Skip to content

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

1235»

Comments

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,948
    edited 1:59PM
    Former Tottenham owner Joe Lewis to be handed pardon by Donald Trump after pleading guilty to insider trading

    https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/tottenham-joe-lewis-pardon-donald-trump-5HjdMjp_2/

    How many bloody people has Trump pardoned.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,173
    Eabhal said:

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    Agree with this. I don't actually like the scheme; it's more the contrast with other policies that frustrates me so much. Why a £4k grant for new EVs and not one for new bikes?

    It's baffling, disheartening.
    Everyone's circumstances are different. I live 17 miles from work, mainly along A roads. I don't feel safe cycling that, irrespective of the big hill to the Uni. I would love to cycle to work.

    How could it do it? I'd need dedicated cycle routes that just don't exist.

    But for a lot of people it IS an option and should be supported.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 38,431
    "Sweden’s pension disaster rings alarm bells for Reeves
    Retirement funds face huge losses after being exposed to high-risk green projects" (£)

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/net-zero/sweden-net-zero-pension-push-cautionary-tale-britain
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 26,692

    I see some idiot on X is proclaiming the death of the human written novel. Suspect this idiot doesn't actually understand how LLMs work...

    https://x.com/thomasknox

    He might be right, for two reasons
    • The market now contains many self-published AI generated books.
    • We are become post-literate, with the number of people buying and reading books dropping
    It's not too difficult to see line going up meeting line come down
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,865
    Nigelb said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

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

    Labour's Truss would be if SKS goes and the members pick somebody from the ideological Left who makes them feel good but is clueless and incompetent. Streeting, like him or not, doesn't fit the bill.
    There's always Ed Milliband...
    Now you're talking. If the goal is apoplexy at the TeleMail - and there are worse goals let's face it - that's the way to go. After all these years, fully a decade after we missed the chance, we can finally have "chaos with Ed Miliband".
    You may scoff but...

    On thread, at 16/1 Ed Miliband is a very good value bet in this market (Streeting is 11/2). He is by some way the most popular Cabinet minister amongst Labour members at a +71% net approval (using Labour List rankings as a close proxy) compared to Streeting who has +17% (still well ahead of Starmer on -11%!!) Miliband is close politically to Burnham and part of the same Mainstream grouping. He has a decent chance of getting the support of 20% of Labour MPs as the soft left candidate to stand against Starmer in a leadership contest, not least because he'll be viewed as the best placed candidate to beat Streeting.

    It doesn't matter to the Labour selectorate that Miliband's popularity with the membership is not echoed amongst the general public, although I think that anyone who moves against Starmer will pick up some credit with the public in the present climate. Miliband is also well placed to court support from those who have switched allegiance to the Greens or Lib Dems which is the group from which Labour really needs to win back support under new leadership.

    https://labourlist.org/2025/09/labour-cabinet-league-table-rankings-labourlist-survation/

    He's also clearly interested in standing. There was no particular imperative for him to weigh in today to publically echo Streeting's call for the No 10 briefers to be sacked, but he's chosen to do so anyway, which helps keep him in the frame.
    I wasn't really scoffing. Ed is a decent long shot bet if you want to avoid the fav. But I think Streeting myself and I don't think he's too short at current odds. I also wouldn't get too swept up with "Starmer is toast next year" sentiment. I don't see him leading into the next GE but 1.9 to go in 2026 doesn't appeal. I'd be more inclined to back 27/28 at much higher prices.
    The Labour membership/selectorate isn't keen on Streeting because he's made his name divisively marginalising the left, and much prefers EdM. That could change (this week's debacle is clearly helpful to Streeting) or the membersip could change. I know a fair number of Labour people like me who are waiting to see how the new party's conference in two weeks works out - if it produces a positive left-wing force with a reasonable chance, a lot of us will be tempted (but if it's a shambolic squabble over rules, then not), which would leave a rump of members who like Streeting.

    What do voters want? Primarily leadership with a clear, attractive medium-term agenda. I don't think most voters think of themselves as especially left- or right-wing, though they react against people seen as extreme and negative (e.g. Scargill).
    Update: It was widely reported that the briefing was against Streeting but the BBC reports that it was also against Miliband which I had missed.
    "Energy Secretary Ed Miliband and Health Secretary Wes Streeting were both named as potential challengers in the anonymous briefings - now both are calling for whoever was behind them to be found and sacked."
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn8vn4vv87xo

    That just reinforces my view that Miliband is extraordinary value at 16/1 next Labour leader or even better 25/1 next PM.
    Not mine.

    Streeting played Downing Street like a violin; Miliband ... well, what did Miliband do ?
    The current membership would definitely pick Miliband over Streeting, who is simply too confrontational to the left. If it changes in a big way (e.g. because loads march off to Your Party or the Greens) that could change, but as things stand Miliband is IMO definitely a better shot than Streeting.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 40,967
    @rashmeerl

    @TheNewWorldmag
    EXCLUSIVE: Michael Prescott himself doctored Trump quote in his anti-BBC report. It's certainly pots, not quite kettles, as James Ball's excellent piece points out

    https://x.com/rashmeerl/status/1988953097968972175?s=20
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,173
    viewcode said:

    I see some idiot on X is proclaiming the death of the human written novel. Suspect this idiot doesn't actually understand how LLMs work...

    https://x.com/thomasknox

    He might be right, for two reasons
    • The market now contains many self-published AI generated books.
    • We are become post-literate, with the number of people buying and reading books dropping
    It's not too difficult to see line going up meeting line come down
    Is that first bit true? Are they any good?
  • isamisam Posts: 42,989
    edited 2:04PM
    If Streeting were to take over before the next election, he must be in line to be the biggest price a PM has ever been to win their seat at a GE
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 62,334

    viewcode said:

    Foss said:

    Foss said:

    Child Benefits should be linked to x number of years of previous full-time employment. Perhaps 5 to 10 years per child, split between both parents.

    Send em down pit before school.
    If you don't have what it takes to look after yourself then you certainly don't have what it takes to adequately raise a child. We need to be far clearer and far louder about that.
    There is some truth in what you say. But actions have consequences beyond your intention. Take away child benefit from the poorest, expect a bigger underclass, more need for social care, more crime, more misery and ultimately more expense for the taxpayer.

    Getting rid of surestart was a huge false economy, lets not to do the same with child benefit. The formative years are important, if we neglect them for a chunk of the population, that chunk of the population will be very expensive to manage for all of us as they grow up in addition to screwing up the lives of kids who have no choice in who their parents are.
    Amused that @Foss thinks that people who 'don't have what it takes to look after yourself' have what it takes to calculate whether having another child is financially viable.
    Many, many years ago, there was an impassioned column in the Independent, arguing that teenage pregnancy "to get a council house" couldn't be true. Because by adding up the life time benefits of finishing school vs teenage pregnancy - including the NPV........
    Somebody never read Kahneman and Tversky's work....
    Pause. Raises hand diffidently. "Um, me?" My TBR pile is too large already. :(

    No the Independent columnist. But Thinking Fast and Slow by Kahneman is an essential read about their work that eventually won them a Noble Prize. The Undoing Project by Michael Lewis is also an interesting read about their lives.
    The Michael Lewis book also gets 80% of Kahneman's ideas across, in a much shorter and readable way.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,421
    isam said:

    If Streeting were to take over before the next election, he must be in line to be the biggest price a PM has ever been to win their seat at a GE

    What about Boris Johnson in 2019? There was much excitement on here on the day of the election that he'd lost his seat.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,499

    Former Tottenham owner Joe Lewis to be handed pardon by Donald Trump after pleading guilty to insider trading

    https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/tottenham-joe-lewis-pardon-donald-trump-5HjdMjp_2/

    How many bloody people has Trump pardoned.

