Labour MP tells Starmer: Scrap jury reforms or face a by-election Karl Turner, who was once falsely accused of a crime, has warned the PM he will stand down on a point of principle
Turner revealed he was charged with handling stolen goods when he worked as an antiques dealer in Hull in 2002. Although the case collapsed, he said the judge warned him there was “no smoke without fire”
Ah yes, the famed legal principle of 'the authorities do not make mistakes'.
I say yes. I’m pretty sure that Sandy says no. I haven’t yet compared it to Congleton for Cookie. But I’m not sure that geographical northernness matches English Northernness. In fact, I’m sure that the boundary of the North isn’t a straight line
So what about Macclesfield?
Being my part of the world... Leek and Macc are definitely North - grimy mill towns.
Buxton, Glossop and Chesterfield are North. Matlock and Bakewell Midlands.
But in this twilight zone where the Midlands blend into the North, imho it's as much about the "feel" of a place as the exact geographic location.
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
Actually it's probably the case that both the French and British approaches are valid.
Either way it requires an increase in European military capacity, so they're no in any event completely at odds.
Reducing reliance on US produced weapons remains imperative., as there's no way we can trust a MAGA led US, even if we collaborate militarily with them.
It's not going to be the easiest of balances, naturally.
Greenland is not about security. It's about dibs on the Arctic carve-up with Russia and China. That's why America wants Canada as well.
The bogus security angle is just easier to sell to the shitmunchers. The US can already do whatever they like in Greenland in terms of military presence and Denmark (or anyone) isn't going to shit about it.
It's extremely unlikely Europe is going to go to war with them to stop a Greenland takeover, sure. But it's wrong to assume it would be consequence free. The US would become as unattractive partner as China at that point, which down the road leads to a lot of possible downsides.
oh no not consequences
It's not a threat, just an observation.
You've taken the line since the beginning of Putin's disastrous exercise that Europe is without any real agency. That's simply not true.
Yes, 'consequences' need not be as grand or immediate as some might imagine the word to involve, and that in itself might be worthy of criticism, but the kind of reassessment and realignment even at the glacial speed of much geopopolitical wrangling, is surely not inconsequential. The agency displayed might be slow, or subtle, but since things do not happen in a vaccuum 'nothing' happening is not on the cards, and that will have, well, consequences.
Labour MP tells Starmer: Scrap jury reforms or face a by-election Karl Turner, who was once falsely accused of a crime, has warned the PM he will stand down on a point of principle
Labour MP tells Starmer: Scrap jury reforms or face a by-election Karl Turner, who was once falsely accused of a crime, has warned the PM he will stand down on a point of principle
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
Actually it's probably the case that both the French and British approaches are valid.
Either way it requires an increase in European military capacity, so they're no in any event completely at odds.
Reducing reliance on US produced weapons remains imperative., as there's no way we can trust a MAGA led US, even if we collaborate militarily with them.
It's not going to be the easiest of balances, naturally.
Greenland is not about security. It's about dibs on the Arctic carve-up with Russia and China. That's why America wants Canada as well.
The bogus security angle is just easier to sell to the shitmunchers. The US can already do whatever they like in Greenland in terms of military presence and Denmark (or anyone) isn't going to shit about it.
It's extremely unlikely Europe is going to go to war with them to stop a Greenland takeover, sure. But it's wrong to assume it would be consequence free. The US would become as unattractive partner as China at that point, which down the road leads to a lot of possible downsides.
Given 73% of Americans polled oppose a military invasion of Greenland with just 8% in favour that isn't happening.
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
Actually it's probably the case that both the French and British approaches are valid.
Either way it requires an increase in European military capacity, so they're no in any event completely at odds.
Reducing reliance on US produced weapons remains imperative., as there's no way we can trust a MAGA led US, even if we collaborate militarily with them.
It's not going to be the easiest of balances, naturally.
Greenland is not about security. It's about dibs on the Arctic carve-up with Russia and China. That's why America wants Canada as well.
The bogus security angle is just easier to sell to the shitmunchers. The US can already do whatever they like in Greenland in terms of military presence and Denmark (or anyone) isn't going to shit about it.
It's extremely unlikely Europe is going to go to war with them to stop a Greenland takeover, sure. But it's wrong to assume it would be consequence free. The US would become as unattractive partner as China at that point, which down the road leads to a lot of possible downsides.
Given 73% of Americans polled oppose a military invasion of Greenland with just 8% in favour that isn't happening.
If he actually did it the Republican figure in support would skyrocket. Unfortunately, Trump is genuinely a political leader who can sway his supporters from one position to another, and not merely one who runs scared of his base.
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
Actually it's probably the case that both the French and British approaches are valid.
Either way it requires an increase in European military capacity, so they're no in any event completely at odds.
Reducing reliance on US produced weapons remains imperative., as there's no way we can trust a MAGA led US, even if we collaborate militarily with them.
It's not going to be the easiest of balances, naturally.
Greenland is not about security. It's about dibs on the Arctic carve-up with Russia and China. That's why America wants Canada as well.
The bogus security angle is just easier to sell to the shitmunchers. The US can already do whatever they like in Greenland in terms of military presence and Denmark (or anyone) isn't going to shit about it.
It's extremely unlikely Europe is going to go to war with them to stop a Greenland takeover, sure. But it's wrong to assume it would be consequence free. The US would become as unattractive partner as China at that point, which down the road leads to a lot of possible downsides.
Given 73% of Americans polled oppose a military invasion of Greenland with just 8% in favour that isn't happening.
If he actually did it the Republican figure in support would skyrocket. Unfortunately, Trump is genuinely a political leader who can sway his supporters from one position to another, and not merely one who runs scared of his base.
Possibly but the median US voter ie the one who voted for Biden in 2020 but Trump in 2024 and decides US elections, would not be happy at paying their tax dollars to make Greenlanders millionaires
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
Actually it's probably the case that both the French and British approaches are valid.
Either way it requires an increase in European military capacity, so they're no in any event completely at odds.
Reducing reliance on US produced weapons remains imperative., as there's no way we can trust a MAGA led US, even if we collaborate militarily with them.
It's not going to be the easiest of balances, naturally.
Greenland is not about security. It's about dibs on the Arctic carve-up with Russia and China. That's why America wants Canada as well.
The bogus security angle is just easier to sell to the shitmunchers. The US can already do whatever they like in Greenland in terms of military presence and Denmark (or anyone) isn't going to shit about it.
It's extremely unlikely Europe is going to go to war with them to stop a Greenland takeover, sure. But it's wrong to assume it would be consequence free. The US would become as unattractive partner as China at that point, which down the road leads to a lot of possible downsides.
Given 73% of Americans polled oppose a military invasion of Greenland with just 8% in favour that isn't happening.
If he actually did it the Republican figure in support would skyrocket. Unfortunately, Trump is genuinely a political leader who can sway his supporters from one position to another, and not merely one who runs scared of his base.
Possibly but the median US voter ie the one who voted for Biden in 2020 but Trump in 2024 and decides US elections, would not be happy at paying their tax dollars to make Greenlanders millionaires
I don't think he will do it (through either option), but I put the chance higher than many people as I think he means what he says, in the moment, with total conviction, even as he changes his mind and contradicts himself.
