The state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension says they've been informed by the FBI that US DOJ has said FBI will solely lead the investigation into Renee Nicole Good's killing by a federal officer. State investigators no longer have access to "case materials, scene evidence/investigative interviews"
Just propaganda and the character assassination of a dead woman, killed by their agents, from everyone in this administration.
Do you think this officer was wrong in defending his life against a deranged leftist who tried to run him over?
That would be a leading question, or for Americans, push-polling, or for politicians, framing the narrative.
It’s a very polarised debate. Either the officer is a murderer or was defending his life. People’s view on this seems purely driven by how emotionally invested they are in the US political scene.
We should wait and see what comes out of the investigation into it.
Even if you thought the victim at fault (which I don't believe she was) this would be the appropriate response.
I say this without any political affiliation or agenda. A woman sitting in a car full of toys, surrounded by masked officials, clearly panicking and making a mistake, whose vehicle may have struck one of them in a non-life-threatening way, would not have been executed in a civilized country.
She would have been arrested, restrained, and brought before a court. The officer would have had the protection of the law. Instead, she was killed. That is not justice.
What is even more disturbing are the reactions in the US comments on X. They show a near zero valuation of human life and instead aggressively glorify blind obedience to “law and order.” The underlying message is clear: comply perfectly or die. That mindset is not about justice or safety. It is about submission, and it exposes a deeply unhealthy moral compass. https://x.com/Zlatti_71/status/2009131274426888488
Does the Governor of Minnesota actually have the power to call out the National Guard to expel ICE?
(If I have my Court results correct, Trump has already been stopped from nationalising the National Guard to his purposes, though it may be several local rulings not one national. He tried to avoid the first rulings by taking National Guards from elsewhere when the first one was closed down.)
Just propaganda and the character assassination of a dead woman, killed by their agents, from everyone in this administration.
I expect some actual pushback from AOC & similar.
Maybe some mealy blather from “Mainstream Democrats”.
Then crickets.
Time was when Congress and the Senate had some function or the other. Anyone remember what it was?
Raju: The Speaker and others have said that this driver was weaponizing her vehicle.
AOC: Their editorializing of this event to justify this is disgusting. Watch it for yourself and make that assessment for yourself on which of these leaders are lying to you. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2009059549970682104
For almost a year, Donald Trump's personal police force has rampaged across America.
His administration has driven extremism and cruelty while discarding basic safeguards and accountability.
Ah, Gov Newsom, on the first anniversary of the massive fire that engulfed his State, has nothing to say about the rebuilding that hasn’t even started to happen, delayed by process imposed by his government.
Ah, whataboutery.
(And a quick search suggests that he's had a fair amount to say about it.)
Calling ICE "Donald Trump's personal police force" is a bit of a stretch, isn't it? It's possible to regard them as a menace without stoking this fantasy that the US is in the grip of fascism.
The SS started out as "Adolf Hitler's personal body guard"...
Yes, thank you for highlighting the contrast with ICE.
Newsom is no different to the British far-left during the 80s calling the police "Thatcher's Gestapo".
They may have not been members of the Gestapo, but ask any miner about their actions on any picket line. Waving payslips under miners noses?
Guardian reporting Labour will climb down on pub business rates and maybe wider hospitality sector. Wonder why they bother annoying everyone and then backing down.
Higher taxes for you and me so pubs and restaurants can keep their tax breaks.
They're a sector getting a pretty hard time from tax increases, NI rise hit them quite hard, I have sympathy for them. We need a vibrant hospitality sector to stop us becoming society of recluses, they've had a pretty tough time since covid. No one wants to work those hours, which is in part why migrants are needed to fill those jobs
The politics, again, are dreadful. Tax first and work out consequences later is the way it seems to work from the government
Agree on the politics.
But I see no national interest in tax breaks for people eating and drinking out (and unhealthily). It's also low paid work.
Everyone tells me hospitality is struggling, on its knees etc. I don't know that the figures show that.
Last 4 quarterly growth rates are: 0.8%, 1.7%, 1.9% and 0.2%.
Just propaganda and the character assassination of a dead woman, killed by their agents, from everyone in this administration.
Do you think this officer was wrong in defending his life against a deranged leftist who tried to run him over?
That would be a leading question, or for Americans, push-polling, or for politicians, framing the narrative.
It’s a very polarised debate. Either the officer is a murderer or was defending his life. People’s view on this seems purely driven by how emotionally invested they are in the US political scene.
We should wait and see what comes out of the investigation into it.
Just propaganda and the character assassination of a dead woman, killed by their agents, from everyone in this administration.
Do you think this officer was wrong in defending his life against a deranged leftist who tried to run him over?
That would be a leading question, or for Americans, push-polling, or for politicians, framing the narrative.
It’s a very polarised debate. Either the officer is a murderer or was defending his life. People’s view on this seems purely driven by how emotionally invested they are in the US political scene.
We should wait and see what comes out of the investigation into it.
If you have any faith in a federal investigation then I have a bridge to sell you.
How will these numbers (or issues) change when it becomes apparent over the next couple of years that immigration numbers are down massively ? Notice "crime" doesn't even crack the top five.
What do the public say the govt’s #1 priority for 2026 should be? Respondents answered in their own words, which we have categorised
As I think I've said before, a hugely massive bad number being a bit smaller than a previous even huger massive bad number, although an improvement, doesn't solve the problem.
It's an attempt at a slight of hand like politicians mixing up the deficit and the national debt, and implying that merely *reducing* the deficit will reduce the debt.
We're not even remotely near Cameron's tens of thousands yet, never mind the net zero or below (very easy without forcing anyone to leave - cap visas to say 90% of the previous year's emigration figure, job done) which is what's needed to actually cut the pressure immigration is placing on housing and services.
Of course, if we don't solve the boats, part of the *political* problem is that they become a bigger and bigger part of the net figure. When we're letting in a net million people, 40k boat people are a drop in the ocean. Get legal immigration under control so the total is say 100k net, nearly half that net number is boat people, and it's a tiny issue no longer.
To pick up on one point, I would say we are "remotely near Cameron's tens of thousands". Net immigration was 204k in 2025 and the number is falling. That's getting closer to, say, 90k, which would meet Cameron's description. To describe 2025's figure as merely "a bit smaller than a previous even huger massive bad number" is misleading and does not capture the absolutely huge drop in net immigration we've seen over the last 2 years.
so you reckon it will only be mainly illegal boat people this year
Were those boat people Rupert Lowe saw paddling in the North Sea past Great Yarmouth pier on their way to Scotland?
A Ukrainian family in California has lost custody of their daughter after refusing to allow her to medically transition to a "boy."
Speaking to Reduxx, the parents say they were also entered into an abuse registry by child protective services.
Just stopping in to point out that in her previous role as editor of The Baron, the editor of Reduxx, Anna Slatz, uncritically published an op-ed by a literal Nazi who used the platform to praise Mein Kampf.
To see such sites quoted here, uncritically, is a reminder of just how far down the alt-right alt-facts pipeline some people on here have fallen.
I'm not inclined to leap to judgement, but I've just watched the 'BBC Verify' video contained half way through this article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1jepdjy256o While I'm well aware of the risks of editing/manipulating film coverage to make one's case, having watched this I have come to a judgement. Cold-blooded execution, essentially, with no mitigating factors.
Just propaganda and the character assassination of a dead woman, killed by their agents, from everyone in this administration.
Do you think this officer was wrong in defending his life against a deranged leftist who tried to run him over?
That would be a leading question, or for Americans, push-polling, or for politicians, framing the narrative.