    Maybe he'll pardon those behind the Post Office scandal next....
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 7,529

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    My wife bought a bike with the scheme and rode to work about twice.
    When I worked in HR in London, hardly anybody used it to cycle to work. The youngsters, who mostly lived in London, continued to come to work on their knackered old bikes, the older cyclists, who mostly lived in Surrey, continued to come to work by train. Both groups used the scheme to buy a nice bike for the weekend.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 68,176

    PBers will be delighted to know a BPC registered pollster is polling me on people who are modest versus people who self promote themselves.


    It often seems to me that people either massively over- or under-sell themselves. It's rare to find people who have a well calibrated sense of their own abilities and sell themselves accurately.
    That’s what I’ve often found too, I told they survey that too, and that self praise is no praise at all.

    I’ve found a sense of humour has often bought me an awful lot of goodwill both professionally and personally.
    It is what has kept my wife and my 61 years of marriage so strong
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,173

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    My wife bought a bike with the scheme and rode to work about twice.
    When I worked in HR in London, hardly anybody used it to cycle to work. The youngsters, who mostly lived in London, continued to come to work on their knackered old bikes, the older cyclists, who mostly lived in Surrey, continued to come to work by train. Both groups used the scheme to buy a nice bike for the weekend.
    And thats the problem.

    Anecdotally lots of middle class parents used to love Surestart, rather than the lower socioeconomic groups it was aimed at. How to make sure the scheme is doing what is intended?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 62,334
    Sandpit said:

    Definitely nothing wrong with the Russian economy, nothing at all. Of course they’ve not issued six trillion rubles in bonds this year…


    This is the direct consequence of Ukraine's attacks on Russia's energy infrastructure. Less oil revenues means more need to borrow money.

    If you combine this printing of money with energy shortages (of all types) in the civilian economy, you have a recipe for inflation.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,299
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Definitely nothing wrong with the Russian economy, nothing at all. Of course they’ve not issued six trillion rubles in bonds this year…


    Raises the interesting question of who the F is buying them?
    One suspects that those buying them have little choice in the matter!

    Most likely bought by the likes of Lukoil and Rosneft, which is where the dollars live.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,499

    Brittas talking tough....

    “I’ve been assured it didn’t come from Downing Street, but I’d be equally clear that whether it’s this case or any other, I intend to deal with it. I will absolutely deal with anybody responsible for briefing against ministers, cabinet ministers or other ministers.”

    "Since I have been manager, I am proud to say there have only been twenty-three deaths. And not one of them was a staff member."
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 7,529

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    To a point. Lightweight Craghoppers cargo pants, lightweight warm tops and waterproofs. They all have other uses though
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 12,533

    Eabhal said:

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    Agree with this. I don't actually like the scheme; it's more the contrast with other policies that frustrates me so much. Why a £4k grant for new EVs and not one for new bikes?

    It's baffling, disheartening.
    Everyone's circumstances are different. I live 17 miles from work, mainly along A roads. I don't feel safe cycling that, irrespective of the big hill to the Uni. I would love to cycle to work.

    How could it do it? I'd need dedicated cycle routes that just don't exist.

    But for a lot of people it IS an option and should be supported.
    That doesn't really answer the question though. There are millions more people who can't drive - or afford a £30k EV. Why shouldn't they get a tax break for another form of personal transport?
  • eekeek Posts: 31,879
    edited 2:13PM

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    My wife bought a bike with the scheme and rode to work about twice.
    When I worked in HR in London, hardly anybody used it to cycle to work. The youngsters, who mostly lived in London, continued to come to work on their knackered old bikes, the older cyclists, who mostly lived in Surrey, continued to come to work by train. Both groups used the scheme to buy a nice bike for the weekend.
    And thats the problem.

    Anecdotally lots of middle class parents used to love Surestart, rather than the lower socioeconomic groups it was aimed at. How to make sure the scheme is doing what is intended?
    Looks at the current money being spent on child social services.

    Anecdotally (speaking to social workers separately confirmed by child social care spending relative to 2011-25) Surestart did a lot for the lower socioeconomic groups - as shown by the lower level of support required then
  • isamisam Posts: 42,989
    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    If Streeting were to take over before the next election, he must be in line to be the biggest price a PM has ever been to win their seat at a GE

    What about Boris Johnson in 2019? There was much excitement on here on the day of the election that he'd lost his seat.
    I can’t remember what price he was. Would Streeting be odds on?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,247

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    My wife bought a bike with the scheme and rode to work about twice.
    When I worked in HR in London, hardly anybody used it to cycle to work. The youngsters, who mostly lived in London, continued to come to work on their knackered old bikes, the older cyclists, who mostly lived in Surrey, continued to come to work by train. Both groups used the scheme to buy a nice bike for the weekend.
    And thats the problem.

    Anecdotally lots of middle class parents used to love Surestart, rather than the lower socioeconomic groups it was aimed at. How to make sure the scheme is doing what is intended?
    Something like surestart should be for everyone, an opportunity for people to make connections and learn from each other. Just like the local state school, it should be a hub for the whole community, a way to build bonds across society, not a ghetto for the poor or an act of charity.
    FWIW I got my bike for about £700 using the loan scheme and use it about 3:1 for work vs leisure. I've always thought the scheme is a bit of a scam though. I'd guess the median user is someone like me, a well off white dude who works in London.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 30,746
    edited 2:20PM
    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    It looks like a cap on price not an abolition. I can't quarrel with that assuming that mobility aids are exempt and the cap is sensible.

    A restriction to basic rate tax would also be OK, imo.

    They are trying to curb Peleton Pete getting his 10k penis extension through the scheme.

    Personally I think the purchase of bikes for the weekend is OK too, as they help with fitness and carbon reduction etc, and limiting it to only people who work seems perverse.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/nov/12/rachel-reeves-to-cut-tax-benefits-for-workers-using-salary-sacrifice-schemes-to-buy-bikes
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,299

    PBers will be delighted to know a BPC registered pollster is polling me on people who are modest versus people who self promote themselves.


    It often seems to me that people either massively over- or under-sell themselves. It's rare to find people who have a well calibrated sense of their own abilities and sell themselves accurately.
    Knowing what you don’t know is a really important skill to have.

    Always better to take a step back and think - or research further - before doing something, especially in my trade, or before giving an answer on something to a senior manager who doesn’t like it if you have to correct yourself later.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 46,451

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    My wife bought a bike with the scheme and rode to work about twice.
    When I worked in HR in London, hardly anybody used it to cycle to work. The youngsters, who mostly lived in London, continued to come to work on their knackered old bikes, the older cyclists, who mostly lived in Surrey, continued to come to work by train. Both groups used the scheme to buy a nice bike for the weekend.
    And thats the problem.