Labour MP tells Starmer: Scrap jury reforms or face a by-election Karl Turner, who was once falsely accused of a crime, has warned the PM he will stand down on a point of principle
Too far away for Andy Burnham to work his magic if he was the candidate instead no doubt.
It keeps seeming to me that Burnham could end up with a pretty sweet gig as mayor - but with a signifiant policy oversight role without the day-to-day hassle of the media and tiresome backbenchers.
Shashank Joshi @shashj · 27m 'An eyewitness who joined the protests on Thursday and Friday nights in Tehran told BBC Persian Television that Gen Z Iranians have been instrumental in encouraging their parents and older people to come out and join the protest marches, urging them not to be afraid.'
I have the depressing thought that I'd be at best a bystander and at worst a collaborator in any revolutionary heroic endeavour.
Oh well, I guess you never really know until the moment comes (it should be due about now, given an acquaintance assured me the summer political discontent demonstrated there was a rebellion going on in the UK).
I work in IT. I like to feel that even if I was a collaborator I'd still be fatally undermining everything they attempted by the very nature of the job.
It's weird to me, as apart from people I already know hated Starmer, I don't come across many people mention him at all.
That's probably just a sign of a limited social circle, but maybe he is just so unpopular people don't even bother to bring it up.
Sitting in the pub having a pint with a Labour politician a bloke from the next table, uninvited, told us that we needed to stiffen our resolve. Support Kier properly.
I say yes. I’m pretty sure that Sandy says no. I haven’t yet compared it to Congleton for Cookie. But I’m not sure that geographical northernness matches English Northernness. In fact, I’m sure that the boundary of the North isn’t a straight line
So what about Macclesfield?
my friend is from macclesfield and sounds like a manc so yes northern
So far the survey says..
Macclesfield is in the North!
I upset a work colleague from Congleton by saying she had a "Coronation Street" accent.
It's weird to me, as apart from people I already know hated Starmer, I don't come across many people mention him at all.
That's probably just a sign of a limited social circle, but maybe he is just so unpopular people don't even bother to bring it up.
Sitting in the pub having a pint with a Labour politician a bloke from the next table, uninvited, told us that we needed to stiffen our resolve. Support Kier properly.
We complain about why we no longer have serious deep-dive interview anymore on television, or interesting conversations to really explore politicians views anymore, rather than going for the quick soundbite.
This thread, and people's behaviour shows why: the cheap gag gets 7+ likes. The more insightful discussion on the subject gets none, or at best one like.
So, MSM responds to that. Cheap, facile and superficial is what the public want.
To be fair it was a funny cheap gag. The interview with Carr (and I watched the whole thing) was interesting and impressive
I say yes. I’m pretty sure that Sandy says no. I haven’t yet compared it to Congleton for Cookie. But I’m not sure that geographical northernness matches English Northernness. In fact, I’m sure that the boundary of the North isn’t a straight line
So what about Macclesfield?
my friend is from macclesfield and sounds like a manc so yes northern
So far the survey says..
Macclesfield is in the North!
I upset a work colleague from Congleton by saying she had a "Coronation Street" accent.
This argument over Grok can produce dodgy images....this same week an Israeli company open sourced a state of the art text to video model, but not as usual just the weights of the model, the whole system, training code, etc. So anybody can take off guardrails and fine tune and even runs on a (higher end) macbook. Its already been widely adopted in cloud system. The reality is with particular text to image, there is no moat, no super secret special sauce. Can't put the genie back in the box.
Agreed, there's no route back from here. There have been open source T2I models for quite some time, and now T2V ones too, and people inevitably train them to produce specific images. There's not much the authorities can do. The models are there and people can run them locally on fairly common hardware.
Same with deepfakes. T2I and I2V models are so good now it's possible to produce videos of famous people that are very difficult to distinguish from reality. No more odd eyes and nine fingers. That genie is well out if its particular box, too.
Ofcom can run around banning sites that host these models in the cloud, but there's nothing they can do about local hosting. Anyone with a gaming PC or a high end Mac can produce all the dodgy images they want.
There have already been suggestions of a licensing system for computers over a certain capacity.
Don’t think they won’t go there.
Surely that's madness. The guts of a high end gaming rig today is probably going to be close to what's in a mid-range phone in 10 years time.
Of at a slight tangent,in amoungst the various ways in which this tech will act as massive disrupter, presumably it's about to kill the porn industry dead - once videos can be made that are indistinguishable from the "real thing", why bother with paying for girls to get their kit off on camera? And once that tech will run on a phone, why visit a pornsite, when you can have an app capable of creating every sort of depravity for you on demand?
And trying to legislate for guard rails will be going nowhere, because of the way open source variants will pop up sans guardrails, no matter how little the government likes the idea.
I can't say it's a vision of a future I find very appealing, but I fear it's going to happen whether I like it or not.
The porn industry, at least in its traditional forms, is dead already. The Rest is Entertainment:-
I often wonder if Donald Trump has been sent into the world to teach us all a lesson we seem to need very badly. That lesson is that, if we worship human power and wealth, and make up the rules to suit ourselves, anarchy and death will come storming and yelling into our midst.
The great Irish poet William Butler Yeats, in his bitter, cruel poem, The Second Coming, suggested that our new pagan age was witnessing the birth of a thuggish god of wealth and power and luxury, perhaps better-suited to our desires than Christianity has been. Yeats asked: ‘What rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?’
In words which always haunt me, he described it as having ‘a gaze blank and pitiless as the sun’, words which somehow come to mind quite often these days. Who do they remind me of?
And we must ask whether this new Trumpised United States, on which this unprecedented President imposes his will more and more, is beginning to embody his nature and character at home as well as abroad.
I do not think any open-minded person can look on film of the shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis without a shudder. Did the man who fired those shots think he was doing the will of his President? Should such things happen in a law-governed country?
We are seeing something quite new in the world, born out of what has often been justified frustration, but no less ugly and menacing for that.
I sometime think Hitchens is wasted on the Mail. Not that I like everything he writes. in fact I dislike a lot more than I like but when he does hit the mark I know very few interesting people will be reading it. Infact only those who come upon it by accident as we on here just have.
I hesitate to mention this, since some reader might take it as a challenge. But here goes anyway, with that small warning: Recently a Washington state trooper recorded a driver doing 156 miles per hour. In the fog. With their lights off. https://mynorthwest.com/chokepoints/wsp-156-mph-i-5-headlights/4183877
Probably trying to avoid ICE.
156 miles an hour in freezing temperatures would have been a bit foolish
Firstly, I don't really care (but that might be because it's Sultana and Your Party, which is as insignificant as it is amusing) and, secondly, really? Don't the police have better things to be spending their time on?
You've just said my job isn't important.
Investitgating financial crimes is very important.
Anything juicy recently?
Nope, my investigations have mostly centred on cocaine and unsolicited & solicited dick pics.
In my OH's last company, she was asked to ignore the cocaine misuse as the company wouldn't have a sales team left. Your lot must have higher standards.
Just to point out that this is an everyday example of the ridiculous state of affairs where wholesalers in this product are getting 20-25 year sentences while the product is regarded by millions as quotidian and normal.
If demand ceased, so would supply. Either decriminalise or make the user the real criminal, not the hard working trader.
MPs and television presenters have been cancelled over dodgy bants or porn but politics and the media are fuelled by actually illegal drugs. And this illustrates a real problem – the growing gulf between what is acceptable and what is legal.