It’s a very polarised debate. Either the officer is a murderer or was defending his life. People’s view on this seems purely driven by how emotionally invested they are in the US political scene.
We should wait and see what comes out of the investigation into it.
If you have any faith in a federal investigation then I have a bridge to sell you.
Why would I want to buy a fucking bridge. My spare cash is going on Blu Ray DVDs of classic British TV. Next up,UFO.
I’ve more faith in it than I have in people deciding, from the comfort of their armchairs thousands of miles away, to be judge and jury on an incident they have, as best, partial information on.
Does the Governor of Minnesota actually have the power to call out the National Guard to expel ICE?
We're approaching the point where that's going to come down to the feelings of the National Guard rather than the letter of the law.
Is there an issue with State National Guards?
The conflict I have seen has between Trump wanting another Goon Army to impose on Democrat Cities, and State Governors wanting to retain their normal constitutional control.
Downing Street has asked ministers to find departmental savings to fund the new digital ID scheme
Chief Secretary to the PM Darren Jones wrote to government departments last month asking them to identify savings that could be diverted to pay for the policy, according to people familiar with the matter
A Ukrainian family in California has lost custody of their daughter after refusing to allow her to medically transition to a "boy."
Speaking to Reduxx, the parents say they were also entered into an abuse registry by child protective services.
Just stopping in to point out that in her previous role as editor of The Baron, the editor of Reduxx, Anna Slatz, uncritically published an op-ed by a literal Nazi who used the platform to praise Mein Kampf.
To see such sites quoted here, uncritically, is a reminder of just how far down the alt-right alt-facts pipeline some people on here have fallen.
Everything is so ugly at present and division widdening
The killing of the young mother in the US speaks to this, and what happens when inadequate or poorly trained law enforcers are provided with lethal force
A Ukrainian family in California has lost custody of their daughter after refusing to allow her to medically transition to a "boy."
Speaking to Reduxx, the parents say they were also entered into an abuse registry by child protective services.
Just stopping in to point out that in her previous role as editor of The Baron, the editor of Reduxx, Anna Slatz, uncritically published an op-ed by a literal Nazi who used the platform to praise Mein Kampf.
To see such sites quoted here, uncritically, is a reminder of just how far down the alt-right alt-facts pipeline some people on here have fallen.
So you’re saying the story is totally untrue ?
Don't put words in my mouth.
I'm saying that Anna Slatz is making editorial decisions to selectively publish and report on certain issues in order to create a narrative that furthers a far right agenda - something for which she has form at her previous role.
No local by-elections today. In the meantime take a look at these figures; in the January YouGov poll the class ABC1 figures were Con 20, Lab 20, Ref 19, LD 18, Gre 17, SNP 4, PC 1,Oth 2.
Everything is so ugly at present and division widdening
The killing of the young mother in the US speaks to this, and what happens when inadequate or poorly trained law enforcers are provided with lethal force
Irony also that her name was 'Good '
May she rest in peace
I had not picked up that she was a Legal Observer:
She was a prize-winning poet and a hobby guitarist, who was there as a legal observer of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activities, city leaders have said.
Legally, I see no reason why State charges cannot be instigated.
And this will perhaps come back to haunt some senior regime members who have been shooting from the hip. The footage will all be coming out, as it is all subject to FOIA.
(Aside: Here's a rushed police shooting that I came across last week, that involved a 16 year old being shot in the back and killed, in San Diego, by a police officer. He was running away from being shot at. Training and overreaction are big problems.
Not sure how you've come to this impression.* I'm delighted the government will keep them at a lower rate (and much lower than they were under the previous government, pre-COVID, FWIW). I called for this when it first came up, and genuinely love going to the pub. I think they have massive social benefits (loneliness etc ) and are worth subsiding.
As I've explained in some detail, I remain completely baffled by the fact rents and rates are so high given the apparent unviability of these businesses. The way they are calculated is perfectly sensible, as a percentage of market rents - but commercial rents are obviously artificially inflated to a massive degree. I hope this stimulates a serious investigation into why this is the case - it's not just pubs they are killing off.
*You might have confused it with my views on drink-driving.
The classy Richard Keys with an appropriate and fitting tribute to the late Terry Yorath 😳😳😳😳😳
‘Sad to hear the news of Terry Yorath’s passing. He was a warrior & won fans over wherever he played. He was great for us at Coventry & the reason I got Gabby a job at Sky. I had no idea who she was when we met but I knew her dad. RIP Terry. Your daughter did you proud.‘
All the self congratulations by Macron, Starmer and Zelenski over the signing of a 'boots on the ground' presence in Ukraine has been utterly trashed by Russia today who reject it comprehensively
Not sure how you've come to this impression.* I'm delighted the government will keep them at a lower rate (and much lower than they were under the previous government, pre-COVID, FWIW). I called for this when it first came up, and genuinely love going to the pub.
As I've explained in some detail, I remain completely baffled by the fact rents and rates are so high given the apparent unviability of these businesses. The way they are calculated is perfectly sensible, as a percentage of market rents - but commercial rents are obviously artificially inflated to a massive degree. I hope this stimulates a serious investigation into why this is the case - it's not just pubs they are killing off.
*You might have confused it with my views on drink-driving.
Just propaganda and the character assassination of a dead woman, killed by their agents, from everyone in this administration.
Do you think this officer was wrong in defending his life against a deranged leftist who tried to run him over?
That would be a leading question, or for Americans, push-polling, or for politicians, framing the narrative.
It’s a very polarised debate. Either the officer is a murderer or was defending his life. People’s view on this seems purely driven by how emotionally invested they are in the US political scene.
We should wait and see what comes out of the investigation into it.
If you have any faith in a federal investigation then I have a bridge to sell you.
Why would I want to buy a fucking bridge. My spare cash is going on Blu Ray DVDs of classic British TV. Next up,UFO.
I’ve more faith in it than I have in people deciding, from the comfort of their armchairs thousands of miles away, to be judge and jury on an incident they have, as best, partial information on.
"UFO" is a good decision. Still holds up very well.
Downing Street has asked ministers to find departmental savings to fund the new digital ID scheme
Chief Secretary to the PM Darren Jones wrote to government departments last month asking them to identify savings that could be diverted to pay for the policy, according to people familiar with the matter
Does the Governor of Minnesota actually have the power to call out the National Guard to expel ICE?
We're approaching the point where that's going to come down to the feelings of the National Guard rather than the letter of the law.
Is there an issue with State National Guards?
The conflict I have seen has between Trump wanting another Goon Army to impose on Democrat Cities, and State Governors wanting to retain their normal constitutional control.
When you reach the point where a state governor is deploying state armed forces against federal forces then you're in a de facto state of civil war. And some of those state forces will prefer to side with the federal government - in the same way some of the federal government will prefer to side with the states. Control will begin to break down.
On my morning walk on the day, on the day the Govt announce that they will NOT be doing anything constructive about Pavement Parking.
On a wide, deserted estate road, just about 2ft is left. Which, with the overgrown hedge effectively blocks everything except a person walking.
Calamity Starmer strikes again.
Time to enforce a ban on pavement parking
They don’t really enforce speeding due to lack of Police, never mind pavement parking.
Council do it round here and it's almost universally observed now. The sky hasn't fallen in, despite some earnest predictions. Makes life much easier if you've got disabled relatives or wheeling a pram.
All the self congratulations by Macron, Starmer and Zelenski over the signing of a 'boots on the ground' presence in Ukraine has been utterly trashed by Russia today who reject it comprehensively
Is anybody surprised ?