    Anecdotally lots of middle class parents used to love Surestart, rather than the lower socioeconomic groups it was aimed at. How to make sure the scheme is doing what is intended?
    Something like surestart should be for everyone, an opportunity for people to make connections and learn from each other. Just like the local state school, it should be a hub for the whole community, a way to build bonds across society, not a ghetto for the poor or an act of charity.
    FWIW I got my bike for about £700 using the loan scheme and use it about 3:1 for work vs leisure. I've always thought the scheme is a bit of a scam though. I'd guess the median user is someone like me, a well off white dude who works in London.
    Also, middle class parents by definition are more likely to be up with current affairs and recognise the word Surestart. Doesn't mean it doesn't work for lower socioeconomic groups.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,247

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 46,451
    edited 2:21PM
    Sandpit said:

    PBers will be delighted to know a BPC registered pollster is polling me on people who are modest versus people who self promote themselves.


    It often seems to me that people either massively over- or under-sell themselves. It's rare to find people who have a well calibrated sense of their own abilities and sell themselves accurately.
    Knowing what you don’t know is a really important skill to have.

    Always better to take a step back and think - or research further - before doing something, especially in my trade, or before giving an answer on something to a senior manager who doesn’t like it if you have to correct yourself later.
    Royal Navy training of midshipmen: you don't know the answer to a question, you say "I don't know, but I'll go and find out now, sir!"

    Edit: (Assuming it's not something they're always expected to know, like the names of sailors in the division for which one is responsible.)
  • MattWMattW Posts: 30,746
    edited 2:26PM
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    Agree with this. I don't actually like the scheme; it's more the contrast with other policies that frustrates me so much. Why a £4k grant for new EVs and not one for new bikes?

    It's baffling, disheartening.
    Everyone's circumstances are different. I live 17 miles from work, mainly along A roads. I don't feel safe cycling that, irrespective of the big hill to the Uni. I would love to cycle to work.

    How could it do it? I'd need dedicated cycle routes that just don't exist.

    But for a lot of people it IS an option and should be supported.
    That doesn't really answer the question though. There are millions more people who can't drive - or afford a £30k EV. Why shouldn't they get a tax break for another form of personal transport?
    That was one reason why the scheme was expanded from the £1k limit, to cover e-cycles, which would also include eg tricycles (including tadpoles).

    The EV point is a good one. Something like a clip-on wheelchair or an e-Brompton can be around that 4k.

    I call it: this seems to me to be one that they might get about right.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,299

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 62,334

    Carnyx said:

    eek said:

    MattW said:

    Boo and hiss, I was hoping we’d get a Commissioner Gordon at some point

    Police and crime commissioners to be abolished, government to announce

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/nov/13/police-and-commissioners-to-be-abolished-government-to-announce

    How will that change the role of Regional Mayors? Will they gain the role, or will those who have them already lose the role?
    Going to be fun in areas like County Durham where one of the police forces runs across 2 regional mayors and that police force refuses to merge with either of the other forces (for sane reasons).
    The more I read about it the more disorganised English local government seems to be, all those single and dual tier and mayors and so on. In contrast Scotland here seems is a shining beacon of simplicity - one polis, one level of local gmt under Holyrood, and so on. Not saying that that is always best, but to me English local gmt does seem to be heading the way of the American police system.
    Don't need to tell me that. We should have an English Parliament, but that's something that Westminster finds impossible to countenance.
    What would an English Parliament do for us? Be better off split into regionals to match the sizes (roughly) of Scotland, Wales and NI.
    Slicing England, a single realm, into pathetic little regional assemblies is unacceptable. Why should Scotland not be cut into Lowlands, Highlands, and Islands, as those three parts would more closely resemble the Welsh Assembly's size?

    If a Parliament is good enough for Scotland it's good enough for England. Cutting England into pieces because the political class think the English less worthwhile than the Scots is not acceptable.
    I would divide England into two: London and Everywhere Else.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 38,431
    "The hackers whose cyber attack took down production at Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) a couple of months ago have single-handedly caused a fall in UK gross domestic product.

    Were it not for the 28.6% collapse in car production we saw in September (save for the pandemic, the biggest monthly drop in car output in modern record), the UK economy would have grown by 0.1% that month. Instead, it fell by 0.1%."

    https://news.sky.com/story/budget-2025-the-extraordinary-impact-of-a-crime-on-uk-growth-that-reeves-could-do-without-13469485
  • viewcode said:

    I see some idiot on X is proclaiming the death of the human written novel. Suspect this idiot doesn't actually understand how LLMs work...

    https://x.com/thomasknox

    He might be right, for two reasons
    • The market now contains many self-published AI generated books.
    • We are become post-literate, with the number of people buying and reading books dropping
    It's not too difficult to see line going up meeting line come down
    I suspect he's wrong; AI generated books are terrible, the people behind them spam out loads of titles under different names because they know nobody will buy more than one. And there's little sign LLMs will ever be able to generate acceptable books.

    Literacy is an increasing problem, but the big issue facing authors and publishers is time. People in general just have less time to read, which impacts casual readers more than the smaller pool of dedicated readers. This is why publishers have increasingly put money into audio books, so people can listen to them when driving or exercising, or whatever.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,299
    Andy_JS said:

    "The hackers whose cyber attack took down production at Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) a couple of months ago have single-handedly caused a fall in UK gross domestic product.

    Were it not for the 28.6% collapse in car production we saw in September (save for the pandemic, the biggest monthly drop in car output in modern record), the UK economy would have grown by 0.1% that month. Instead, it fell by 0.1%."

    https://news.sky.com/story/budget-2025-the-extraordinary-impact-of-a-crime-on-uk-growth-that-reeves-could-do-without-13469485

    At some point governments might start to take cyberattacks seriously.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 40,958

    MaxPB said:

    I see some idiot on X is proclaiming the death of the human written novel. Suspect this idiot doesn't actually understand how LLMs work...

    https://x.com/thomasknox

    ChatGPT 5.1 is rather disappointing....It interesting that at the moment I would say the Chinese models are probably the best are writing prose. The Americans ones now love nothing more than to write in bullet points.
    Related to AI, I wrote a script yesterday that automates new pipeline building with Claude code, it took me about half a day to write the script and now the data engineers only have to review the Claude generated code and modify a few bits and pieces. All you need to do is tell it which partner you want to connect to, give it access to auth and it will write you a python script that will bring in your desired fields from the API. It's what I would say is the first production use case that I've been happy with in a while.
    You back working?

    Claude is very good at coding, although I have found it more recently loves to over complicate solutions.
    Yeah started a couple of months ago. Pretty good to be back but I think I can see the end of my career coming in 5 years along with 90% of people who work in front of a monitor.

    I also noticed that tendency, we've turned off the "ultrathink" mode and moved to haiku which actually gives us better results.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 30,746
    edited 2:29PM
    This is probably a silly question.

    Why is President Chump obsessed with Cuba?