Coke is now such a naff drug - it’s being hoovered up noses in pubs up and down the country by every man jack and off kitchen counters by bored mums.
Is the answer to be massively illiberal on coke - 1 year in prison, no suspended sentences or anything for possession. Announce it from the rooftops - you are caught with coke, or driving under the influence and you are going to prison for a year so say goodbye to your mid level management job, your kids, your bed. Prepare to be unable to cover your mortgage and lose your home, have a nightmare with a drugs offence when opening accounts or travelling.
Would something this severe smash the casual use? These people aren’t thinking of the chain of poor fuckers down the line working in grim conditions to harvest and produce, those getting killed in the trade so why have any sympathy for the end users?
I’m not sure how I feel about the above but would be an interesting experiment.
Where do you plan to build the extra 3,000 prisons?
This misses the point. The function of mandatory prison sentences is not in order to fill extra prisons but to deter certain actions. I am neutral as between decriminalisation and, OTOH, rational drug law enforcement. What is irrational is to deter traders with 25 year sentences but not deter use in any significant way.
Would not a few dozen otherwise impeccable living middling sorts with wives, children and careers in auto finance and geography teaching going to prison for drug use be enough?
I wonder how many of us are a little more careful about driving now that mere careless driving, if it chances to have certain outcomes, can lead straight to prison?
It can but even if careless driving leads to death or serious injury in most cases the sentence will be a community order or suspended sentence. Only if the driver killed under the influence of drink of drugs would an immediate prison sentence be likely.
We also should be considering changing highway laws to reduce speed limits on rural roads, narrow tracks and at bends or banning u turns or 3 point turns except in quiet residential streets as a lot of what would be mere careless driving could still be doing a currently legal manoeuvre
Just how are people supposed to turn round if they miss a junction or take a wrong turn?
Wait until they reach the next roundabout
This is nuts. I live in rural Surrey, but let's be honest Surrey is also pretty built up so I imagine most of the countryside is worse for roundabouts than where I live, but lets just take the lane I live on:
It has a roundabout at one end so let's assume we are going in the other direction. It is 2 miles long. It then reaches a cross roads. To the left you have to drive about 4 miles to a roundabout (which you may not know is there). Straight on is a narrow lane of about a mile with a T junction at the end. At that junction you can turn left or right. If you turn left you have about 5 miles to another T junction. At that junction you can turn left and eventually come to a roundabout in a mile. If you turn right I can't even think where there is a roundabout. Going back to the last junction if you turn right you come to another junction after about 2 miles. You can turn right and come to a roundabout after 3 miles. If you turn left after 2 miles you come to another junction. The next roundabout is about 7 miles away. Finally going back to the first junction if you turn right after 2 miles there is a junction. I can't think of where there is another roundabout either left or right on that road.
Your suggestion is nuts.
You are also wrong on speed limits for country lanes. You should be driving at a speed appropriate for the road, car and conditions. I am currently taking my Advanced Driving lessons for IAM. They are really hot on not exceeding the speed limits, but also hot on not progressing and I was told I was driving too slow for the conditions on my last lesson. People driving too slow for the conditions are also very dangerous.
Fine, then take the risk of being done for death or serious injury by careless driving if you do said u turn on a rural road and won't wait until the next roundabout or village.
The speed limit on country lanes is 60mph.
'Driving at a speed appropriate for the road, car and conditions' is a totally subjective term. One man's 'appropriate speed' may be 55mph, another 20mph on the same road and same conditions, even if approaching a bend it is completely vague guidance. As you say you can be accused of going too slow as well as too fast
You should be able to stop in the distance you can see to be clear, is good general advice.
And how is the average man on the road of average intelligence let alone those of below supposed to be able to calculate how long it will take them to stop where they see is clear ahead? They can follow the speed limit, they can't do stopping distance calculations every road they take!
On the contrary, you can and do. Just as you judge other distances, like how far behind the car in front to drive, in different conditions.
Glad you live the other side of London, I'm unlikely to meet you coming round a corner. Perhaps you should hand back your licence, I'm beginning to think that wasn't such an uncharitable suggestion
How? The average driver on the road is NOT a statistician who can calculate stopping distances. You drive behind a car so you can always see its back and license plate in full, that is NOT the same as doing constant stopping distance calculations.
The speed limit on rural roads is 60mph, either we reduce that to 40mph and say 20-30mph max around bends and when wet or snowing and 20mph on single tracks or legally there must be real debate on whether someone driving at the speed limit should be prosecuted even if an accident?
Rural roads are national speed limit - drive at a safe speed, mot the maximum
Yes never over national speed limit and mostly not at it either but what is a safe speed if raining? If hail? Before a bend?
You use your judgement as a driver. And if you are wrong you risk being prosecuted
Hmm. Whilst I partly agree with his analysis, explaining why a thing is happening is different to saying that a thing is good or desirable. European impotence in the face of US violent resolve is a real thing and we have to cope with it, which requires more than saying "Well this is what's happening". Do we (the UK) pivot towards the US, the EU, stand alone from both, what? Canada and Australia are under threat: what do we do about that? Mandelson and the Spectator crowd think of themselves as American-manques, and it annoys me.
Hmm. Whilst I partly agree with his analysis, explaining why a thing is happening is different to saying that a thing is good or desirable. European impotence in the face of US violent resolve is a real thing and we have to cope with it, which requires more than saying "Well this is what's happening". Do we (the UK) pivot towards the US, the EU, stand alone from both, what? Canada and Australia are under threat: what do we do about that? Mandelson and the Spectator crowd think of themselves as American-manques, and it annoys me.
Hmm. Whilst I partly agree with his analysis, explaining why a thing is happening is different to saying that a thing is good or desirable. European impotence in the face of US violent resolve is a real thing and we have to cope with it, which requires more than saying "Well this is what's happening". Do we (the UK) pivot towards the US, the EU, stand alone from both, what? Canada and Australia are under threat: what do we do about that? Mandelson and the Spectator crowd think of themselves as American-manques, and it annoys me.
We must not pivot towards the US.
We should have a much firmer line with Trump over Ukraine and Greenland. My hope would be that we woukd stand apart and act according to what is in our own national interest and what is right according to our own values. That means acting in close cooperation with NATO and with our European partners as well as being prepared to help Canada and Australia as needed.
Tying ourselves too closely to either the US or Europe requires too much in the way of compromises.
The best place to drive: A Motorway with light traffic and a 50 mph speed limit. No hassle whatsoever.
i find driving at 50 mph on motorways so tedious my focus wanders
Ditto. I hate motorway driving. I loose concentration. I struggle over 150 miles. I love driving around the countryside.
I do the 8 hour run to Aberdeen from Lincolnshire every Monday night and back again every Thursday. I have come to really like that time as I am forced to relax - listen to books, podcasts and music - which I can never do at home when there are always a million and one other calls on my time. Once I realised (fairly quickly) that speeding and agressive manouveres wouldn't actually save me much time, I just use cruise control and enjoy the ride.
My commute is over 100 miles there and 100 miles back. IIUC, Aberdeen from Lincolnshire is approx 400 miles there and 400 miles back. So I think you win that one.