Well Russia who are hoping for a couple of years peace to allow themselves to rearm aren’t going to want the UK and France officially in the Ukraine as it would make Russian aim of restarting the military operation later impossible
On my morning walk on the day, on the day the Govt announce that they will NOT be doing anything constructive about Pavement Parking.
On a wide, deserted estate road, just about 2ft is left. Which, with the overgrown hedge effectively blocks everything except a person walking.
Calamity Starmer strikes again.
Time to enforce a ban on pavement parking
They don’t really enforce speeding due to lack of Police, never mind pavement parking.
Wardens. Round here if I parked on a yellow line or across a dropped kerb I would get a ticket within a couple of hours. I assume ultimately it's a revenue raiser for the council.
I simply do not understand how Reeves retains her COE
So many missteps and u turns that shows how out of her depth she is
And by the way, just as in the poll tax none of her u turns will recover the voters anyway
Is there anyone better ?
That speaks for the utter economic mess we are in
No it speaks of the fact no one sane goes into politics nowadays as the way media works (both 24 hour news and social media) makes it a f***ing impossible job that even a masochist would avoid
Not sure how you've come to this impression.* I'm delighted the government will keep them at a lower rate (and much lower than they were under the previous government, pre-COVID, FWIW). I called for this when it first came up, and genuinely love going to the pub.
As I've explained in some detail, I remain completely baffled by the fact rents and rates are so high given the apparent unviability of these businesses. The way they are calculated is perfectly sensible, as a percentage of market rents - but commercial rents are obviously artificially inflated to a massive degree. I hope this stimulates a serious investigation into why this is the case - it's not just pubs they are killing off.
*You might have confused it with my views on drink-driving.
TLDR
Your views on drink driving are similar to mine.
Appreciate it if you could concede you misrepresented me on rates.
On my morning walk on the day, on the day the Govt announce that they will NOT be doing anything constructive about Pavement Parking.
On a wide, deserted estate road, just about 2ft is left. Which, with the overgrown hedge effectively blocks everything except a person walking.
Calamity Starmer strikes again.
Time to enforce a ban on pavement parking
Unfortunately, there is a reply to the recent consultation today, where 71% said they wanted one, by announcing that they are not going to implement one nationally. The model in place in Scotland has been cost effective and flexible.
Which means it is back to bitsa, lots of paperwork for each tiny change, only a small number of Councils doing anything, and the Police and the Councils both and saying "THEM".
This is the guts of the Executive Summary. My apologies for the length.
The consultation set out 3 options:
Option 1: Improve the existing traffic regulation order (TRO) process.
Option 2: Enable local authorities to enforce against ‘unnecessary obstruction’ of the pavement.
Option 3: Introduce a national prohibition on pavement parking, with local exemptions.
Option 3 received the most support from individual and organisational respondents to the consultation (71% and 54%), while local authority respondents preferred Option 2 (56%), though this was largely due to concerns about costs. Only 5% of respondents proposed alternative approaches, most of which were variations or combinations of the 3 options.
It is worth noting that much has changed since the government’s consultation on pavement parking was undertaken in 2020. The policy landscape, local authority powers and public attitudes have all evolved significantly. The consultation responses have provided clear evidence of stakeholder views on the issue of pavement parking and the overarching objective to make pavements accessible and safe remains unchanged. Taking into account the need to enable locally appropriate solutions to address pavement parking and the views from the consultation, we have developed approaches that are better aligned to achieve the policy objectives underpinning Option 3.
The department is already progressing reforms to the TRO process (Option 1), including digitalisation through the Automated Vehicles Act 2024. However, TROs are not a practical tool for widespread enforcement due to cost, complexity and sign clutter.
Option 2 offers a quicker and less costly route via secondary legislation, allowing targeted enforcement. However, concerns were raised about inconsistent enforcement and ambiguity around what constitutes ‘unnecessary obstruction’.
Option 3 could provide a national standard, aiding compliance and enforcement. However, it would require primary legislation, be more costly to implement and was seen by some as inflexible.
Just propaganda and the character assassination of a dead woman, killed by their agents, from everyone in this administration.
Do you think this officer was wrong in defending his life against a deranged leftist who tried to run him over?
That would be a leading question, or for Americans, push-polling, or for politicians, framing the narrative.
It’s a very polarised debate. Either the officer is a murderer or was defending his life. People’s view on this seems purely driven by how emotionally invested they are in the US political scene.
We should wait and see what comes out of the investigation into it.
If you have any faith in a federal investigation then I have a bridge to sell you.
Why would I want to buy a fucking bridge. My spare cash is going on Blu Ray DVDs of classic British TV. Next up,UFO.
I’ve more faith in it than I have in people deciding, from the comfort of their armchairs thousands of miles away, to be judge and jury on an incident they have, as best, partial information on.
"UFO" is a good decision. Still holds up very well.
Yeah, I especially like the last bloc of episodes with Wanda Ventham in rather than George Sewell.
The standard DVD was good quality. The Blu Ray must be a big step up.
I got the Space 1999 season 1 blu ray and it’s magnificent.
Not sure how you've come to this impression.* I'm delighted the government will keep them at a lower rate (and much lower than they were under the previous government, pre-COVID, FWIW). I called for this when it first came up, and genuinely love going to the pub.
As I've explained in some detail, I remain completely baffled by the fact rents and rates are so high given the apparent unviability of these businesses. The way they are calculated is perfectly sensible, as a percentage of market rents - but commercial rents are obviously artificially inflated to a massive degree. I hope this stimulates a serious investigation into why this is the case - it's not just pubs they are killing off.
*You might have confused it with my views on drink-driving.
TLDR
Your views on drink driving are similar to mine.
Appreciate it if you could concede you misrepresented me on rates.
I simply do not understand how Reeves retains her COE
So many missteps and u turns that shows how out of her depth she is
And by the way, just as in the poll tax none of her u turns will recover the voters anyway
Can you think of anyone else in Labour who would be an improvement ?
Darren Jones ?
They just thought not being the Tories was enough. It wasn’t.
It wasn’t and my expectations weren’t high.
Heck my expectations were - reverse the stupid NI cuts, get some infrastructure built or at least started (HS2 being one simple fix) and build some homes
Not sure how you've come to this impression.* I'm delighted the government will keep them at a lower rate (and much lower than they were under the previous government, pre-COVID, FWIW). I called for this when it first came up, and genuinely love going to the pub.
As I've explained in some detail, I remain completely baffled by the fact rents and rates are so high given the apparent unviability of these businesses. The way they are calculated is perfectly sensible, as a percentage of market rents - but commercial rents are obviously artificially inflated to a massive degree. I hope this stimulates a serious investigation into why this is the case - it's not just pubs they are killing off.
*You might have confused it with my views on drink-driving.
TLDR
Your views on drink driving are similar to mine.
Appreciate it if you could concede you misrepresented me on rates.
If you point out how I have, then I will.
You suggested I'd be sad about Reeves keeping the COVID discount in place. I'm not - I'm happy about it.
I simply do not understand how Reeves retains her COE
So many missteps and u turns that shows how out of her depth she is
And by the way, just as in the poll tax none of her u turns will recover the voters anyway
Can you think of anyone else in Labour who would be an improvement ?
Darren Jones ?
They just thought not being the Tories was enough. It wasn’t.
It wasn’t and my expectations weren’t high.
