur-prepares-to-quit-uk/

    A 37-year-old technology entrepreneur worth more than £700m is preparing to quit Britain for Dubai ahead of Rachel Reeves’s planned tax raid on wealthy emigrants.

    Herman Narula, the chief executive of the £2.5bn tech company Improbable, said he was preparing to emigrate to the United Arab Emirates over reports that Ms Reeves intended to unleash a so-called settling-up charge on entrepreneurs.

    Mr Narula, who is Britain’s richest self-made entrepreneur aged under 40, told The Telegraph: “I don’t particularly want to leave the UK – but I might want to one day and I don’t want to be banned from that option.”

    Mr Narula called introducing an exit tax “irresponsible” and warned it threatened to drive out entrepreneurs ahead of the Budget.
    It is one of the reason that us poor bloody PAYE employees pay so much tax.

    Rich tech entrepeneurs pile up vast fortunes, with the earnings coming mostly from developed countries like our own, but shield their profits abroad via shell companies in low tax jurisdictions. They want all the advantages of the developed country lifestyle but are not willing to contribute their fair share.

    It is something that does need to be addressed, and not just in the UK. Otherwise we have the sort of situation of the nobility in Pre-revolutionary France of an untaxed class exempt from the laws. Sooner or later the tumbrils will have to roll.

    I am not convinced that an exit tax is the best way, but there does need to be an answer.
    Yeah, I am sick of people much richer than me paying a much lower tax rate. Why should the PAYE wage slaves be the ones paying for everything?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 53,925

    Foxy said:

    eek said:

    Apols if this was covered earlier:

    UK's first small nuclear power station to be built in north Wales

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo

    Is this the adapted RR submarine reactors idea?

    Yep
    Blimey, we'll have an announcement about tidal barrages next.

    I notice the small reactor announcement has pissed off the US ambassador, which is a plus in my book.
    Why was the ambassador irked?
    "The decision to opt for small modular reactors at Wylfa was criticised by the US ambassador Warren Stephens, who said he was "extremely disappointed" by the decision.
    He had been urging ministers to commit to a large-scale plant, with US firm Westinghouse having reportedly presented plans to build a new gigawatt station at the site."


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c051y3d7myzo
    Trumpism has consequences. Other countries do not want to rely on the whims of a Mad King.
    Thank goodness the Eye of Trump is focussed on..er..other matters otherwise the UK would no doubt have huge tarrifs lumped on in retaliation for this terrible slight.
    This email is interesting. It looks like Epstein was advising Russia on how to manipulate and control Trump.

    https://bsky.app/profile/joniaskola.bsky.social/post/3m5hoh3gvrk2f
Sign In or Register to comment.