AckSHUallY I’ve just watched the end of “Tank” and @Theuniondivvie has a point. It does get unnecessarily surreal and sub-Apocalypse Now as it meanders to a conclusion
Shame
Still a nice solid war movie for the first 70 minutes. What the F was the director thinking with that denouement?
I love a bit of hallucinatory war Dada but that just didn’t quite work
It reminds me that the last really great memorable movie I’ve seen is the Zone of Interest. THAT is a work of art
Sadly I can’t think of much else of late. We’re in a fallow period TV and movie-wise
Death In Paradise is back soon. And Silent Witness. The latter has switched location from London to Birmingham - so that will be interesting to monitor. Will it still work in that setting? I'm not sure. No idea why they took the decision. "If it aint broke" comes to mind.
Silent Witness FFS
Like death in paradise. Even bought a bucket get like his for my vacation
In Crown Office we now have toilets which are marked specifically as gender neutral toilets, expressly for the use of everyone (these were previously for disabled people which is another story). I don't see any problem or embarrassment for any trans people using them. I appreciate that these options may not be available everywhere but hospitals strike me as an unlikely place to have a problem.
I think the problem is that in some environments the mere act of forcing trans women who fully present as and pass as female into third spaces outs them as trans - which could potentially lead to discrimination, harassment, even sexual violence etc.
I do partially agree with you, in the sense that I think people obviously transitioning should be using third spaces and pre op trans people shouldn't be using shared dressing rooms - locked individual cubicles (for changing or using the loo) are a different matter.
I'm also of the "Widdecombe" view that once a person has fully undergone genital reassignment they should be treated for all intents and purposes as their adopted gender. The arguments for excluding them from women's spaces become much, much weaker post-op, which is, IMHO, the most alarming part of the judgement. Much of the rest of it I actually agree with.
I'm interested in what implementing the SC/FWS judgment in full is supposed to lead to in practice. Eg is it the objective of campaigners on the GC side of things that pretty much all signage for male and female spaces has the added words "Biological Only - No Trans"?
Why would you need signage like that?
All that is needed is a clear and unambiguous implementation of the law.
Third spaces, like gender-neutral facilities for anyone who is trans.
Women's spaces for women only.
And treat everyone with respect.
Problem solved.
I was talking about exactly that - implementation of the law. And it's not (alas) as simple as you make out. Eg we have the Gender Recognition Act on statute. The purpose of it is to allow transgender people to live their lives in their acquired gender. There is a transition process to follow and upon completion of this a Gender Recognition Certificate is issued. This marks a change of legal gender. It could be argued therefore that to simply exclude all trans people from all single sex facilities, spaces and activities rather makes a mockery of this piece of legislation and is not necessarily "treating everyone with respect".
Exactly this.
The supreme court argued that the wording of the 2010 EA *implictly* overrides the intent of the 2004 GRA (it never states this explicitly) when in fact the people who drafted it (see the former civil servant Melanie Field's statement on the subject) have stated that they intended for the 2010 EA to be trans inclusionary.
It is my view that the SC Judgement has therefore nullified the 2004 GRA in practice, ignoring parliamentary intent. And the only way forward is through legislation that clarifies the rights of trans people to recognition in their acquired gender post Goodwin v UK.
IIRC the SC said that their judgement was a reconciliation of what the laws *said*. Not what they intended.
I find it notable that advocating further legislation is not main goal of those opposed to the judgement. Why is that?
Strongly agree with a ban for under 16s on social media.
And with that, I will be wishing you all a goodbye for obvious reasons. Best wishes.
I would go further. But in a different way.
1) Anyone publishing text/images is a publisher of the material and completely liable for its content. 2) Unless they are publishing comments, in strict time order. Deletion of comments would be allowed.
Silly internet image aside, this seems over optimistic for Putin Romance of the Three Kingdoms (2026 edition) Reminds me a bit of a scene in the show Rome when the triumvirs were assigning territiory, with Lepidus a complete afterthought.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
In Crown Office we now have toilets which are marked specifically as gender neutral toilets, expressly for the use of everyone (these were previously for disabled people which is another story). I don't see any problem or embarrassment for any trans people using them. I appreciate that these options may not be available everywhere but hospitals strike me as an unlikely place to have a problem.
I think the problem is that in some environments the mere act of forcing trans women who fully present as and pass as female into third spaces outs them as trans - which could potentially lead to discrimination, harassment, even sexual violence etc.