Heck my expectations were - reverse the stupid NI cuts, get some infrastructure built or at least started (HS2 being one simple fix) and build some homes
My expectation was dull, plodding, but competent. I was not going to vote but eventually voted for Labour. Election day we came back on the DFDS ferry from Amsterdam into North Shields. The highlight of election day for me was standing on the deck of the ship watching it navigate past Middlesbrough, Sunderland and then up the Tyne.
I voted Labour for two reasons. I didn’t want a Reform MP (not fussed about that now) and I expected a more competent govt than the Tories.
On my morning walk on the day, on the day the Govt announce that they will NOT be doing anything constructive about Pavement Parking.
On a wide, deserted estate road, just about 2ft is left. Which, with the overgrown hedge effectively blocks everything except a person walking.
Calamity Starmer strikes again.
Time to enforce a ban on pavement parking
Unfortunately, there is a reply to the recent consultation today, where 71% said they wanted one, by announcing that they are not going to implement one nationally. The model in place in Scotland has been cost effective and flexible.
Which means it is back to bitsa, lots of paperwork for each tiny change, only a small number of Councils doing anything, and the Police and the Councils both and saying "THEM".
This is the guts of the Executive Summary. My apologies for the length.
The consultation set out 3 options:
Option 1: Improve the existing traffic regulation order (TRO) process.
Option 2: Enable local authorities to enforce against ‘unnecessary obstruction’ of the pavement.
Option 3: Introduce a national prohibition on pavement parking, with local exemptions.
Option 3 received the most support from individual and organisational respondents to the consultation (71% and 54%), while local authority respondents preferred Option 2 (56%), though this was largely due to concerns about costs. Only 5% of respondents proposed alternative approaches, most of which were variations or combinations of the 3 options.
It is worth noting that much has changed since the government’s consultation on pavement parking was undertaken in 2020. The policy landscape, local authority powers and public attitudes have all evolved significantly. The consultation responses have provided clear evidence of stakeholder views on the issue of pavement parking and the overarching objective to make pavements accessible and safe remains unchanged. Taking into account the need to enable locally appropriate solutions to address pavement parking and the views from the consultation, we have developed approaches that are better aligned to achieve the policy objectives underpinning Option 3.
The department is already progressing reforms to the TRO process (Option 1), including digitalisation through the Automated Vehicles Act 2024. However, TROs are not a practical tool for widespread enforcement due to cost, complexity and sign clutter.
Option 2 offers a quicker and less costly route via secondary legislation, allowing targeted enforcement. However, concerns were raised about inconsistent enforcement and ambiguity around what constitutes ‘unnecessary obstruction’.
Option 3 could provide a national standard, aiding compliance and enforcement. However, it would require primary legislation, be more costly to implement and was seen by some as inflexible.
I have supported the ban on pavement parking for some time having seen the disabled and mothers with prams struggle, but maybe even more so now my mobility is compromised and my need to acquire a mobility scooter myself in the Spring
Not sure how you've come to this impression.* I'm delighted the government will keep them at a lower rate (and much lower than they were under the previous government, pre-COVID, FWIW). I called for this when it first came up, and genuinely love going to the pub.
As I've explained in some detail, I remain completely baffled by the fact rents and rates are so high given the apparent unviability of these businesses. The way they are calculated is perfectly sensible, as a percentage of market rents - but commercial rents are obviously artificially inflated to a massive degree. I hope this stimulates a serious investigation into why this is the case - it's not just pubs they are killing off.
*You might have confused it with my views on drink-driving.
TLDR
Your views on drink driving are similar to mine.
Appreciate it if you could concede you misrepresented me on rates.
If you point out how I have, then I will.
You suggested I'd be sad about Reeves keeping the COVID discount in place. I'm not - I'm happy about it.
Sorry, it was meant as a joke following the discussion yesterday but if I’ve offended you then, and no fake apology here, I’m genuinely sorry and apologise.
On my morning walk on the day, on the day the Govt announce that they will NOT be doing anything constructive about Pavement Parking.
On a wide, deserted estate road, just about 2ft is left. Which, with the overgrown hedge effectively blocks everything except a person walking.
Calamity Starmer strikes again.
Time to enforce a ban on pavement parking
Unfortunately, there is a reply to the recent consultation today, where 71% said they wanted one, by announcing that they are not going to implement one nationally. The model in place in Scotland has been cost effective and flexible.
Which means it is back to bitsa, lots of paperwork for each tiny change, only a small number of Councils doing anything, and the Police and the Councils both and saying "THEM".
This is the guts of the Executive Summary. My apologies for the length.
The consultation set out 3 options:
Option 1: Improve the existing traffic regulation order (TRO) process.
Option 2: Enable local authorities to enforce against ‘unnecessary obstruction’ of the pavement.
Option 3: Introduce a national prohibition on pavement parking, with local exemptions.
Option 3 received the most support from individual and organisational respondents to the consultation (71% and 54%), while local authority respondents preferred Option 2 (56%), though this was largely due to concerns about costs. Only 5% of respondents proposed alternative approaches, most of which were variations or combinations of the 3 options.
It is worth noting that much has changed since the government’s consultation on pavement parking was undertaken in 2020. The policy landscape, local authority powers and public attitudes have all evolved significantly. The consultation responses have provided clear evidence of stakeholder views on the issue of pavement parking and the overarching objective to make pavements accessible and safe remains unchanged. Taking into account the need to enable locally appropriate solutions to address pavement parking and the views from the consultation, we have developed approaches that are better aligned to achieve the policy objectives underpinning Option 3.
The department is already progressing reforms to the TRO process (Option 1), including digitalisation through the Automated Vehicles Act 2024. However, TROs are not a practical tool for widespread enforcement due to cost, complexity and sign clutter.
Option 2 offers a quicker and less costly route via secondary legislation, allowing targeted enforcement. However, concerns were raised about inconsistent enforcement and ambiguity around what constitutes ‘unnecessary obstruction’.
Option 3 could provide a national standard, aiding compliance and enforcement. However, it would require primary legislation, be more costly to implement and was seen by some as inflexible.
Why don't they just introduce a minimum width of pavement. If you leave less than that, you are obstructing the highway. Although in the above example a pedestrian can go in the road.
All the self congratulations by Macron, Starmer and Zelenski over the signing of a 'boots on the ground' presence in Ukraine has been utterly trashed by Russia today who reject it comprehensively
Is anybody surprised ?
I'm quite interested in why they made that commitment. What's the theory of diplomacy behind it? To make a craven deal between Trump and Putin less likely - an effective poison pill?
Not sure how you've come to this impression.* I'm delighted the government will keep them at a lower rate (and much lower than they were under the previous government, pre-COVID, FWIW). I called for this when it first came up, and genuinely love going to the pub.
As I've explained in some detail, I remain completely baffled by the fact rents and rates are so high given the apparent unviability of these businesses. The way they are calculated is perfectly sensible, as a percentage of market rents - but commercial rents are obviously artificially inflated to a massive degree. I hope this stimulates a serious investigation into why this is the case - it's not just pubs they are killing off.
*You might have confused it with my views on drink-driving.
TLDR
Your views on drink driving are similar to mine.
Appreciate it if you could concede you misrepresented me on rates.
If you point out how I have, then I will.
You suggested I'd be sad about Reeves keeping the COVID discount in place. I'm not - I'm happy about it.
Sorry, it was meant as a joke following the discussion yesterday but if I’ve offended you then, and no fake apology here, I’m genuinely sorry and apologise.
On my morning walk on the day, on the day the Govt announce that they will NOT be doing anything constructive about Pavement Parking.
On a wide, deserted estate road, just about 2ft is left. Which, with the overgrown hedge effectively blocks everything except a person walking.