    (Is it just Cuban exiles in Florida, or is he living in the 1970s in this policy area too?)
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,247
    Sandpit said:

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
    Jeans t shirt and a hoodie for me. But I guess I wear this most of the time I'm not actually working anyway!
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 12,533
    MattW said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    Agree with this. I don't actually like the scheme; it's more the contrast with other policies that frustrates me so much. Why a £4k grant for new EVs and not one for new bikes?

    It's baffling, disheartening.
    Everyone's circumstances are different. I live 17 miles from work, mainly along A roads. I don't feel safe cycling that, irrespective of the big hill to the Uni. I would love to cycle to work.

    How could it do it? I'd need dedicated cycle routes that just don't exist.

    But for a lot of people it IS an option and should be supported.
    That doesn't really answer the question though. There are millions more people who can't drive - or afford a £30k EV. Why shouldn't they get a tax break for another form of personal transport?
    That was one reason why the scheme was expanded from the £1k limit, to cover e-cycles, which would also include eg tricycles (including tadpoles).

    The EV point is a good one. Something like a clip-on wheelchair or an e-Brompton can be around that 4k.

    I call it: this seems to me to be one that they might get about right.
    The obvious thing to do is bin C2W and abolish VAT on all things cycling instead.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 62,334
    Scott_xP said:

    @rashmeerl

    @TheNewWorldmag
    EXCLUSIVE: Michael Prescott himself doctored Trump quote in his anti-BBC report. It's certainly pots, not quite kettles, as James Ball's excellent piece points out

    https://x.com/rashmeerl/status/1988953097968972175?s=20

    The editing of the Trump quote by Prescott is quite extraordinary. At the very least, it casts massive doubts over his motivations.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,385
    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    It's the equivalent of cutting back on free biscuits in the office when the firm's profits go down. It makes essentially no difference to the fiscal situation, it removes a perk that people like, and it's unserious.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 36,057

    Sandpit said:

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
    Jeans t shirt and a hoodie for me. But I guess I wear this most of the time I'm not actually working anyway!
    Other than for funerals I don't think I've worn a tie since I retired for even part-time work. That's 17 years ago now.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 38,431
    The Australian government has done the right thing in banning social media for under 16s. I'm baffled why we're not doing the same thing.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,727

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    You don't fly private?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,764
    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    Agree with this. I don't actually like the scheme; it's more the contrast with other policies that frustrates me so much. Why a £4k grant for new EVs and not one for new bikes?

    It's baffling, disheartening.
    Everyone's circumstances are different. I live 17 miles from work, mainly along A roads. I don't feel safe cycling that, irrespective of the big hill to the Uni. I would love to cycle to work.

    How could it do it? I'd need dedicated cycle routes that just don't exist.

    But for a lot of people it IS an option and should be supported.
    That doesn't really answer the question though. There are millions more people who can't drive - or afford a £30k EV. Why shouldn't they get a tax break for another form of personal transport?
    That was one reason why the scheme was expanded from the £1k limit, to cover e-cycles, which would also include eg tricycles (including tadpoles).

    The EV point is a good one. Something like a clip-on wheelchair or an e-Brompton can be around that 4k.

    I call it: this seems to me to be one that they might get about right.
    The obvious thing to do is bin C2W and abolish VAT on all things cycling instead.
    No, again that just favours the rich who might spend £3k on a bike.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,247

    Sandpit said:

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
    Jeans t shirt and a hoodie for me. But I guess I wear this most of the time I'm not actually working anyway!
    Other than for funerals I don't think I've worn a tie since I retired for even part-time work. That's 17 years ago now.
    I will wear whatever needed for work - luckily that's no tie 99% of the time - but I've never understood why anyone would ever dress up unless forced to. I first came across the dressing up to eat dinner thing at university and it still makes no fucking sense to me.
  • eekeek Posts: 31,879

    Sandpit said:

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
    Jeans t shirt and a hoodie for me. But I guess I wear this most of the time I'm not actually working anyway!
    I usually wear a jacket, simply so I know my passport will be in the correct pocket
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,764
    MattW said:

    This is probably a silly question.

    Why is President Chump obsessed with Cuba?

    (Is it just Cuban exiles in Florida, or is he living in the 1970s in this policy area too?)

    He learnt what he could be bothered to learn about the world in the 1950s. Cuba was central to that period for US foreign policy.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 62,334
    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    Agree with this. I don't actually like the scheme; it's more the contrast with other policies that frustrates me so much. Why a £4k grant for new EVs and not one for new bikes?

    It's baffling, disheartening.
    Everyone's circumstances are different. I live 17 miles from work, mainly along A roads. I don't feel safe cycling that, irrespective of the big hill to the Uni. I would love to cycle to work.

    How could it do it? I'd need dedicated cycle routes that just don't exist.

    But for a lot of people it IS an option and should be supported.
    That doesn't really answer the question though. There are millions more people who can't drive - or afford a £30k EV. Why shouldn't they get a tax break for another form of personal transport?
    That was one reason why the scheme was expanded from the £1k limit, to cover e-cycles, which would also include eg tricycles (including tadpoles).

    The EV point is a good one. Something like a clip-on wheelchair or an e-Brompton can be around that 4k.

    I call it: this seems to me to be one that they might get about right.
    The obvious thing to do is bin C2W and abolish VAT on all things cycling instead.
    Or you could just explain to cyclists that 99% of cycling specific products can be bought for half the price if they buy the car/motorbike version. (You know, things like degreaser.)
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,247

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    You don't fly private?
    I'm too lower middle class for that kind of vulgarity.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,948
    Morgan McSweeney signed off briefings about a Labour leadership challenge that backfired and caused a row over a “toxic” culture in No 10.

    The Telegraph understands Sir Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, as well as senior Downing Street communication figures, agreed to brief journalists that the Prime Minister would fight any challenge to his position and that ousting him could undermine the economy.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/11/13/mcsweeney-approved-briefings-that-triggered-labour-war/

    Do they have receipts or is it my mates mate cab driver told him...
  • TazTaz Posts: 22,199
    MattW said:

    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

    An interesting one.

    1 - I'd like to see his "14 months suspended for two years" sentence be more like "14 months suspended for 10 years" to give an incentive for longer term good behaviour.

    2 - The mitigation is very lawyerly. I'm not sure how "of previous good character" works for someone riding a motorcycle with no insurance, carrying a knife, who made a deliberate decision to assault a member of the public which he carried out, then went for a female PC, and caused ABH to her colleague.

    3 - The comments are very Telegraph.
    The fucker should be inside not getting a suspended. What should fellow cyclists be a punchbag fur knife wielding nutters.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,727

    Sandpit said:

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
    Jeans t shirt and a hoodie for me. But I guess I wear this most of the time I'm not actually working anyway!
    Other than for funerals I don't think I've worn a tie since I retired for even part-time work. That's 17 years ago now.
    I will wear whatever needed for work - luckily that's no tie 99% of the time - but I've never understood why anyone would ever dress up unless forced to. I first came across the dressing up to eat dinner thing at university and it still makes no fucking sense to me.
    Occasionally I have to chair (board) meetings, I always ensure I wear a morning suit, it has become a tradition.