Aye. 430 miles door to door. On a goodcrun I can do it in about seven and a half hours but that depends on traffic at Edinburgh and Dundee and how many times the A1 is closed. My record is 5 full closures between Edinburgh and Newark last Autumn.
I say yes. I’m pretty sure that Sandy says no. I haven’t yet compared it to Congleton for Cookie. But I’m not sure that geographical northernness matches English Northernness. In fact, I’m sure that the boundary of the North isn’t a straight line
So what about Macclesfield?
I'd say yes - more so than say Nutsford.
And I'd say that Buxton is genuinely Derbyshire, even though it feels a bit soft-edged.
I'd compare Macclesfield vs Nutsford to Newark vs Southwell. To me Southwell feels wealthier than Newark, but it is Newark that is the refuge for London commuters due to ~90 minute trains, which has always been a feature. I'd say that Southwell will get a Gail's before Newark.
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
Starmer has no charisma, and his comms are awful. But with (really important) stuff like this I'm glad he's the PM, and not Davey - or God forbid, Farage.
Davey would be fine. Heaven knows what Farage would do other than cheerlead Trump.
He wouldn't be able to manage the necessary flattery and ego-caressing.
It must be hard to do with a straight face. Trump probably knows it is mostly phony (though no doubt many respect his power), though I expect that just makes it more appealing to him, not less.
Yes, but it is how he has behaved in his business and life since he was in his 20s. He never had approachable parenting, and inherited his wealth, and has seen himself as above the law since the 1970s.
So he is a career malignant narcissist. And now behaves no differently, and is in a unique position as he can destroy all the people who have positions where their role is to keep him in check. He is effective King of the USA due to all the people who should be checks and balances are under his desk licking his boots.
As I see it, international leaders follow a similar strategy in inverse proportion to their possibility of defying / opposing him, which will adjust as they are able to pivot their countries away over time.
Is a useful comparison a celebrity who has no personality other than the public shell?
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
Actually it's probably the case that both the French and British approaches are valid.
Either way it requires an increase in European military capacity, so they're no in any event completely at odds.
Reducing reliance on US produced weapons remains imperative., as there's no way we can trust a MAGA led US, even if we collaborate militarily with them.
It's not going to be the easiest of balances, naturally.
Greenland is not about security. It's about dibs on the Arctic carve-up with Russia and China. That's why America wants Canada as well.
The bogus security angle is just easier to sell to the shitmunchers. The US can already do whatever they like in Greenland in terms of military presence and Denmark (or anyone) isn't going to shit about it.
It's extremely unlikely Europe is going to go to war with them to stop a Greenland takeover, sure. But it's wrong to assume it would be consequence free. The US would become as unattractive partner as China at that point, which down the road leads to a lot of possible downsides.
oh no not consequences
I think that is actually what it turns on.
Do other countries have the political will to impose consequences, or not? That is, to turn words and "soft power" into practical interventions.
Straw in the wind: European regulatory actions on American big tech, and dealing with the bogus "free speech" narrative.
Now, the UN has a lot of problems associated with it, but I don't think even Trump has suggested this.
I think it could be a good move to shift the UN to Ottawa, Montreal or Toronto.
Canada has always been supportive (eg peacekeeping), rather than antagonistic, since the start, and it would be symbolic - whilst being close enough for weekly commuting to be possible. An alternative might depend on whether the UN centres in Nairobi or Kuala Lumpur could resource the General Assembly.
Trump would throw a tantrum as it would be on a day with D in it, and Ahab has to go hunt his whale, and there might be interesting manoeuvres around the veto and authorisation.
The best place to drive: A Motorway with light traffic and a 50 mph speed limit. No hassle whatsoever.
i find driving at 50 mph on motorways so tedious my focus wanders
Ditto. I hate motorway driving. I loose concentration. I struggle over 150 miles. I love driving around the countryside.
I do the 8 hour run to Aberdeen from Lincolnshire every Monday night and back again every Thursday. I have come to really like that time as I am forced to relax - listen to books, podcasts and music - which I can never do at home when there are always a million and one other calls on my time. Once I realised (fairly quickly) that speeding and agressive manouveres wouldn't actually save me much time, I just use cruise control and enjoy the ride.
My commute is over 100 miles there and 100 miles back. IIUC, Aberdeen from Lincolnshire is approx 400 miles there and 400 miles back. So I think you win that one.
Aye. 430 miles door to door. On a goodcrun I can do it in about seven and a half hours but that depends on traffic at Edinburgh and Dundee and how many times the A1 is closed. My record is 5 full closures between Edinburgh and Newark last Autumn.
The best place to drive: A Motorway with light traffic and a 50 mph speed limit. No hassle whatsoever.
i find driving at 50 mph on motorways so tedious my focus wanders
Ditto. I hate motorway driving. I loose concentration. I struggle over 150 miles. I love driving around the countryside.
I do the 8 hour run to Aberdeen from Lincolnshire every Monday night and back again every Thursday. I have come to really like that time as I am forced to relax - listen to books, podcasts and music - which I can never do at home when there are always a million and one other calls on my time. Once I realised (fairly quickly) that speeding and agressive manouveres wouldn't actually save me much time, I just use cruise control and enjoy the ride.
My commute is over 100 miles there and 100 miles back. IIUC, Aberdeen from Lincolnshire is approx 400 miles there and 400 miles back. So I think you win that one.
Aye. 430 miles door to door. On a goodcrun I can do it in about seven and a half hours but that depends on traffic at Edinburgh and Dundee and how many times the A1 is closed. My record is 5 full closures between Edinburgh and Newark last Autumn.
A normal run is about 8 hours.
My commute is about 5,500 miles or so.
The longest, possibly apocryphal, commute I ever heard of was Hawaii to the North Sea oil rigs (in the days of Concorde), although that wouldn't have been every week. Where is your commute to/from? Make it vague if you don't want to give max details.
The best place to drive: A Motorway with light traffic and a 50 mph speed limit. No hassle whatsoever.
i find driving at 50 mph on motorways so tedious my focus wanders
Ditto. I hate motorway driving. I loose concentration. I struggle over 150 miles. I love driving around the countryside.
I do the 8 hour run to Aberdeen from Lincolnshire every Monday night and back again every Thursday. I have come to really like that time as I am forced to relax - listen to books, podcasts and music - which I can never do at home when there are always a million and one other calls on my time. Once I realised (fairly quickly) that speeding and agressive manouveres wouldn't actually save me much time, I just use cruise control and enjoy the ride.
My commute is over 100 miles there and 100 miles back. IIUC, Aberdeen from Lincolnshire is approx 400 miles there and 400 miles back. So I think you win that one.
Aye. 430 miles door to door. On a goodcrun I can do it in about seven and a half hours but that depends on traffic at Edinburgh and Dundee and how many times the A1 is closed. My record is 5 full closures between Edinburgh and Newark last Autumn.
A normal run is about 8 hours.
My commute is about 5,500 miles or so.
The longest, possibly apocryphal, commute I ever heard of was Hawaii to the North Sea oil rigs (in the days of Concorde), although that wouldn't have been every week. Where is your commute to/from? Make it vague if you don't want to give max details.
Somewhere in Europe to somewhere in North America. I move around a lot but those are the two main bases I operate from
I often wonder if Donald Trump has been sent into the world to teach us all a lesson we seem to need very badly. That lesson is that, if we worship human power and wealth, and make up the rules to suit ourselves, anarchy and death will come storming and yelling into our midst.