Calamity Starmer strikes again.
Time to enforce a ban on pavement parking
They don’t really enforce speeding due to lack of Police, never mind pavement parking.
Wardens. Round here if I parked on a yellow line or across a dropped kerb I would get a ticket within a couple of hours. I assume ultimately it's a revenue raiser for the council.
They could make pavement parking a ticket able offence, if they introduced a statutory minimum width of pavement to be left
All the self congratulations by Macron, Starmer and Zelenski over the signing of a 'boots on the ground' presence in Ukraine has been utterly trashed by Russia today who reject it comprehensively
Is anybody surprised ?
That was supposed to happen. Our response ought to be "actually they're already there. Your response is?"
On my morning walk on the day, on the day the Govt announce that they will NOT be doing anything constructive about Pavement Parking.
On a wide, deserted estate road, just about 2ft is left. Which, with the overgrown hedge effectively blocks everything except a person walking.
Calamity Starmer strikes again.
Time to enforce a ban on pavement parking
Unfortunately, there is a reply to the recent consultation today, where 71% said they wanted one, by announcing that they are not going to implement one nationally. The model in place in Scotland has been cost effective and flexible.
Which means it is back to bitsa, lots of paperwork for each tiny change, only a small number of Councils doing anything, and the Police and the Councils both and saying "THEM".
This is the guts of the Executive Summary. My apologies for the length.
The consultation set out 3 options:
Option 1: Improve the existing traffic regulation order (TRO) process.
Option 2: Enable local authorities to enforce against ‘unnecessary obstruction’ of the pavement.
Option 3: Introduce a national prohibition on pavement parking, with local exemptions.
Option 3 received the most support from individual and organisational respondents to the consultation (71% and 54%), while local authority respondents preferred Option 2 (56%), though this was largely due to concerns about costs. Only 5% of respondents proposed alternative approaches, most of which were variations or combinations of the 3 options.
It is worth noting that much has changed since the government’s consultation on pavement parking was undertaken in 2020. The policy landscape, local authority powers and public attitudes have all evolved significantly. The consultation responses have provided clear evidence of stakeholder views on the issue of pavement parking and the overarching objective to make pavements accessible and safe remains unchanged. Taking into account the need to enable locally appropriate solutions to address pavement parking and the views from the consultation, we have developed approaches that are better aligned to achieve the policy objectives underpinning Option 3.
The department is already progressing reforms to the TRO process (Option 1), including digitalisation through the Automated Vehicles Act 2024. However, TROs are not a practical tool for widespread enforcement due to cost, complexity and sign clutter.
Option 2 offers a quicker and less costly route via secondary legislation, allowing targeted enforcement. However, concerns were raised about inconsistent enforcement and ambiguity around what constitutes ‘unnecessary obstruction’.
Option 3 could provide a national standard, aiding compliance and enforcement. However, it would require primary legislation, be more costly to implement and was seen by some as inflexible.
I have supported the ban on pavement parking for some time having seen the disabled and mothers with prams struggle, but maybe even more so now my mobility is compromised and my need to acquire a mobility scooter myself in the Spring
Do you have one in Wales? I haven't followed that aspect in Wales so closely.
I simply do not understand how Reeves retains her COE
So many missteps and u turns that shows how out of her depth she is
And by the way, just as in the poll tax none of her u turns will recover the voters anyway
Can you think of anyone else in Labour who would be an improvement ?
Darren Jones ?
They just thought not being the Tories was enough. It wasn’t.
It wasn’t and my expectations weren’t high.
Heck my expectations were - reverse the stupid NI cuts, get some infrastructure built or at least started (HS2 being one simple fix) and build some homes
My expectation was dull, plodding, but competent. I was not going to vote but eventually voted for Labour. Election day we came back on the DFDS ferry from Amsterdam into North Shields. The highlight of election day for me was standing on the deck of the ship watching it navigate past Middlesbrough, Sunderland and then up the Tyne.
I voted Labour for two reasons. I didn’t want a Reform MP (not fussed about that now) and I expected a more competent govt than the Tories.
We have to be careful as apart from the booby traps Hunt created, Rishi was a fairly competent unlike the 3 previous PMs who preceded him
So while I was going to say being more competent was a low bar, Rishi did do a fairly competent job so it’s actually possible to see why SKS and co look so utterly.
I simply do not understand how Reeves retains her COE
So many missteps and u turns that shows how out of her depth she is
And by the way, just as in the poll tax none of her u turns will recover the voters anyway
Can you think of anyone else in Labour who would be an improvement ?
Darren Jones ?
They just thought not being the Tories was enough. It wasn’t.
It wasn’t and my expectations weren’t high.
Heck my expectations were - reverse the stupid NI cuts, get some infrastructure built or at least started (HS2 being one simple fix) and build some homes
My expectation was dull, plodding, but competent. I was not going to vote but eventually voted for Labour. Election day we came back on the DFDS ferry from Amsterdam into North Shields. The highlight of election day for me was standing on the deck of the ship watching it navigate past Middlesbrough, Sunderland and then up the Tyne.
I voted Labour for two reasons. I didn’t want a Reform MP (not fussed about that now) and I expected a more competent govt than the Tories.
We have to be careful as apart from the booby traps Hunt created, Rishi was a fairly competent unlike the 3 previous PMs who preceded him
So while I was going to say being more competent was a low bar, Rishi did do a fairly competent job so it’s actually possible to see why SKS and co look so utterly.
Rishi was competent. It was his Party that was a shambles and had become discredited.
All the self congratulations by Macron, Starmer and Zelenski over the signing of a 'boots on the ground' presence in Ukraine has been utterly trashed by Russia today who reject it comprehensively
Is anybody surprised ?
They should have the balls to ask Putin "If it's OK for YOU to station troops on Ukrainian territory, why can't we?",
On my morning walk on the day, on the day the Govt announce that they will NOT be doing anything constructive about Pavement Parking.
On a wide, deserted estate road, just about 2ft is left. Which, with the overgrown hedge effectively blocks everything except a person walking.
Calamity Starmer strikes again.
Time to enforce a ban on pavement parking
Unfortunately, there is a reply to the recent consultation today, where 71% said they wanted one, by announcing that they are not going to implement one nationally. The model in place in Scotland has been cost effective and flexible.
Which means it is back to bitsa, lots of paperwork for each tiny change, only a small number of Councils doing anything, and the Police and the Councils both and saying "THEM".
This is the guts of the Executive Summary. My apologies for the length.
The consultation set out 3 options:
Option 1: Improve the existing traffic regulation order (TRO) process.
Option 2: Enable local authorities to enforce against ‘unnecessary obstruction’ of the pavement.
Option 3: Introduce a national prohibition on pavement parking, with local exemptions.
Option 3 received the most support from individual and organisational respondents to the consultation (71% and 54%), while local authority respondents preferred Option 2 (56%), though this was largely due to concerns about costs. Only 5% of respondents proposed alternative approaches, most of which were variations or combinations of the 3 options.
It is worth noting that much has changed since the government’s consultation on pavement parking was undertaken in 2020. The policy landscape, local authority powers and public attitudes have all evolved significantly. The consultation responses have provided clear evidence of stakeholder views on the issue of pavement parking and the overarching objective to make pavements accessible and safe remains unchanged. Taking into account the need to enable locally appropriate solutions to address pavement parking and the views from the consultation, we have developed approaches that are better aligned to achieve the policy objectives underpinning Option 3.