    As for university, it was always a nightmare having to wear a white shirt for those events.
  • TazTaz Posts: 22,199
    Andy_JS said:

    "Sweden’s pension disaster rings alarm bells for Reeves
    Retirement funds face huge losses after being exposed to high-risk green projects" (£)

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/net-zero/sweden-net-zero-pension-push-cautionary-tale-britain

    Yet she wants us investing in illiquid assets and green schemes. It will be Woodford on steroids.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 30,746
    rcs1000 said:

    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    Agree with this. I don't actually like the scheme; it's more the contrast with other policies that frustrates me so much. Why a £4k grant for new EVs and not one for new bikes?

    It's baffling, disheartening.
    Everyone's circumstances are different. I live 17 miles from work, mainly along A roads. I don't feel safe cycling that, irrespective of the big hill to the Uni. I would love to cycle to work.

    How could it do it? I'd need dedicated cycle routes that just don't exist.

    But for a lot of people it IS an option and should be supported.
    That doesn't really answer the question though. There are millions more people who can't drive - or afford a £30k EV. Why shouldn't they get a tax break for another form of personal transport?
    That was one reason why the scheme was expanded from the £1k limit, to cover e-cycles, which would also include eg tricycles (including tadpoles).

    The EV point is a good one. Something like a clip-on wheelchair or an e-Brompton can be around that 4k.

    I call it: this seems to me to be one that they might get about right.
    The obvious thing to do is bin C2W and abolish VAT on all things cycling instead.
    Or you could just explain to cyclists that 99% of cycling specific products can be bought for half the price if they buy the car/motorbike version. (You know, things like degreaser.)
    My rule of thumb is that the cycling market is driven by brands and discounting, and - following Sport Pursuit - it will be sold at a mixture of a fraction at full price, most discounted and perhaps 1/3 deep discounted (which means up to 60% off).

    I normally try and get at least 30% off anything.

    Halfords used to be fun - you could stack 2 or 3 different types of discount and incentive, and order it online for collection and payment at the local store. And get another 10% off there for a membership of Cycling UK when you paid.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 36,057

    Sandpit said:

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
    Jeans t shirt and a hoodie for me. But I guess I wear this most of the time I'm not actually working anyway!
    Other than for funerals I don't think I've worn a tie since I retired for even part-time work. That's 17 years ago now.
    I will wear whatever needed for work - luckily that's no tie 99% of the time - but I've never understood why anyone would ever dress up unless forced to. I first came across the dressing up to eat dinner thing at university and it still makes no fucking sense to me.
    My wife and I used to go to 'black tie' dinners and dances back in the 50's, 60's and 70's. Haven't had occasion to for years now though.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,948
    Jude Bellingham is in line to start on the bench for England's World Cup qualifier against Serbia on Thursday, with Morgan Rogers set to play in the number 10 role.

    Tuchel really doesnt like Bellingham does he.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 124,727

    NEW THREAD

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 46,451

    Sandpit said:

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
    Jeans t shirt and a hoodie for me. But I guess I wear this most of the time I'm not actually working anyway!
    Other than for funerals I don't think I've worn a tie since I retired for even part-time work. That's 17 years ago now.
    I will wear whatever needed for work - luckily that's no tie 99% of the time - but I've never understood why anyone would ever dress up unless forced to. I first came across the dressing up to eat dinner thing at university and it still makes no fucking sense to me.
    Occasionally I have to chair (board) meetings, I always ensure I wear a morning suit, it has become a tradition.

    As for university, it was always a nightmare having to wear a white shirt for those events.
    At least the gown kept the food off the suit. Not so much off the shirt, alas.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 8,399

    Morgan McSweeney signed off briefings about a Labour leadership challenge that backfired and caused a row over a “toxic” culture in No 10.

    The Telegraph understands Sir Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, as well as senior Downing Street communication figures, agreed to brief journalists that the Prime Minister would fight any challenge to his position and that ousting him could undermine the economy.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/11/13/mcsweeney-approved-briefings-that-triggered-labour-war/

    Do they have receipts or is it my mates mate cab driver told him...

    Hasn’t SKS just come out and said he’s been assured it didn’t come from No.10 (yeah, right)?

    If so, McSweeney’s position is now untenable isn’t it?


  • KnightOutKnightOut Posts: 216

    Nigelb said:

    Boo and hiss, I was hoping we’d get a Commissioner Gordon at some point

    Police and crime commissioners to be abolished, government to announce

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/nov/13/police-and-commissioners-to-be-abolished-government-to-announce

    Was it a bad idea, or a good idea poorly implemented?
    Part of the issue with passing down powers more locally is rarely does it attract high quality local non-partisan candidates. It too often becomes another place to put politicians who have failed elsewhere. Police and Crime Commissioners being a good example. It is rarely if ever now some local non-political person who is highly experienced getting the gig.

    The first elected Bristol Mayor was an exception, a local guy done good who was geuinely independent of party politics.
    Part of the issue with not devolving powers is that central government rarely attracts high quality, let alone non partisan candidates...

    And all the money stays in London.

    Many years ago, I actually asked a Thatcher era cabinet minister why they didn't simply let the Mad Left Councils go Full Loony - spend infinite amounts of money, raise council tax to the stratosphere.

    After all, it would have ended up as a disaster for the Left, and fixed itself within a year or 2.

    He was quite horrified at the idea, I recall.

    But I do wonder....
    Isn't that why they put the cap on the Poll Tax, because everyone was blaming the Thatcher government for the high bills rather than the Labour councils? Which, of course, completely defeated the whole point.
    The anti-Poll Tax movement defied both logic and principle. Gold medal mental gymnastics.
  • TazTaz Posts: 22,199

    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    Agree with this. I don't actually like the scheme; it's more the contrast with other policies that frustrates me so much. Why a £4k grant for new EVs and not one for new bikes?

    It's baffling, disheartening.
    Everyone's circumstances are different. I live 17 miles from work, mainly along A roads. I don't feel safe cycling that, irrespective of the big hill to the Uni. I would love to cycle to work.

    How could it do it? I'd need dedicated cycle routes that just don't exist.

    But for a lot of people it IS an option and should be supported.
    That doesn't really answer the question though. There are millions more people who can't drive - or afford a £30k EV. Why shouldn't they get a tax break for another form of personal transport?
    That was one reason why the scheme was expanded from the £1k limit, to cover e-cycles, which would also include eg tricycles (including tadpoles).

    The EV point is a good one. Something like a clip-on wheelchair or an e-Brompton can be around that 4k.

    I call it: this seems to me to be one that they might get about right.
    The obvious thing to do is bin C2W and abolish VAT on all things cycling instead.
    No, again that just favours the rich who might spend £3k on a bike.
    I was the only person where I worked, of the dozen who got a bike on the scheme, who actually used it for cycling to work. The scheme just allowed people to get bikes on the cheap and never checked if they were being used for work.
  • Andy_JS said:

    The Australian government has done the right thing in banning social media for under 16s. I'm baffled why we're not doing the same thing.

    Depending on the definition of 'social media' a ban can cause significant collateral damage, with small sites and forums that can't afford to do ID checks just forced to close or block the country in question.

    But as we've seen, the OSA already causes a lot of the same problems, so a ban here is likely to not cause that much more pain in practice.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 7,529
    And Green remain second. I wonder how long it is before labour go below the Tories on the Wikipedia polling chart, they are definitely headed in that direction
  • MattWMattW Posts: 30,746

    MattW said:

    This is probably a silly question.