The great Irish poet William Butler Yeats, in his bitter, cruel poem, The Second Coming, suggested that our new pagan age was witnessing the birth of a thuggish god of wealth and power and luxury, perhaps better-suited to our desires than Christianity has been. Yeats asked: ‘What rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?’
In words which always haunt me, he described it as having ‘a gaze blank and pitiless as the sun’, words which somehow come to mind quite often these days. Who do they remind me of?
And we must ask whether this new Trumpised United States, on which this unprecedented President imposes his will more and more, is beginning to embody his nature and character at home as well as abroad.
I do not think any open-minded person can look on film of the shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis without a shudder. Did the man who fired those shots think he was doing the will of his President? Should such things happen in a law-governed country?
We are seeing something quite new in the world, born out of what has often been justified frustration, but no less ugly and menacing for that.
I sometime think Hitchens is wasted on the Mail. Not that I like everything he writes. in fact I dislike a lot more than I like but when he does hit the mark I know very few interesting people will be reading it. Infact only those who come upon it by accident as we on here just have.
I imagine Hitchens will be silently applauded by every English teacher in the land for his invocation of great poetry.
On social media it was suggested that the way to stop Trump forever going on about Greenland would be to rename it Epstein Island. I doubt the locals would be that keen, however.
I often wonder if Donald Trump has been sent into the world to teach us all a lesson we seem to need very badly. That lesson is that, if we worship human power and wealth, and make up the rules to suit ourselves, anarchy and death will come storming and yelling into our midst.
The great Irish poet William Butler Yeats, in his bitter, cruel poem, The Second Coming, suggested that our new pagan age was witnessing the birth of a thuggish god of wealth and power and luxury, perhaps better-suited to our desires than Christianity has been. Yeats asked: ‘What rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?’
In words which always haunt me, he described it as having ‘a gaze blank and pitiless as the sun’, words which somehow come to mind quite often these days. Who do they remind me of?
And we must ask whether this new Trumpised United States, on which this unprecedented President imposes his will more and more, is beginning to embody his nature and character at home as well as abroad.
I do not think any open-minded person can look on film of the shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis without a shudder. Did the man who fired those shots think he was doing the will of his President? Should such things happen in a law-governed country?
We are seeing something quite new in the world, born out of what has often been justified frustration, but no less ugly and menacing for that.
I sometime think Hitchens is wasted on the Mail. Not that I like everything he writes. in fact I dislike a lot more than I like but when he does hit the mark I know very few interesting people will be reading it. Infact only those who come upon it by accident as we on here just have.
He's a really talented writer and I used to regularly read his columns. After a while i found his repeated focus on cannabis a bit repetitive. And I always felt he couldn't get his head around statistics.
What will they do with it when the regime also collapses, which is possibly now not far off ?
Well, given reports of civil breakdown in Venezuela this morning, I imagine the United States is going to be facing a big wave of refugees from the countries that American intervention brought to the point of collapse.
I'm sure Rubio will happily support ICE agents opening fire on the boats stream across to Florida.
What will they do with it when the regime also collapses, which is possibly now not far off ?
Well, given reports of civil breakdown in Venezuela this morning, I imagine the United States is going to be facing a big wave of refugees from the countries that American intervention brought to the point of collapse.
I'm sure Rubio will happily support ICE agents opening fire on the boats stream across to Florida.
I say yes. I’m pretty sure that Sandy says no. I haven’t yet compared it to Congleton for Cookie. But I’m not sure that geographical northernness matches English Northernness. In fact, I’m sure that the boundary of the North isn’t a straight line
So what about Macclesfield?
I'd say yes - more so than say Nutsford.
And I'd say that Buxton is genuinely Derbyshire, even though it feels a bit soft-edged.
I'd compare Macclesfield vs Nutsford to Newark vs Southwell. To me Southwell feels wealthier than Newark, but it is Newark that is the refuge for London commuters due to ~90 minute trains, which has always been a feature. I'd say that Southwell will get a Gail's before Newark.
Knutsford please: and given the name comes from Canute's ford, I'd say it was relatively north, given that Canute was Danish.
On social media it was suggested that the way to stop Trump forever going on about Greenland would be to rename it Epstein Island. I doubt the locals would be that keen, however.
Especially when the Windsor formerly known as Prince turns up expecting to shag the locals...
What will they do with it when the regime also collapses, which is possibly now not far off ?
Well, given reports of civil breakdown in Venezuela this morning, I imagine the United States is going to be facing a big wave of refugees from the countries that American intervention brought to the point of collapse.
I'm sure Rubio will happily support ICE agents opening fire on the boats stream across to Florida.
ICE agents will be too busy chasing down oil execs who won't invest in Venezuela.
It really is a shit show. And however bad the ratings, this show is guaranteed a four year run.
What will they do with it when the regime also collapses, which is possibly now not far off ?
Well, given reports of civil breakdown in Venezuela this morning, I imagine the United States is going to be facing a big wave of refugees from the countries that American intervention brought to the point of collapse.
I'm sure Rubio will happily support ICE agents opening fire on the boats stream across to Florida.
ICE agents will be too busy chasing down oil execs who won't invest in Venezuela.
It really is a shit show. And however bad the ratings, this show is guaranteed a four year run.
Yep. How it looks on the first day rarely gives any clue as to how it will turn out.
What will they do with it when the regime also collapses, which is possibly now not far off ?
Well, given reports of civil breakdown in Venezuela this morning, I imagine the United States is going to be facing a big wave of refugees from the countries that American intervention brought to the point of collapse.
I'm sure Rubio will happily support ICE agents opening fire on the boats stream across to Florida.
ICE agents will be too busy chasing down oil execs who won't invest in Venezuela.
It really is a shit show. And however bad the ratings, this show is guaranteed a four year run.
I was trying to think of how it couldn't, but all scenarios are quite far-fetched. The most plausible would involve Vance being assassinated, Trump dying of a heart attack on hearing the news, and the Speaker acting as President.
And give Vance is brainless, heartless and gutless, it's difficult to see how he could be assassinated.
What will they do with it when the regime also collapses, which is possibly now not far off ?
Well, given reports of civil breakdown in Venezuela this morning, I imagine the United States is going to be facing a big wave of refugees from the countries that American intervention brought to the point of collapse.
I'm sure Rubio will happily support ICE agents opening fire on the boats stream across to Florida.
ICE agents will be too busy chasing down oil execs who won't invest in Venezuela.
It really is a shit show. And however bad the ratings, this show is guaranteed a four year run.
I was trying to think of how it couldn't, but all scenarios are quite far-fetched. The most plausible would involve Vance being assassinated, Trump dying of a heart attack on hearing the news, and the Speaker acting as President.
And give Vance is brainless, heartless and gutless, it's difficult to see how he could be assassinated.
On that score, it's not even possible to assassinate his character.
Fair play to Kemi. Will be great to see a consensus develop on this. And see how evidence from Aus develops.
As with all such initiatives the evidence from Aus will simply be it is a success and the people providing it will be the pro policy lobbyists effectively marking their own homework
Surprisingly? I thought he was employed as ambassador for his Trump rimming skills? Not sure Trumping in the Speccie is the best route back for Mandy’s umpteenth regeneration, though I’m certain he’ll be plotting towards such an outcome.