I do partially agree with you, in the sense that I think people obviously transitioning should be using third spaces and pre op trans people shouldn't be using shared dressing rooms - locked individual cubicles (for changing or using the loo) are a different matter.
I'm also of the "Widdecombe" view that once a person has fully undergone genital reassignment they should be treated for all intents and purposes as their adopted gender. The arguments for excluding them from women's spaces become much, much weaker post-op, which is, IMHO, the most alarming part of the judgement. Much of the rest of it I actually agree with.
I'm interested in what implementing the SC/FWS judgment in full is supposed to lead to in practice. Eg is it the objective of campaigners on the GC side of things that pretty much all signage for male and female spaces has the added words "Biological Only - No Trans"?
Why would you need signage like that?
All that is needed is a clear and unambiguous implementation of the law.
Third spaces, like gender-neutral facilities for anyone who is trans.
Women's spaces for women only.
And treat everyone with respect.
Problem solved.
I was talking about exactly that - implementation of the law. And it's not (alas) as simple as you make out. Eg we have the Gender Recognition Act on statute. The purpose of it is to allow transgender people to live their lives in their acquired gender. There is a transition process to follow and upon completion of this a Gender Recognition Certificate is issued. This marks a change of legal gender. It could be argued therefore that to simply exclude all trans people from all single sex facilities, spaces and activities rather makes a mockery of this piece of legislation and is not necessarily "treating everyone with respect".
Exactly this.
The supreme court argued that the wording of the 2010 EA *implictly* overrides the intent of the 2004 GRA (it never states this explicitly) when in fact the people who drafted it (see the former civil servant Melanie Field's statement on the subject) have stated that they intended for the 2010 EA to be trans inclusionary.
It is my view that the SC Judgement has therefore nullified the 2004 GRA in practice, ignoring parliamentary intent. And the only way forward is through legislation that clarifies the rights of trans people to recognition in their acquired gender post Goodwin v UK.
IIRC the SC said that their judgement was a reconciliation of what the laws *said*. Not what they intended.
I find it notable that advocating further legislation is not main goal of those opposed to the judgement. Why is that?
Because apparently Keir Starmer doesn't have the spine to bring forward legislation to confirm the clear intention of the GRA 2004.
Labour shouldn't complain if people can't see the point in voting.
https://www.ispionline.it/en/publication/meloni-and-takaichi-charting-the-way-forward-for-italy-japan-relations-227500 ..During the EU-Japan summit held last July, then PM Shigeru Ishiba and President Ursula von der Leyen announced the launch of the “Competitiveness Alliance”, a joint project to strengthen the resilience of supply chains for critical raw materials. The plan envisions co-development and co-production to stabilise procurement, in particular of rare earths, on which both the EU and Japan remain heavily dependent on China. On top of that, last month the EU accepted Japan’s request to be included in Horizon Europe – the EU’s €93.5 billion research programme –, a decision that will enable Japanese and European researchers to join forces and apply for funding to support joint innovative research projects: prominent targets of this collaboration will be the digital transition, food security and climate-neutral energy...
Japan could help the E.U., and Britain, a lot, from my experience of Japanese staff and expertise.
They may have had a lot of setbacks since the 1990's, but I've generally been impressed. Japan is refined in culture and innovative in technology.
Horizon covers in some respect almost all the countries which are the coalition of allies of Ukraine, including even the USA - so it is potentially a key part of what happens next outside the military/politics area when the USA, whose population is not far off starting to shrink , withdraws from or cannot afford to be hegemon.
The only significant advanced democracies which afaics is missing are Australia and Taiwan. With a few more on the periphery. The USA participates but not as a Member or Associate.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
But by retiring early on full pension, the inference I take is that Craig is effectively getting more pension. I'm 50 and in a public sector pension. I still nèed to work another 17 years before I can retire on full pension (or as full as it will get). If I rwtired in disgrace tomorrow I would rightfully retain what pension I had earned, but couldn't start drawing it for years,and even when I did it wouldn't be a full pension because it would be short of 17 years of contributions. It looks to me like he is being rewarded for failure. But perhaps my inference of the details is not correct.
Strongly recommend the German Language movie “Tank” on Amazon Prime. Compelling and intelligent - it manages to humanise a Tiger tank crew on the Eastern Front in WW2, but doesn’t shy away from the horrors - including the Final Solution
VG
Really?! Watched it last night and to me it seemed a clumsy fusion of Apocalypse Now and An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge, they even had a bridge. Good sense of what being inside a tank involved nevertheless, though the U-boat Tiger bit was a bit far fetched.