    Why is President Chump obsessed with Cuba?

    (Is it just Cuban exiles in Florida, or is he living in the 1970s in this policy area too?)

    He learnt what he could be bothered to learn about the world in the 1950s. Cuba was central to that period for US foreign policy.
    Two of the things that still startle me about the whole Trump period are:

    1 - Just how fragile the USA system has turned out to be.
    2 - How even Trump's progressive critics are still noticeably in thrall to the old "Model for the World, City on a Hill, God's Country" (even if filtered through a secular philosophy) view of the USA.
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 4,938

    Sandpit said:

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
    Jeans t shirt and a hoodie for me. But I guess I wear this most of the time I'm not actually working anyway!
    Other than for funerals I don't think I've worn a tie since I retired for even part-time work. That's 17 years ago now.
    I will wear whatever needed for work - luckily that's no tie 99% of the time - but I've never understood why anyone would ever dress up unless forced to. I first came across the dressing up to eat dinner thing at university and it still makes no fucking sense to me.
    People are just different. I've been a jeans and T-shirt man all my life, but my son loves dressing up for stuff, whether that be for work, socialising or posh dinners.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 30,746
    Andy_JS said:

    "Sweden’s pension disaster rings alarm bells for Reeves
    Retirement funds face huge losses after being exposed to high-risk green projects" (£)

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/net-zero/sweden-net-zero-pension-push-cautionary-tale-britain

    The mix is interesting in that piece.

    It is entirely illustrated with two large pictures of wind turbines (plus mugshots), whilst the two projects that are in trouble are not traditional "green infrastructure investments" at all, but are the NorthVolt EV battery scheme, and a Green Steel project.

    I didn't know that the Chancellor's existing suggestion for UK pension funds was so modest: "the Mansion House Accord, a voluntary commitment Ms Reeves attained from pension providers to invest at least 5pc of fund assets in Britain’s private markets by 2030."
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 83,239
    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @rashmeerl

    @TheNewWorldmag
    EXCLUSIVE: Michael Prescott himself doctored Trump quote in his anti-BBC report. It's certainly pots, not quite kettles, as James Ball's excellent piece points out

    https://x.com/rashmeerl/status/1988953097968972175?s=20

    The editing of the Trump quote by Prescott is quite extraordinary. At the very least, it casts massive doubts over his motivations.
    It completely disqualifies him as any kind of arbiter of impartiality.

    It doesn't absolve the BBC of editorial mistakes, obviously.
    But along with the fact that it was leaked to a paper with an animus against the BBC, and one with similar beliefs (justified or not) about editorial bias, renders it of little more evidential value than any other complaint submitted by anyone else.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 83,239
    Cyclefree said:

    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.
    Appalled. But not surprised. My headers on the police over the years are not exactly favourable to them or naive about their persistent capacity for misbehaviour.

    I knew about this a couple of days ago as Charlotte Elves, the junior barrister in this case, is a friend of a friend of mine. Worth noting that she was specifically praised by the judges for her work on this case, including reviewing 1200 pages of logs which helped prove the Chief Constable's dreadful misbehaviour. And she did it all pro bono. As did the KC James Leonard.

    Her cross examination of the IT experts in the Sandy Peggie case is a masterclass in how to do it. She's one to watch.

    The Chief Constable should be sent to prison. Only criminal convictions of public servants office who break or allow their organisations to break the law will work. Civil law suits, Supreme Court judgments - let alone appeals to just do the job they are paid to do - are falling on stony ground.

    We need a few Admiral Byngs - pour encourager les autres.
    I'd argue that capital punishment is, just perhaps, a step too far.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 58,467
    Cyclefree said:

    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.
    Appalled. But not surprised. My headers on the police over the years are not exactly favourable to them or naive about their persistent capacity for misbehaviour.

    I knew about this a couple of days ago as Charlotte Elves, the junior barrister in this case, is a friend of a friend of mine. Worth noting that she was specifically praised by the judges for her work on this case, including reviewing 1200 pages of logs which helped prove the Chief Constable's dreadful misbehaviour. And she did it all pro bono. As did the KC James Leonard.

    Her cross examination of the IT experts in the Sandy Peggie case is a masterclass in how to do it. She's one to watch.

    The Chief Constable should be sent to prison. Only criminal convictions of public servants office who break or allow their organisations to break the law will work. Civil law suits, Supreme Court judgments - let alone appeals to just do the job they are paid to do - are falling on stony ground.

    We need a few Admiral Byngs - pour encourager les autres.
    When the Coalition came to power, a delegation from ACPO came to Downing Street, to demand a list of things.

    Such as gun decking further enquiries into Hillsborough etc.

    Cameron listened to them, then refused their demands.

    Which led the Police to claim he was "Going to war with the Police"

    There is a strain of passive aggressive behaviour in the Police Leadership - acting like toddlers, frankly.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,499

    And Green remain second. I wonder how long it is before labour go below the Tories on the Wikipedia polling chart, they are definitely headed in that direction
    How long to the Budget? There's your answer...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 58,467
    edited 3:15PM
    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    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.
    Appalled. But not surprised. My headers on the police over the years are not exactly favourable to them or naive about their persistent capacity for misbehaviour.

    I knew about this a couple of days ago as Charlotte Elves, the junior barrister in this case, is a friend of a friend of mine. Worth noting that she was specifically praised by the judges for her work on this case, including reviewing 1200 pages of logs which helped prove the Chief Constable's dreadful misbehaviour. And she did it all pro bono. As did the KC James Leonard.

    Her cross examination of the IT experts in the Sandy Peggie case is a masterclass in how to do it. She's one to watch.

    The Chief Constable should be sent to prison. Only criminal convictions of public servants office who break or allow their organisations to break the law will work. Civil law suits, Supreme Court judgments - let alone appeals to just do the job they are paid to do - are falling on stony ground.

    We need a few Admiral Byngs - pour encourager les autres.
    I'd argue that capital punishment is, just perhaps, a step too far.
    It would cut re-offending, though.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,499

    Morgan McSweeney signed off briefings about a Labour leadership challenge that backfired and caused a row over a “toxic” culture in No 10.

    The Telegraph understands Sir Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, as well as senior Downing Street communication figures, agreed to brief journalists that the Prime Minister would fight any challenge to his position and that ousting him could undermine the economy.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/11/13/mcsweeney-approved-briefings-that-triggered-labour-war/

    Do they have receipts or is it my mates mate cab driver told him...

    Hasn’t SKS just come out and said he’s been assured it didn’t come from No.10 (yeah, right)?

    If so, McSweeney’s position is now untenable isn’t it?


    McSweeney's position is marginally less tenable than Starmer's. But not by much.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,299
    edited 3:20PM

    Sandpit said:

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
    Jeans t shirt and a hoodie for me. But I guess I wear this most of the time I'm not actually working anyway!
    Other than for funerals I don't think I've worn a tie since I retired for even part-time work. That's 17 years ago now.
    I will wear whatever needed for work - luckily that's no tie 99% of the time - but I've never understood why anyone would ever dress up unless forced to. I first came across the dressing up to eat dinner thing at university and it still makes no fucking sense to me.
    People are just different. I've been a jeans and T-shirt man all my life, but my son loves dressing up for stuff, whether that be for work, socialising or posh dinners.
    Tell him to always dress well at the airport, and ask every time if there’s any free upgrades available on the flight. The worst they can say is no. Look like you belong in biz class.