Surprisingly? I thought he was employed as ambassador for his Trump rimming skills? Not sure Trumping in the Speccie is the best route back for Mandy’s umpteenth regeneration, though I’m certain he’ll be plotting towards such an outcome.
He’s 72 years old. He can’t have that many regenerations left in him.
I reckon that I’d be tyrannical compared to HYUFD on driving laws and standards
I just wouldn’t make the theory test into an applied mathematics degree
I would. Lots of people would be flocking to do maths degrees so they could then become highly-paid HGV drivers. Funding for public transport would have to increase. Only Fields Medal winners allowed to drive taxis, but everyone having great maths training means we would soon solve all problems with robotaxis.
Fair play to Kemi. Will be great to see a consensus develop on this. And see how evidence from Aus develops.
As with all such initiatives the evidence from Aus will simply be it is a success and the people providing it will be the pro policy lobbyists effectively marking their own homework
It’s all very much like that Simpsons meme.
I think you'll find there is a well funded lot on the other side who will be releasing plenty of 'research'.
But there certainly is a need for rigorous research from academics.
It's weird to me, as apart from people I already know hated Starmer, I don't come across many people mention him at all.
That's probably just a sign of a limited social circle, but maybe he is just so unpopular people don't even bother to bring it up.
Any reason to think that Kemi, Nigel, Andy or Wes won't experience the same skirun of political doom as their recent predecessors?
It's striking to think that from 1979 to 2016 four of our five PMs served more than six years in office, but since 2007 only one of our seven PMs has (so far) managed significantly more than three years in office.*
You have to go back to the period 1852-1868 to find a similar level of turmoil. (Derby, Aberdeen, Palmerston, Derby, Palmerston, Russell, Derby, Disraeli, Gladstone.)
That doesn't say anything good about the current state of our politics.
It might also be added that this period was brought to an end by the fairly drastic changes to the electoral system of the Second Reform Act of 1867.
* May managed three years and eleven days, but she had resigned before the three years came up. Similarly Johnson managed 3 years and 44 days but 'the breaks' came before the three years.
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
Labour MP tells Starmer: Scrap jury reforms or face a by-election Karl Turner, who was once falsely accused of a crime, has warned the PM he will stand down on a point of principle
It's weird to me, as apart from people I already know hated Starmer, I don't come across many people mention him at all.
That's probably just a sign of a limited social circle, but maybe he is just so unpopular people don't even bother to bring it up.
Any reason to think that Kemi, Nigel, Andy or Wes won't experience the same skirun of political doom as their recent predecessors?
I think Kemi and Nigel more likely to hold onto their base a bit longer because they'll duck difficult decisions.
Presumably at the next general election, there will only be two parties to vote for: one supporting the complete economic blockade of the US following the invasion of Greenland, and one opposing it.
It's weird to me, as apart from people I already know hated Starmer, I don't come across many people mention him at all.
That's probably just a sign of a limited social circle, but maybe he is just so unpopular people don't even bother to bring it up.
Sitting in the pub having a pint with a Labour politician a bloke from the next table, uninvited, told us that we needed to stiffen our resolve. Support Kier properly.
It was actually quietly encouraging.
That you found a pub that was still in business?
Also serving labour MP's, assume he was in disguise.
The best place to drive: A Motorway with light traffic and a 50 mph speed limit. No hassle whatsoever.
i find driving at 50 mph on motorways so tedious my focus wanders
Ditto. I hate motorway driving. I loose concentration. I struggle over 150 miles. I love driving around the countryside.
I do the 8 hour run to Aberdeen from Lincolnshire every Monday night and back again every Thursday. I have come to really like that time as I am forced to relax - listen to books, podcasts and music - which I can never do at home when there are always a million and one other calls on my time. Once I realised (fairly quickly) that speeding and agressive manouveres wouldn't actually save me much time, I just use cruise control and enjoy the ride.
My commute is over 100 miles there and 100 miles back. IIUC, Aberdeen from Lincolnshire is approx 400 miles there and 400 miles back. So I think you win that one.
Aye. 430 miles door to door. On a goodcrun I can do it in about seven and a half hours but that depends on traffic at Edinburgh and Dundee and how many times the A1 is closed. My record is 5 full closures between Edinburgh and Newark last Autumn.
A normal run is about 8 hours.
My commute is about 5,500 miles or so.
The longest, possibly apocryphal, commute I ever heard of was Hawaii to the North Sea oil rigs (in the days of Concorde), although that wouldn't have been every week. Where is your commute to/from? Make it vague if you don't want to give max details.
Somewhere in Europe to somewhere in North America. I move around a lot but those are the two main bases I operate from
Hmm. Whilst I partly agree with his analysis, explaining why a thing is happening is different to saying that a thing is good or desirable. European impotence in the face of US violent resolve is a real thing and we have to cope with it, which requires more than saying "Well this is what's happening". Do we (the UK) pivot towards the US, the EU, stand alone from both, what? Canada and Australia are under threat: what do we do about that? Mandelson and the Spectator crowd think of themselves as American-manques, and it annoys me.
We must not pivot towards the US.
We should have a much firmer line with Trump over Ukraine and Greenland. My hope would be that we woukd stand apart and act according to what is in our own national interest and what is right according to our own values. That means acting in close cooperation with NATO and with our European partners as well as being prepared to help Canada and Australia as needed.
Tying ourselves too closely to either the US or Europe requires too much in the way of compromises.
Richard, unfortunately we are led by supine spineless tossers who will grovel and support them all the way till it is their turn.
Pahlavi is claiming the Iranian Government is running low of mercenaries.
In a very competitive market with the Russians.
Been reportd that Iran's gold reserves are being flown to Moscow. Good luck in ever seeing them again...
(Be an interesting missile target...literal golden showers.)
I’m sure that any Iranian gold that actually makes it to Moscow’s stores will write regularly - but apologetically - about how it’s far to busy to come home and visit its parents.
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
grovelling to Trump will do no good, just encouraging him that your are weak will embolden him and encourage more bullying.
There is an excellent article in Foreign Policy about Europe's reaction to the new assertive Trump doctrine. The twin prongs of the strategy are supplicant placation and unevidenced hope. There will be no change in that approach until at least Trump48 or Vance48 and maybe not even then.
Wordle in two. Things can only go downhill from here.
Oh, and a bit of snow on the ground in Airedale this morning.
Wordle still? I must admit, I fell into the hard stuff when I bored of the basic ones.
I used to do loads of them during COVID - maths ones, geography ones, but last couple of years I've been down to one. For a while it was Quordle, though even that got to be quite formulaic - the same four seed words most of the time, and not using seed words too suboptimal to contemplate going back to. When I lost a long sequence of stats, I left.
My current is Octordle Rescue, 8 words to get in 9 guesses with some quite variable computer generated seed words. I find it a proper challenge, as I actually fail 25-30% of the time, and the opportunity to deploy one seed word will be played differently, if at all, every time.
'Badenoch says children are spending hours on platforms designed to be addictive. She says we want "protection for children", and she wants to bring in an age limit for social media access.
"We are seeing children spending hours on platforms that are profiting from their anxiety and distraction."
Badenoch says she is a mother and understands it won't solve all the issues around social media access, but it would get a "critical mass of children off of social media".' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c20er9d399et
Australia now has a social media ban for under 16s
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
grovelling to Trump will do no good, just encouraging him that your are weak will embolden him and encourage more bullying.