The department is already progressing reforms to the TRO process (Option 1), including digitalisation through the Automated Vehicles Act 2024. However, TROs are not a practical tool for widespread enforcement due to cost, complexity and sign clutter.
Option 2 offers a quicker and less costly route via secondary legislation, allowing targeted enforcement. However, concerns were raised about inconsistent enforcement and ambiguity around what constitutes ‘unnecessary obstruction’.
Option 3 could provide a national standard, aiding compliance and enforcement. However, it would require primary legislation, be more costly to implement and was seen by some as inflexible.
I have supported the ban on pavement parking for some time having seen the disabled and mothers with prams struggle, but maybe even more so now my mobility is compromised and my need to acquire a mobility scooter myself in the Spring
Do you have one in Wales? I haven't followed that aspect in Wales so closely.
Does the Governor of Minnesota actually have the power to call out the National Guard to expel ICE?
We're approaching the point where that's going to come down to the feelings of the National Guard rather than the letter of the law.
Is there an issue with State National Guards?
The conflict I have seen has between Trump wanting another Goon Army to impose on Democrat Cities, and State Governors wanting to retain their normal constitutional control.
When you reach the point where a state governor is deploying state armed forces against federal forces then you're in a de facto state of civil war. And some of those state forces will prefer to side with the federal government - in the same way some of the federal government will prefer to side with the states. Control will begin to break down.
I ought to hope that you are wrong, but I strongly suspect that you are right.
On my morning walk on the day, on the day the Govt announce that they will NOT be doing anything constructive about Pavement Parking.
On a wide, deserted estate road, just about 2ft is left. Which, with the overgrown hedge effectively blocks everything except a person walking.
Calamity Starmer strikes again.
Time to enforce a ban on pavement parking
Around most side-streets in Ilford North you can park on the kerb. The roads are too narrow for cars to be parked wholly in the road.
Are you sure, Sunil?
My understanding is that parking on a pavement is a traffic offence rather than a parking one, so it is of no interest to traffic wardens. The police however can do you for it any time, if they have the time and can be bothered. It would be a £100 fine and three points on your licence if you got done.
On my morning walk on the day, on the day the Govt announce that they will NOT be doing anything constructive about Pavement Parking.
On a wide, deserted estate road, just about 2ft is left. Which, with the overgrown hedge effectively blocks everything except a person walking.
Calamity Starmer strikes again.
Time to enforce a ban on pavement parking
Around most side-streets in Ilford North you can park on the kerb. The roads are too narrow for cars to be parked wholly in the road.
Are you sure, Sunil?
My understanding is that parking on a pavement is a traffic offence rather than a parking one, so it is of no interest to traffic wardens. The police however can do you for it any time, if they have the time and can be bothered. It would be a £100 fine and three points on your licence if you got done.
London has a default ban enforced by local authorities - different to the rest of England. There are spots as Sunil describes where it is permitted due to the width of the road, marked on the pavement.
Just propaganda and the character assassination of a dead woman, killed by their agents, from everyone in this administration.
Do you think this officer was wrong in defending his life against a deranged leftist who tried to run him over?
That would be a leading question, or for Americans, push-polling, or for politicians, framing the narrative.
It’s a very polarised debate. Either the officer is a murderer or was defending his life. People’s view on this seems purely driven by how emotionally invested they are in the US political scene.
We should wait and see what comes out of the investigation into it.
On my morning walk on the day, on the day the Govt announce that they will NOT be doing anything constructive about Pavement Parking.
On a wide, deserted estate road, just about 2ft is left. Which, with the overgrown hedge effectively blocks everything except a person walking.
Calamity Starmer strikes again.
Time to enforce a ban on pavement parking
Around most side-streets in Ilford North you can park on the kerb. The roads are too narrow for cars to be parked wholly in the road.
Are you sure, Sunil?
My understanding is that parking on a pavement is a traffic offence rather than a parking one, so it is of no interest to traffic wardens. The police however can do you for it any time, if they have the time and can be bothered. It would be a £100 fine and three points on your licence if you got done.
There are signs like this one below on our road and others! I have seen local wardens ticket cars that park "wrong side" of these signs (eg. near junctions, bends, etc.), but never "right side" of them.
"Although vehicles should not be parked on verges and footways (it is unlawful in London, in some other cities and generally throughout Scotland), this may be allowed on certain narrow streets where parked vehicles would not obstruct pedestrians. There are special signs to indicate footway parking. There may also be white bays indicating where parking is permitted. Where there are controls applying to the parking place, such as pay and display, these should be indicated by separate signs."
Just propaganda and the character assassination of a dead woman, killed by their agents, from everyone in this administration.
I expect some actual pushback from AOC & similar.
Maybe some mealy blather from “Mainstream Democrats”.
Then crickets.
Time was when Congress and the Senate had some function or the other. Anyone remember what it was?
Raju: The Speaker and others have said that this driver was weaponizing her vehicle.
AOC: Their editorializing of this event to justify this is disgusting. Watch it for yourself and make that assessment for yourself on which of these leaders are lying to you. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2009059549970682104
For almost a year, Donald Trump's personal police force has rampaged across America.
His administration has driven extremism and cruelty while discarding basic safeguards and accountability.
Ah, Gov Newsom, on the first anniversary of the massive fire that engulfed his State, has nothing to say about the rebuilding that hasn’t even started to happen, delayed by process imposed by his government.
Ah, whataboutery.
(And a quick search suggests that he's had a fair amount to say about it.)
Calling ICE "Donald Trump's personal police force" is a bit of a stretch, isn't it? It's possible to regard them as a menace without stoking this fantasy that the US is in the grip of fascism.
The SS started out as "Adolf Hitler's personal body guard"...
Yes, thank you for highlighting the contrast with ICE.
Newsom is no different to the British far-left during the 80s calling the police "Thatcher's Gestapo".
They may have not been members of the Gestapo, but ask any miner about their actions on any picket line. Waving payslips under miners noses?
You're a bot anyway so you wouldn't know.
...and you're no better than Lord Haw Haw
You’re replying to yourself, you mug 😂😂😂😂
I wasn't, it was an edit, but my editing facility doesn't work on my phone.
All the self congratulations by Macron, Starmer and Zelenski over the signing of a 'boots on the ground' presence in Ukraine has been utterly trashed by Russia today who reject it comprehensively
Is anybody surprised ?
I'm quite interested in why they made that commitment. What's the theory of diplomacy behind it? To make a craven deal between Trump and Putin less likely - an effective poison pill?
I think that is part of it. I also think it changes the dynamic for both Russia and Ukraine if they know the other European powers are signed up for boots on the ground as and when any deal eventually appears.
Just propaganda and the character assassination of a dead woman, killed by their agents, from everyone in this administration.
Do you think this officer was wrong in defending his life against a deranged leftist who tried to run him over?
That would be a leading question, or for Americans, push-polling, or for politicians, framing the narrative.
It’s a very polarised debate. Either the officer is a murderer or was defending his life. People’s view on this seems purely driven by how emotionally invested they are in the US political scene.
We should wait and see what comes out of the investigation into it.
If you have any faith in a federal investigation then I have a bridge to sell you.
Why would I want to buy a fucking bridge. My spare cash is going on Blu Ray DVDs of classic British TV. Next up,UFO.
I’ve more faith in it than I have in people deciding, from the comfort of their armchairs thousands of miles away, to be judge and jury on an incident they have, as best, partial information on.
We can see with our own eyes what happened.
Sad you are condoning state executions these days.
Guardian reporting Labour will climb down on pub business rates and maybe wider hospitality sector. Wonder why they bother annoying everyone and then backing down.