I'm currently reading James Holland's Brothers in Arms about the Sherwood Foresters Yeomanry in WW2 (mainly Northern Europe). Utterly compelling and utterly horrifying. The idea of seeing your mates tank brew up, unable to escape and thus burn to death, or cut down by mortars/machine guns as they exit and still having to keep going blows the mind.
Thus of us who never had to go to war are truly blessed.
Try Max Hastings' "Armageddon" or "Bomber Command".
In the former, by 1945 all the sides are utter bastards killing in the most disgusting manner, with the Westerners doing it by aerial bombing, the Soviets doing it in person, the Japanese doing it with bayonets and medical experiments, and the Germans humming merrily as the ovens burn Jews in the millions.
In the latter, the pleasant disquisition on how to build one of the largest bomber forces ever and train their crews is interrupted by a chapter that shows what it was like to be on the receiving end as a little German town is burned to the foundations.
Silly internet image aside, this seems over optimistic for Putin Romance of the Three Kingdoms (2026 edition) Reminds me a bit of a scene in the show Rome when the triumvirs were assigning territiory, with Lepidus a complete afterthought.
That almost exactly how the British partitioned India.
Silly internet image aside, this seems over optimistic for Putin Romance of the Three Kingdoms (2026 edition) Reminds me a bit of a scene in the show Rome when the triumvirs were assigning territiory, with Lepidus a complete afterthought.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
The bar for 'gross misconduct' is very high: I doubt an employment tribunal would regard Guilford's stupidity as clearing it.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
The bar for 'gross misconduct' is very high: I doubt an employment tribunal would regard Guilford's stupidity as clearing it.
Lying to parliament would probably clear the bar. Everything before that maybe not though.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
The bar for 'gross misconduct' is very high: I doubt an employment tribunal would regard Guilford's stupidity as clearing it.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
But by retiring early on full pension, the inference I take is that Craig is effectively getting more pension. I'm 50 and in a public sector pension. I still nèed to work another 17 years before I can retire on full pension (or as full as it will get). If I rwtired in disgrace tomorrow I would rightfully retain what pension I had earned, but couldn't start drawing it for years,and even when I did it wouldn't be a full pension because it would be short of 17 years of contributions. It looks to me like he is being rewarded for failure. But perhaps my inference of the details is not correct.
This is the key point, surely.
It's one thing to give him his already earned pension. It's another thing altogether to effectively bung him another five or six years of pension contributions.
That would be doubly unconstitutional. Should be a fun case.
Let him tariff us 100% and we can return the favour.
The US has moved from being a necessary friend (e.g. on Ukraine) to being an adversary. Pretending that trade deals are the most important thing right now is to be deluded.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
The bar for 'gross misconduct' is very high: I doubt an employment tribunal would regard Guilford's stupidity as clearing it.
Lying to parliament would probably clear the bar. Everything before that maybe not though.
In Crown Office we now have toilets which are marked specifically as gender neutral toilets, expressly for the use of everyone (these were previously for disabled people which is another story). I don't see any problem or embarrassment for any trans people using them. I appreciate that these options may not be available everywhere but hospitals strike me as an unlikely place to have a problem.
I think the problem is that in some environments the mere act of forcing trans women who fully present as and pass as female into third spaces outs them as trans - which could potentially lead to discrimination, harassment, even sexual violence etc.
I do partially agree with you, in the sense that I think people obviously transitioning should be using third spaces and pre op trans people shouldn't be using shared dressing rooms - locked individual cubicles (for changing or using the loo) are a different matter.
I'm also of the "Widdecombe" view that once a person has fully undergone genital reassignment they should be treated for all intents and purposes as their adopted gender. The arguments for excluding them from women's spaces become much, much weaker post-op, which is, IMHO, the most alarming part of the judgement. Much of the rest of it I actually agree with.
I'm interested in what implementing the SC/FWS judgment in full is supposed to lead to in practice. Eg is it the objective of campaigners on the GC side of things that pretty much all signage for male and female spaces has the added words "Biological Only - No Trans"?
Why would you need signage like that?
All that is needed is a clear and unambiguous implementation of the law.
Third spaces, like gender-neutral facilities for anyone who is trans.
Women's spaces for women only.
And treat everyone with respect.
Problem solved.