    I blagged a bunch of upgrades in my 20s doing that. Also either be first or last to check in.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,499
    edited 3:24PM
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
    Jeans t shirt and a hoodie for me. But I guess I wear this most of the time I'm not actually working anyway!
    Other than for funerals I don't think I've worn a tie since I retired for even part-time work. That's 17 years ago now.
    I will wear whatever needed for work - luckily that's no tie 99% of the time - but I've never understood why anyone would ever dress up unless forced to. I first came across the dressing up to eat dinner thing at university and it still maFor akes no fucking sense to me.
    People are just different. I've been a jeans and T-shirt man all my life, but my son loves dressing up for stuff, whether that be for work, socialising or posh dinners.
    Tell him to always dress well at the airport, and ask every time if there’s any free upgrades available on the flight. The worst they can say is no. Look like you belong in biz class.

    I blagged a bunch of upgrades in my 20s doing that. Also either be first or last to check in.
    For a laugh, a friend of mine enrolled with Emirates frequent flyer scheme and seeing the drop-down menu, thought it would be a laugh to tick "Prince".

    He's done very well on upgrades for that laugh...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,299
    Oh that refinery in Nizhnekamsk is well ablaze. Look at the broken window in front of the camera some distance away.

    https://x.com/bohuslavskakate/status/1988954154161889309
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,499
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
    Jeans t shirt and a hoodie for me. But I guess I wear this most of the time I'm not actually working anyway!
    Other than for funerals I don't think I've worn a tie since I retired for even part-time work. That's 17 years ago now.
    I will wear whatever needed for work - luckily that's no tie 99% of the time - but I've never understood why anyone would ever dress up unless forced to. I first came across the dressing up to eat dinner thing at university and it still makes no fucking sense to me.
    People are just different. I've been a jeans and T-shirt man all my life, but my son loves dressing up for stuff, whether that be for work, socialising or posh dinners.
    Tell him to always dress well at the airport, and ask every time if there’s any free upgrades available on the flight. The worst they can say is no. Look like you belong in biz class.

    I blagged a bunch of upgrades in my 20s doing that. Also either be first or last to check in.
    I worked with a chap who whenever he walked through customs at an airport, put on a face like thunder.

    He never got stopped.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,499
    Sandpit said:

    Oh that refinery in Nizhnekamsk is well ablaze. Look at the broken window in front of the camera some distance away.

    https://x.com/bohuslavskakate/status/1988954154161889309

    DAYS SINCE LAST SMOKING-RELATED ACCIDENT - 0
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,299

    Sandpit said:

    Oh that refinery in Nizhnekamsk is well ablaze. Look at the broken window in front of the camera some distance away.

    https://x.com/bohuslavskakate/status/1988954154161889309

    DAYS SINCE LAST SMOKING-RELATED ACCIDENT - 0
    There’s a few more smoking incidents too, Ukraine General Staff daily report.

    In occupied Crimea, hits were recorded on the “Morskoy Oil Terminal” fuel storage facility, a helicopter parking area, UAV storage and preparation sites at the Kirovske airfield, and an air defense radar station near Yevpatoria.

    In the occupied territory of Zaporizhzhia region, strikes targeted an oil depot near Berdiansk and forward command posts of Russia’s 5th Combined Arms Army and the 127th Motor Rifle Division.

    Additional strikes were carried out on targets inside the Russian Federation. The extent of the damage is being assessed.

    The attacks involved strike UAVs, rocket drones, and various types of missiles. Last night, several long‑range weapons were launched, including domestic developments such as Flamingo, Bars, and Liutyi.

    https://x.com/bohuslavskakate/status/1988966032191422812
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,299
    Oh no, how sad, too bad….

    https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1988681357568958847

    Russia’s oil giants on the brink: shares plummet nearly 20% amid sanctions

    Sanctions on Lukoil and Rosneft have triggered a crisis in Russia’s oil industry. Bloomberg reports that almost one billion barrels of oil are currently stuck in tankers worldwide with no buyers, most of it Russian.

    Investors also fear that sanctions will prevent the companies from offloading foreign assets without losses.

    Globally, countries are rejecting Russian oil products. Brazil sharply reduced imports of Russian diesel, while Indian and Chinese oil companies have significantly cut or almost completely stopped buying Russian crude.

    In Finland, Lukoil’s Teboil fuel network announced it will cease operations due to the sanctions.

    Recently, Lukoil declared force majeure at one of the world’s largest oil fields in Iraq after Baghdad halted payments over sanctions.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 35,597
    With the PB Reformer gold standard pollster too.
  • CumberlandGapCumberlandGap Posts: 188

    Cyclefree said:

    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.
    Appalled. But not surprised. My headers on the police over the years are not exactly favourable to them or naive about their persistent capacity for misbehaviour.

    I knew about this a couple of days ago as Charlotte Elves, the junior barrister in this case, is a friend of a friend of mine. Worth noting that she was specifically praised by the judges for her work on this case, including reviewing 1200 pages of logs which helped prove the Chief Constable's dreadful misbehaviour. And she did it all pro bono. As did the KC James Leonard.

    Her cross examination of the IT experts in the Sandy Peggie case is a masterclass in how to do it. She's one to watch.

    The Chief Constable should be sent to prison. Only criminal convictions of public servants office who break or allow their organisations to break the law will work. Civil law suits, Supreme Court judgments - let alone appeals to just do the job they are paid to do - are falling on stony ground.

    We need a few Admiral Byngs - pour encourager les autres.
    When the Coalition came to power, a delegation from ACPO came to Downing Street, to demand a list of things.

    Such as gun decking further enquiries into Hillsborough etc.

    Cameron listened to them, then refused their demands.

    Which led the Police to claim he was "Going to war with the Police"

    There is a strain of passive aggressive behaviour in the Police Leadership - acting like toddlers, frankly.
    What has shocked me is how they operate in open defiance of the Home Office and Home Secretary. Whilst the HS shouldnt have control of something in operation, there's an expectation that the HS should be calling the shots around policy, and when their displeasure is expressed, this it taken account of. The police have become out of control, accountable to noone.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 58,467

    Cyclefree said:

    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.
    Appalled. But not surprised. My headers on the police over the years are not exactly favourable to them or naive about their persistent capacity for misbehaviour.

    I knew about this a couple of days ago as Charlotte Elves, the junior barrister in this case, is a friend of a friend of mine. Worth noting that she was specifically praised by the judges for her work on this case, including reviewing 1200 pages of logs which helped prove the Chief Constable's dreadful misbehaviour. And she did it all pro bono. As did the KC James Leonard.

    Her cross examination of the IT experts in the Sandy Peggie case is a masterclass in how to do it. She's one to watch.

    The Chief Constable should be sent to prison. Only criminal convictions of public servants office who break or allow their organisations to break the law will work. Civil law suits, Supreme Court judgments - let alone appeals to just do the job they are paid to do - are falling on stony ground.