There is an excellent article in Foreign Policy about Europe's reaction to the new assertive Trump doctrine. The twin prongs of the strategy are supplicant placation and unevidenced hope. There will be no change in that approach until at least Trump48 or Vance48 and maybe not even then.
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
grovelling to Trump will do no good, just encouraging him that your are weak will embolden him and encourage more bullying.
There is an excellent article in Foreign Policy about Europe's reaction to the new assertive Trump doctrine. The twin prongs of the strategy are supplicant placation and unevidenced hope. There will be no change in that approach until at least Trump48 or Vance48 and maybe not even then.
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
grovelling to Trump will do no good, just encouraging him that your are weak will embolden him and encourage more bullying.
There is an excellent article in Foreign Policy about Europe's reaction to the new assertive Trump doctrine. The twin prongs of the strategy are supplicant placation and unevidenced hope. There will be no change in that approach until at least Trump48 or Vance48 and maybe not even then.
By 2029 on current polls we could have President Bardella, PM Farage, still PM Meloni, the AfD topped the polls in Germany and maybe President Buttigieg or Newsom and a Democrat Congress, so would be a whole different scenario
Saw some snippets of Kemi Badenoch on Kuenssberg this morning - okay. She did get into trouble on Greenland trying to sit on the fence of disagreeing with Trump's comments but not too much and that was her uncomfortable moment.
On the social media ban for under 16s, the Australian experience politically was interesting - the legislation was pushed through quickly (with only 24 hours for public submissions) and initially it seemed the Coalition would support the Labor plans but it soon became clear within the Coalition there were dissenters and all it did was publicly to expose divisions within the Liberal and National parties.
I'm not sure how this will look for Conservatives who are opposed to any further extension in the size and scope of the State - Reform will have similar issues I would suspect. It seems an odd hill to fight on especially as it could expose divisions in her own ranks.
I also see we have the tired old refrain of "saving the High Street" and "kick starting Britain" getting yet another airing from the Conservatives and their friends in the Express. The "problem" in the High Street is as much to do with landlords chasing ever higher rents as much as it is business rates but at its core is the fundamental change in the way retail now operates. I'm in my favourite coffee shop and in the time I take to order and get my flat white (sad, aren't I?), three bicycle riders have been in with their bags to collect coffees and pastries.
Perhaps this is less about banning 15 year olds from TikTok than banning 45 year olds from Deliveroo.
I say yes. I’m pretty sure that Sandy says no. I haven’t yet compared it to Congleton for Cookie. But I’m not sure that geographical northernness matches English Northernness. In fact, I’m sure that the boundary of the North isn’t a straight line
So what about Macclesfield?
I'd say yes - more so than say Nutsford.
And I'd say that Buxton is genuinely Derbyshire, even though it feels a bit soft-edged.
I'd compare Macclesfield vs Nutsford to Newark vs Southwell. To me Southwell feels wealthier than Newark, but it is Newark that is the refuge for London commuters due to ~90 minute trains, which has always been a feature. I'd say that Southwell will get a Gail's before Newark.
Knutsford please: and given the name comes from Canute's ford, I'd say it was relatively north, given that Canute was Danish.
Yes, sorry.
It was the early hours and I was unable to sleep.
We used to travel throughout my childhood from North Notts to Prestatyn where grandparents had retired, so I have the entire journey (in several versions) engraved in my mind still. Including Ffynnongroyw.
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
grovelling to Trump will do no good, just encouraging him that your are weak will embolden him and encourage more bullying.
There is an excellent article in Foreign Policy about Europe's reaction to the new assertive Trump doctrine. The twin prongs of the strategy are supplicant placation and unevidenced hope. There will be no change in that approach until at least Trump48 or Vance48 and maybe not even then.
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
grovelling to Trump will do no good, just encouraging him that your are weak will embolden him and encourage more bullying.
There is an excellent article in Foreign Policy about Europe's reaction to the new assertive Trump doctrine. The twin prongs of the strategy are supplicant placation and unevidenced hope. There will be no change in that approach until at least Trump48 or Vance48 and maybe not even then.
Ultimately, Europe doesn't want to pay and won't until the enemy is at the gates.
The only countries in the latter categories are Poland, and the Baltic States - and Poland is probably the only one tooled up enough to actually check the Russians.
It wouldn't surprise me if they actually led the Germans.
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
grovelling to Trump will do no good, just encouraging him that your are weak will embolden him and encourage more bullying.
There is an excellent article in Foreign Policy about Europe's reaction to the new assertive Trump doctrine. The twin prongs of the strategy are supplicant placation and unevidenced hope. There will be no change in that approach until at least Trump48 or Vance48 and maybe not even then.
This is either excellent diplomacy keeping the Western world away from the brink, or pitiful naïveté. Or a bit of both. Whichever, I wish them well.
NEW: The UK is quietly taking a leading role on Greenland, trying to persuade Trump he doesn’t need to take it over by demonstrating Europe is serious about Arctic security
In last 48 hours Starmer has spoken to Trump twice about the High North, as well as Frederiksen, Rutte, Macron, Merz
The UK this week deployed 1,500 Royal Marines commandos to northern Norway. It led discussion on the topic at NATO’s North Atlantic Council. Healey sent message to Danish counterpart. All suggests a larger British role than publicly advertised
Starmer has been telling Trump that Europe will do more in the Arctic and urging European counterparts to step up their security presence and cooperation with the US there
That’s in Europe’s interests amid rising concerns about suspected Russian sabotage activity on undersea cables around Finland
But the British aim is also to persuade Trump that Europe can help with shared interests on Greenland too, rather than let it divide NATO
One diplomat described it as an effort to take the heat out of the situation, with hopes that the calmer Rubio viewpoint prevails
It’s the same UK strategy as on Ukraine negotiations and with aiding the US seizure of the tanker in the North Atlantic: demonstrating European diplomatic, military and security utility to the US
It notably contrasts with the French approach, which publicly warned this week that Europe is facing threats of US coercion
grovelling to Trump will do no good, just encouraging him that your are weak will embolden him and encourage more bullying.
There is an excellent article in Foreign Policy about Europe's reaction to the new assertive Trump doctrine. The twin prongs of the strategy are supplicant placation and unevidenced hope. There will be no change in that approach until at least Trump48 or Vance48 and maybe not even then.
Ultimately, Europe doesn't want to pay and won't until the enemy is at the gates.
The only countries in the latter categories are Poland, and the Baltic States - and Poland is probably the only one tooled up enough to actually check the Russians.
It wouldn't surprise me if they actually led the Germans.
Enough time should have passed to make that prospect encouraging.
Wordle in two. Things can only go downhill from here.
Oh, and a bit of snow on the ground in Airedale this morning.
Wordle still? I must admit, I fell into the hard stuff when I bored of the basic ones.
I used to do loads of them during COVID - maths ones, geography ones, but last couple of years I've been down to one. For a while it was Quordle, though even that got to be quite formulaic - the same four seed words most of the time, and not using seed words too suboptimal to contemplate going back to. When I lost a long sequence of stats, I left.
My current is Octordle Rescue, 8 words to get in 9 guesses with some quite variable computer generated seed words. I find it a proper challenge, as I actually fail 25-30% of the time, and the opportunity to deploy one seed word will be played differently, if at all, every time.