Higher taxes for you and me so pubs and restaurants can keep their tax breaks.
They're a sector getting a pretty hard time from tax increases, NI rise hit them quite hard, I have sympathy for them. We need a vibrant hospitality sector to stop us becoming society of recluses, they've had a pretty tough time since covid. No one wants to work those hours, which is in part why migrants are needed to fill those jobs
The politics, again, are dreadful. Tax first and work out consequences later is the way it seems to work from the government
Agree on the politics.
But I see no national interest in tax breaks for people eating and drinking out (and unhealthily). It's also low paid work.
Everyone tells me hospitality is struggling, on its knees etc. I don't know that the figures show that.
Last 4 quarterly growth rates are: 0.8%, 1.7%, 1.9% and 0.2%.
Not an expert on the figures, only relaying what I see on the ground. Would be keen to see how the growth in the sector fares against inflation.
I'm in a rural area and what I see/hear from folks visiting or working in the industry is that pubs and restaurants in the sticks are struggling more with costs, staff recruitment, taxes, than those in the city. I know pub numbers are getting less , would be good to see similar figures on how restaurants are doing
This month Glasgow will host Celtic connections, a very vibrant cultural event which brings a welcome relief to the city centre restaurants on the back of a potentially leaner time post Christmas when cash (or electronic payments) is tight. A lot of pubs, restaurants etc in rural towns don't even bother opening til its March or Easter time.
Re the tax breaks, there's VAT on hot food isn't there? Personally I think people with less disposable income will be eating out less the past year or so, food price increases have been very noticeable, particularly since the Ukraine war kicked off.
Who knows, maybe bigger brands and chains are able to soak up costs better than family run smaller businesses
Guardian reporting Labour will climb down on pub business rates and maybe wider hospitality sector. Wonder why they bother annoying everyone and then backing down.
Higher taxes for you and me so pubs and restaurants can keep their tax breaks.
They're a sector getting a pretty hard time from tax increases, NI rise hit them quite hard, I have sympathy for them. We need a vibrant hospitality sector to stop us becoming society of recluses, they've had a pretty tough time since covid. No one wants to work those hours, which is in part why migrants are needed to fill those jobs
The politics, again, are dreadful. Tax first and work out consequences later is the way it seems to work from the government
I think it is pretty obvious what has happened the past 2 budgets. Reeves and wider government have done very little thinking while having declared certain red lines.
They then go to the treasury bods and say what policies have you got in the drawer for raising taxes, they then produce a big list of them, Reeves picks a few, and off we go. No joined up thinking, no strategy, little thought about potential pitfalls or about implementation e.g. see pay per mile on EVs.
They then have the absolute gall to suggest they are improving the cost of living and prioritising growth above all else.
Living under this government is being subjected to constant daily gaslighting.
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
If UK Border Force are masked up, armed and executing and deporting British citizens, and people with a legitimate leave to remain, yes.
This government's behaviour towards Shamima Begum is arguably illegal according to international law protocols. If you choose to call that fascism that's up to you.
I’m going to go with the Supreme Court saying it’s ok, thanks very much
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
Is “West Side Story” Steven Sondheim’s best work?
(I presume we’re playing some sort of game of non sequiturs.)
Which dinosaur would you choose as a family pet?
A small herbivorous one from the Cretaceous (a late stage of evolution so likely quite intelligent and potentially trainable).
There's been some misinterpretation of my comment last night.
Particularly since 2020, there's been a growing tendency in progressive circles to delegitimise law enforcement per se and to see it as virtuous to inhibit the operation. In some places the police can barely so much as arrest someone without an uninvolved member of the public intervening to take the 'victim's' side.
Politicians who encourage this behaviour while portentously warning that somebody is going to get killed only make that outcome more likely because it's inevitable that either a protester will take it too far or an officer will make the wrong snap decision when under pressure, as seems to have happened yesterday.
You argue for fascism and then pretend the consequences are the fault of the victims or those opposed to it. You are not the only such person, so I guess in the interest of "balance" these views need to be aired. I'm not sure whether that's a good idea for those concerned, but it's not my call.
Nevertheless it's not misinterpretation when people push back on that argument.
Are immigration enforcement raids in Britain also an example of fascism?
If UK Border Force are masked up, armed and executing and deporting British citizens, and people with a legitimate leave to remain, yes.
This government's behaviour towards Shamima Begum is arguably illegal according to international law protocols. If you choose to call that fascism that's up to you.
Shamima Begum is a weird case - firstly it's about the only thing I agree with Nigel Farage on and secondly we raised her and she should be held responsible for any crimes she's committed. Instead we didn't bother with the criminal prosecutions, took a quick way out and have now wasted years trying to justify it.
One of the issues for me is this - do we have the evidence to convict her of the things we believe she has done? I'm not convinced we do. So bringing her back/allowing her back in order to lock her up in prison may well not work that well. I'd rather she stood trial in the place of her crimes, but that doesn't seem to be happening.
And she was likely groomed and is thus also, partially, a victim too. People have less sympathy for her than they do for victims of the other grooming story, but she didn't just decide to up and leave to join ISIS in a vacuum.
She participated in some pretty heinous activities once she was there
All the self congratulations by Macron, Starmer and Zelenski over the signing of a 'boots on the ground' presence in Ukraine has been utterly trashed by Russia today who reject it comprehensively
Is anybody surprised ?
I’m going with plusgood.
It’s very tidy politics imo. We now have a default position. Russia rejected a generous peace offering. The USA were not a party to that peace.
This feels to be a better place for Ukraine. And an interesting beginning to non NATO European security arrangements.
Orwell’s 1984 tripartite security may be something we can live with.
Comments
@jcollins.bsky.social
The state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension says they've been informed by the FBI that US DOJ has said FBI will solely lead the investigation into Renee Nicole Good's killing by a federal officer. State investigators no longer have access to "case materials, scene evidence/investigative interviews"
@coachfinstock.bsky.social
If everyone just lets this go, that's the ballgame. Anytime they want to kill someone they'll just say the FBI is handling it.
We should wait and see what comes out of the investigation into it.
I say this without any political affiliation or agenda. A woman sitting in a car full of toys, surrounded by masked officials, clearly panicking and making a mistake, whose vehicle may have struck one of them in a non-life-threatening way, would not have been executed in a civilized country.
She would have been arrested, restrained, and brought before a court. The officer would have had the protection of the law. Instead, she was killed. That is not justice.
What is even more disturbing are the reactions in the US comments on X. They show a near zero valuation of human life and instead aggressively glorify blind obedience to “law and order.” The underlying message is clear: comply perfectly or die. That mindset is not about justice or safety. It is about submission, and it exposes a deeply unhealthy moral compass.
https://x.com/Zlatti_71/status/2009131274426888488
Watters: How does taking out a dictator in Venezuela help the average American?
Vance: It means is we are going to be able to control the incredible natural resources of Venezuela
https://x.com/Acyn/status/2009073815066947750
(If I have my Court results correct, Trump has already been stopped from nationalising the National Guard to his purposes, though it may be several local rulings not one national. He tried to avoid the first rulings by taking National Guards from elsewhere when the first one was closed down.)
I could not see her getting the nomination. I could see her in a meaty role in the 2028 democrat administration.
Brace, brace.
But I see no national interest in tax breaks for people eating and drinking out (and unhealthily). It's also low paid work.
Everyone tells me hospitality is struggling, on its knees etc. I don't know that the figures show that.