    We need a few Admiral Byngs - pour encourager les autres.
    When the Coalition came to power, a delegation from ACPO came to Downing Street, to demand a list of things.

    Such as gun decking further enquiries into Hillsborough etc.

    Cameron listened to them, then refused their demands.

    Which led the Police to claim he was "Going to war with the Police"

    There is a strain of passive aggressive behaviour in the Police Leadership - acting like toddlers, frankly.
    What has shocked me is how they operate in open defiance of the Home Office and Home Secretary. Whilst the HS shouldnt have control of something in operation, there's an expectation that the HS should be calling the shots around policy, and when their displeasure is expressed, this it taken account of. The police have become out of control, accountable to noone.
    Not much different to Rory Stewart's Civil Servants repeatedly lying to his face, really.

    Why do you think they want the Police Commissioner's gone? Quite a few are useless nodding dogs, but several upset the Police by demanding accountability.
  • CumberlandGapCumberlandGap Posts: 188
    MattW said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Sweden’s pension disaster rings alarm bells for Reeves
    Retirement funds face huge losses after being exposed to high-risk green projects" (£)

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/net-zero/sweden-net-zero-pension-push-cautionary-tale-britain

    The mix is interesting in that piece.

    It is entirely illustrated with two large pictures of wind turbines (plus mugshots), whilst the two projects that are in trouble are not traditional "green infrastructure investments" at all, but are the NorthVolt EV battery scheme, and a Green Steel project.

    I didn't know that the Chancellor's existing suggestion for UK pension funds was so modest: "the Mansion House Accord, a voluntary commitment Ms Reeves attained from pension providers to invest at least 5pc of fund assets in Britain’s private markets by 2030."
    Green Steel is and always has been a complete fraud. There is no economically feasible way to make virgin steel that doesnt include coking coal.

    Vast amounts of electricity are needed which makes it entirely uneconomical, but policy makers were touting press releases for a pilot project that had created a few dumper trucks as the future and a reason to block extraction of coking coal "we dont need it any more, we can do it this way" . No you cant.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,607
    Here's a story that may interest many of you:
    Federal officials arrested a former chief of staff to California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Wednesday, charging her with conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud, submitting false tax returns and making false statements, among other charges, according to court filings.

    The 23-count indictment unsealed Wednesday alleges that Dana Williamson conspired from February 2022 through September 2024 with Sean McCluskie, the former chief of staff for then-U.S. Health Secretary Xavier Becerra, and other associates to divert $225,000 from a dormant state campaign account to McCluskie’s wife for what law enforcement officials described as a “no-show job.”
    source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/11/12/newsom-becerra-indictment/

    (For the record: I have no special knowledge of any of the individuals -- but California Democrats have long had problems with corruption.)
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 46,451
    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    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.
    Appalled. But not surprised. My headers on the police over the years are not exactly favourable to them or naive about their persistent capacity for misbehaviour.

    I knew about this a couple of days ago as Charlotte Elves, the junior barrister in this case, is a friend of a friend of mine. Worth noting that she was specifically praised by the judges for her work on this case, including reviewing 1200 pages of logs which helped prove the Chief Constable's dreadful misbehaviour. And she did it all pro bono. As did the KC James Leonard.

    Her cross examination of the IT experts in the Sandy Peggie case is a masterclass in how to do it. She's one to watch.

    The Chief Constable should be sent to prison. Only criminal convictions of public servants office who break or allow their organisations to break the law will work. Civil law suits, Supreme Court judgments - let alone appeals to just do the job they are paid to do - are falling on stony ground.

    We need a few Admiral Byngs - pour encourager les autres.
    I'd argue that capital punishment is, just perhaps, a step too far.
    Also difficult finding a convenient RN quarterdeck when you need one where you need one, these days.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 11,740
    FF43 said:

    Cookie said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looks like the cycle-to-work scheme is heading to the bin. Meanwhile the cuts to fuel duty have cost us over £100 billion.

    I've personally benefitted from the cycle-to-work scheme. But it feels to me like it's one of those middle class benefits which is hard to defend or demonstrate the benefits of. Most people I know who use it would have cycled to work anyway. I'd be interested to be shown otherwise.
    It's the equivalent of cutting back on free biscuits in the office when the firm's profits go down. It makes essentially no difference to the fiscal situation, it removes a perk that people like, and it's unserious.
    Honestly we simply can’t afford the “perks that people like”. We need to be starting from a zero based approach.

    Once we have the economy and the budget right sized we can figure out what we can afford and how best to allocated those funds.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 11,740

    Sandpit said:

    Jeffrey Epstein appears to have confirmed that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was photographed with Virginia Giuffre, according to a newly released email.

    The message sent by Epstein - who is alleged to have taken the photo - reads: "Yes she [Giuffre] was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cglgj08erywo

    Was that actually in doubt? I thought he'd just said that he couldn't remember it, not that he thought the photo was faked.
    HE WAS WEARING TRAVELLING CLOTHES!

    'During his interview with BBC, which was widely considered disastrous for the former prince, he addressed the infamous image, saying. "I have absolutely no memory of that photograph ever being taken."
    "Nobody can prove whether or not that photograph has been doctored but I don’t recollect that photograph ever being taken," Andrew continued.
    "From the investigations that we’ve done, you can’t prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph," he added.
    Prince Andrew Virginia Roberts
    Andrew also questioned his attire and the hand placement in the photo. He pointed out that he was wearing "travelling clothes," which he said he wouldn’t have worn for the occasion. In addition, he queried whether the hand on the waist was his own and raised the possibility of photo editing.'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/epstein-emails-suggest-ex-prince-andrew-photo-virginia-giuffre-authentic-despite-royals-denials
    We all have 'travelling clothes' right?
    I always dress down if I'm flying business class.
    If I’m booked in biz class I’ll wear slacks and a polo shirt, If I’m booked in Economy I’ll wear a jacket and tie, at least until I’m about to board ;)
    Jeans t shirt and a hoodie for me. But I guess I wear this most of the time I'm not actually working anyway!
    Other than for funerals I don't think I've worn a tie since I retired for even part-time work. That's 17 years ago now.
    I will wear whatever needed for work - luckily that's no tie 99% of the time - but I've never understood why anyone would ever dress up unless forced to. I first came across the dressing up to eat dinner thing at university and it still makes no fucking sense to me.
    Occasionally I have to chair (board) meetings, I always ensure I wear a morning suit, it has become a tradition.

    As for university, it was always a nightmare having to wear a white shirt for those events.
    At uni I once turned up to a mid afternoon philosophy tutorial wearing black tie

    My tutor asked if I was “going or coming”

    I replied “both”

    At which point her started rambling on about Schrödinger
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,607
    Long term, or short term? Since I have seen the argument many times here on the two-child benefit limit, let me make a point that seems obvious to me: In the short term, children are, net, consumers; in the medium-term -- if raised by good families, they are, net, producers.

    At about 15, traditionally, American children often became, net, producers.

    (If I recall correctly, Winston Churchill made that point far more vividly, when he talked about the benefits of putting milk into babies.)
Sign In or Register to comment.