Comments
Turner revealed he was charged with handling stolen goods when he worked as an antiques dealer in Hull in 2002. Although the case collapsed, he said the judge warned him there was “no smoke without fire”
Ah yes, the famed legal principle of 'the authorities do not make mistakes'.
Buxton, Glossop and Chesterfield are North. Matlock and Bakewell Midlands.
But in this twilight zone where the Midlands blend into the North, imho it's as much about the "feel" of a place as the exact geographic location.
That's probably just a sign of a limited social circle, but maybe he is just so unpopular people don't even bother to bring it up.
However I think the Net Figure does him no favours since it does not measure strength of feeling.
I suspect, without digging into it, that plenty dislike Starmer while next to nobody likes him, which leads to a horrendous net negative figure.
Even if people hated eg Johnson more, he had more fans too.
And a negative is a negative whether it be "I can't f***ing stand that guy" or "oh him? Bit of a knob."
A purchase of Greenland is more likely but even there only 28% of Americans were in favour, even Republicans were only a narrow 51% for buying it
https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2026-01-08/greenland-military-poll-20339489.html
The model has failed.
The US needs to take the next step.
The United Nations building in New York should be closed down.
https://nitter.poast.org/trussliz/status/2010056953096224961#m
Now, the UN has a lot of problems associated with it, but I don't think even Trump has suggested this.
It was actually quietly encouraging.
https://spectator.com/article/europe-needs-to-get-on-board-with-trumps-plans-for-greenland/
We should have a much firmer line with Trump over Ukraine and Greenland. My hope would be that we woukd stand apart and act according to what is in our own national interest and what is right according to our own values. That means acting in close cooperation with NATO and with our European partners as well as being prepared to help Canada and Australia as needed.
Tying ourselves too closely to either the US or Europe requires too much in the way of compromises.
A normal run is about 8 hours.
And I'd say that Buxton is genuinely Derbyshire, even though it feels a bit soft-edged.
I'd compare Macclesfield vs Nutsford to Newark vs Southwell. To me Southwell feels wealthier than Newark, but it is Newark that is the refuge for London commuters due to ~90 minute trains, which has always been a feature. I'd say that Southwell will get a Gail's before Newark.
So he is a career malignant narcissist. And now behaves no differently, and is in a unique position as he can destroy all the people who have positions where their role is to keep him in check. He is effective King of the USA due to all the people who should be checks and balances are under his desk licking his boots.
As I see it, international leaders follow a similar strategy in inverse proportion to their possibility of defying / opposing him, which will adjust as they are able to pivot their countries away over time.
Is a useful comparison a celebrity who has no personality other than the public shell?
Do other countries have the political will to impose consequences, or not? That is, to turn words and "soft power" into practical interventions.
Straw in the wind: European regulatory actions on American big tech, and dealing with the bogus "free speech" narrative.
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2026/jan/10/cuba-regime-polycrisis-collapse-exodus-economy-migration-us-sanctions-trump
What will they do with it when the regime also collapses, which is possibly now not far off ?
Canada has always been supportive (eg peacekeeping), rather than antagonistic, since the start, and it would be symbolic - whilst being close enough for weekly commuting to be possible. An alternative might depend on whether the UN centres in Nairobi or Kuala Lumpur could resource the General Assembly.
Trump would throw a tantrum as it would be on a day with D in it, and Ahab has to go hunt his whale, and there might be interesting manoeuvres around the veto and authorisation.
Mild dusting of snow this morning, so far, anyway.
Conservatives plan to ban social media for under 16s: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2wyeqw3gpo
I'm sure Rubio will happily support ICE agents opening fire on the boats stream across to Florida.
It really is a shit show. And however bad the ratings, this show is guaranteed a four year run.
And give Vance is brainless, heartless and gutless, it's difficult to see how he could be assassinated.
It’s all very much like that Simpsons meme.
Not sure Trumping in the Speccie is the best route back for Mandy’s umpteenth regeneration, though I’m certain he’ll be plotting towards such an outcome.
But there certainly is a need for rigorous research from academics.
You have to go back to the period 1852-1868 to find a similar level of turmoil. (Derby, Aberdeen, Palmerston, Derby, Palmerston, Russell, Derby, Disraeli, Gladstone.)
That doesn't say anything good about the current state of our politics.
It might also be added that this period was brought to an end by the fairly drastic changes to the electoral system of the Second Reform Act of 1867.
* May managed three years and eleven days, but she had resigned before the three years came up. Similarly Johnson managed 3 years and 44 days but 'the breaks' came before the three years.
Wordle in two. Things can only go downhill from here.
Oh, and a bit of snow on the ground in Airedale this morning.
Been reported that Iran's gold reserves are being flown to Moscow. Good luck in ever seeing them again...
(Be an interesting missile target...literal golden showers.)
I used to do loads of them during COVID - maths ones, geography ones, but last couple of years I've been down to one. For a while it was Quordle, though even that got to be quite formulaic - the same four seed words most of the time, and not using seed words too suboptimal to contemplate going back to. When I lost a long sequence of stats, I left.
My current is Octordle Rescue, 8 words to get in 9 guesses with some quite variable computer generated seed words. I find it a proper challenge, as I actually fail 25-30% of the time, and the opportunity to deploy one seed word will be played differently, if at all, every time.
But with both, I’ll believe it when I see it.
"We are seeing children spending hours on platforms that are profiting from their anxiety and distraction."
Badenoch says she is a mother and understands it won't solve all the issues around social media access, but it would get a "critical mass of children off of social media".'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c20er9d399et
Australia now has a social media ban for under 16s
NEW THREAD
Saw some snippets of Kemi Badenoch on Kuenssberg this morning - okay. She did get into trouble on Greenland trying to sit on the fence of disagreeing with Trump's comments but not too much and that was her uncomfortable moment.
On the social media ban for under 16s, the Australian experience politically was interesting - the legislation was pushed through quickly (with only 24 hours for public submissions) and initially it seemed the Coalition would support the Labor plans but it soon became clear within the Coalition there were dissenters and all it did was publicly to expose divisions within the Liberal and National parties.
I'm not sure how this will look for Conservatives who are opposed to any further extension in the size and scope of the State - Reform will have similar issues I would suspect. It seems an odd hill to fight on especially as it could expose divisions in her own ranks.
I also see we have the tired old refrain of "saving the High Street" and "kick starting Britain" getting yet another airing from the Conservatives and their friends in the Express. The "problem" in the High Street is as much to do with landlords chasing ever higher rents as much as it is business rates but at its core is the fundamental change in the way retail now operates. I'm in my favourite coffee shop and in the time I take to order and get my flat white (sad, aren't I?), three bicycle riders have been in with their bags to collect coffees and pastries.
Perhaps this is less about banning 15 year olds from TikTok than banning 45 year olds from Deliveroo.
It was the early hours and I was unable to sleep.
We used to travel throughout my childhood from North Notts to Prestatyn where grandparents had retired, so I have the entire journey (in several versions) engraved in my mind still. Including Ffynnongroyw.
The only countries in the latter categories are Poland, and the Baltic States - and Poland is probably the only one tooled up enough to actually check the Russians.
It wouldn't surprise me if they actually led the Germans.