Last 4 quarterly growth rates are:
0.8%, 1.7%, 1.9% and 0.2%.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/kgc7/ukea/previous
To see such sites quoted here, uncritically, is a reminder of just how far down the alt-right alt-facts pipeline some people on here have fallen.
On a wide, deserted estate road, just about 2ft is left. Which, with the overgrown hedge effectively blocks everything except a person walking.
Calamity Starmer strikes again.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/rachel-reeves-poised-to-u-turn-on-business-rates-for-struggling-pubs-within-days-5HjdQQB_2/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1jepdjy256o
While I'm well aware of the risks of editing/manipulating film coverage to make one's case, having watched this I have come to a judgement.
Cold-blooded execution, essentially, with no mitigating factors.
I’ve more faith in it than I have in people deciding, from the comfort of their armchairs thousands of miles away, to be judge and jury on an incident they have, as best, partial information on.
The conflict I have seen has between Trump wanting another Goon Army to impose on Democrat Cities, and State Governors wanting to retain their normal constitutional control.
The killing of the young mother in the US speaks to this, and what happens when inadequate or poorly trained law enforcers are provided with lethal force
Irony also that her name was 'Good '
May she rest in peace
I'm saying that Anna Slatz is making editorial decisions to selectively publish and report on certain issues in order to create a narrative that furthers a far right agenda - something for which she has form at her previous role.
So many missteps and u turns that shows how out of her depth she is
And by the way, just as in the poll tax none of her u turns will recover the voters anyway
She was a prize-winning poet and a hobby guitarist, who was there as a legal observer of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activities, city leaders have said.
But the Trump administration has called her a "domestic terrorist".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1jepdjy256o
Legally, I see no reason why State charges cannot be instigated.
And this will perhaps come back to haunt some senior regime members who have been shooting from the hip. The footage will all be coming out, as it is all subject to FOIA.
(Aside: Here's a rushed police shooting that I came across last week, that involved a 16 year old being shot in the back and killed, in San Diego, by a police officer. He was running away from being shot at. Training and overreaction are big problems.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIQBKBsA12Y )
As I've explained in some detail, I remain completely baffled by the fact rents and rates are so high given the apparent unviability of these businesses. The way they are calculated is perfectly sensible, as a percentage of market rents - but commercial rents are obviously artificially inflated to a massive degree. I hope this stimulates a serious investigation into why this is the case - it's not just pubs they are killing off.
*You might have confused it with my views on drink-driving.
‘Sad to hear the news of Terry Yorath’s passing. He was a warrior & won fans over wherever he played. He was great for us at Coventry & the reason I got Gabby a job at Sky. I had no idea who she was when we met but I knew her dad. RIP Terry. Your daughter did you proud.‘
https://x.com/richardajkeys/status/2009231076011724999?s=61
Is anybody surprised ?
Your views on drink driving are similar to mine.
Darren Jones ?
They just thought not being the Tories was enough. It wasn’t.
Which means it is back to bitsa, lots of paperwork for each tiny change, only a small number of Councils doing anything, and the Police and the Councils both and saying "THEM".
This is the guts of the Executive Summary. My apologies for the length.
The consultation set out 3 options:
Option 1: Improve the existing traffic regulation order (TRO) process.
Option 2: Enable local authorities to enforce against ‘unnecessary obstruction’ of the pavement.
Option 3: Introduce a national prohibition on pavement parking, with local exemptions.
Option 3 received the most support from individual and organisational respondents to the consultation (71% and 54%), while local authority respondents preferred Option 2 (56%), though this was largely due to concerns about costs. Only 5% of respondents proposed alternative approaches, most of which were variations or combinations of the 3 options.
It is worth noting that much has changed since the government’s consultation on pavement parking was undertaken in 2020. The policy landscape, local authority powers and public attitudes have all evolved significantly. The consultation responses have provided clear evidence of stakeholder views on the issue of pavement parking and the overarching objective to make pavements accessible and safe remains unchanged. Taking into account the need to enable locally appropriate solutions to address pavement parking and the views from the consultation, we have developed approaches that are better aligned to achieve the policy objectives underpinning Option 3.
The department is already progressing reforms to the TRO process (Option 1), including digitalisation through the Automated Vehicles Act 2024. However, TROs are not a practical tool for widespread enforcement due to cost, complexity and sign clutter.
Option 2 offers a quicker and less costly route via secondary legislation, allowing targeted enforcement. However, concerns were raised about inconsistent enforcement and ambiguity around what constitutes ‘unnecessary obstruction’.
Option 3 could provide a national standard, aiding compliance and enforcement. However, it would require primary legislation, be more costly to implement and was seen by some as inflexible.
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/managing-pavement-parking/outcome/pavement-parking-options-for-change-government-response
The standard DVD was good quality. The Blu Ray must be a big step up.
I got the Space 1999 season 1 blu ray and it’s magnificent.
My new TV has given my DVDs a new lease of life,
Heck my expectations were - reverse the stupid NI cuts, get some infrastructure built or at least started (HS2 being one simple fix) and build some homes
I voted Labour for two reasons. I didn’t want a Reform MP (not fussed about that now) and I expected a more competent govt than the Tories.
Westminster Voting Intention:
RFM: 32% (+1)
CON: 18% (+1)
GRN: 17% (=)
LAB: 15% (=)
LDM: 12% (=)
SNP: 3% (=)
Via @FindoutnowUK, 7-8 Jan.
Changes w/ 31 Dec.
So while I was going to say being more competent was a low bar, Rishi did do a fairly competent job so it’s actually possible to see why SKS and co look so utterly.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62l18lnd47o
My understanding is that parking on a pavement is a traffic offence rather than a parking one, so it is of no interest to traffic wardens. The police however can do you for it any time, if they have the time and can be bothered. It would be a £100 fine and three points on your licence if you got done.
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — Minnesota investigators say they can't access evidence after fatal ICE shooting and FBI won't work jointly on probe.
https://x.com/seungminkim/status/2009296395434377216
"Although vehicles should not be parked on verges and footways (it is unlawful in London, in some other cities and generally throughout Scotland), this may be allowed on certain narrow streets where parked vehicles would not obstruct pedestrians. There are special signs to indicate footway parking. There may also be white bays indicating where parking is permitted. Where there are controls applying to the parking place, such as pay and display, these should be indicated by separate signs."
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/know-your-traffic-signs/on-street-parking-control-signs-and-road-markings
NEW THREAD
Sad you are condoning state executions these days.
I'm in a rural area and what I see/hear from folks visiting or working in the industry is that pubs and restaurants in the sticks are struggling more with costs, staff recruitment, taxes, than those in the city. I know pub numbers are getting less , would be good to see similar figures on how restaurants are doing
This month Glasgow will host Celtic connections, a very vibrant cultural event which brings a welcome relief to the city centre restaurants on the back of a potentially leaner time post Christmas when cash (or electronic payments) is tight. A lot of pubs, restaurants etc in rural towns don't even bother opening til its March or Easter time.
Re the tax breaks, there's VAT on hot food isn't there? Personally I think people with less disposable income will be eating out less the past year or so, food price increases have been very noticeable, particularly since the Ukraine war kicked off.
Who knows, maybe bigger brands and chains are able to soak up costs better than family run smaller businesses
Living under this government is being subjected to constant daily gaslighting.
It’s very tidy politics imo.
We now have a default position.
Russia rejected a generous peace offering.
The USA were not a party to that peace.
This feels to be a better place for Ukraine.
And an interesting beginning to non NATO European security arrangements.
Orwell’s 1984 tripartite security may be something we can live with.