I was talking about exactly that - implementation of the law. And it's not (alas) as simple as you make out. Eg we have the Gender Recognition Act on statute. The purpose of it is to allow transgender people to live their lives in their acquired gender. There is a transition process to follow and upon completion of this a Gender Recognition Certificate is issued. This marks a change of legal gender. It could be argued therefore that to simply exclude all trans people from all single sex facilities, spaces and activities rather makes a mockery of this piece of legislation and is not necessarily "treating everyone with respect".
Exactly this.
The supreme court argued that the wording of the 2010 EA *implictly* overrides the intent of the 2004 GRA (it never states this explicitly) when in fact the people who drafted it (see the former civil servant Melanie Field's statement on the subject) have stated that they intended for the 2010 EA to be trans inclusionary.
It is my view that the SC Judgement has therefore nullified the 2004 GRA in practice, ignoring parliamentary intent. And the only way forward is through legislation that clarifies the rights of trans people to recognition in their acquired gender post Goodwin v UK.
IIRC the SC said that their judgement was a reconciliation of what the laws *said*. Not what they intended.
I find it notable that advocating further legislation is not main goal of those opposed to the judgement. Why is that?
Actually, it's quite the opposite. The SC ruling states that the GRA and the EA exist separately, covering different statutory purposes, and thus do not overlap - therefore they do not need to be reconciled. This means, in the court's eyes, that a person can be treated as a woman 'on paper' for the purpose of the GRA but not in practice (barred from all women's spaces under the EA). This is legally coherent but logically inconsistent as it nullifies the stated intent of the GRA in practice (including in the explanatory notes, i.e. 'for all purposes' a person becomes their acquired gender). The GRA specifically states 'for all purposes' which is a very clear declaration of intent which in my opinion the SC ruling fails dismally to reconcile with the wording of the EA in its judgement.
As to your second point, the generally accepted wisdom in pro trans spaces is that the whole thing could be cleared up with a 'single sentence' amendment to the existing 2010 EA to restore Parliamentary intent. I think it's a bit more complicated than that, mainly because not all trans people have gender recognition certificates and, bizarrely, recent court rulings have made it so you don't have to have surgery to have a GRC, which complicates things further. Which is why I think more comprehensive clarification through new legislation is required.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
The bar for 'gross misconduct' is very high: I doubt an employment tribunal would regard Guilford's stupidity as clearing it.
Which is indeed a huge part of the problem.
Anyone with two eyes can see that he made up evidence and lied about it, including to Parliament.
Public trust in “the system” quickly evaporates when there isn’t serious punishment for obvious malfeasance in public office.
In Crown Office we now have toilets which are marked specifically as gender neutral toilets, expressly for the use of everyone (these were previously for disabled people which is another story). I don't see any problem or embarrassment for any trans people using them. I appreciate that these options may not be available everywhere but hospitals strike me as an unlikely place to have a problem.
I think the problem is that in some environments the mere act of forcing trans women who fully present as and pass as female into third spaces outs them as trans - which could potentially lead to discrimination, harassment, even sexual violence etc.
I do partially agree with you, in the sense that I think people obviously transitioning should be using third spaces and pre op trans people shouldn't be using shared dressing rooms - locked individual cubicles (for changing or using the loo) are a different matter.
I'm also of the "Widdecombe" view that once a person has fully undergone genital reassignment they should be treated for all intents and purposes as their adopted gender. The arguments for excluding them from women's spaces become much, much weaker post-op, which is, IMHO, the most alarming part of the judgement. Much of the rest of it I actually agree with.
I'm interested in what implementing the SC/FWS judgment in full is supposed to lead to in practice. Eg is it the objective of campaigners on the GC side of things that pretty much all signage for male and female spaces has the added words "Biological Only - No Trans"?
Why would you need signage like that?
All that is needed is a clear and unambiguous implementation of the law.
Third spaces, like gender-neutral facilities for anyone who is trans.
Women's spaces for women only.
And treat everyone with respect.
Problem solved.
I was talking about exactly that - implementation of the law. And it's not (alas) as simple as you make out. Eg we have the Gender Recognition Act on statute. The purpose of it is to allow transgender people to live their lives in their acquired gender. There is a transition process to follow and upon completion of this a Gender Recognition Certificate is issued. This marks a change of legal gender. It could be argued therefore that to simply exclude all trans people from all single sex facilities, spaces and activities rather makes a mockery of this piece of legislation and is not necessarily "treating everyone with respect".
Exactly this.
The supreme court argued that the wording of the 2010 EA *implictly* overrides the intent of the 2004 GRA (it never states this explicitly) when in fact the people who drafted it (see the former civil servant Melanie Field's statement on the subject) have stated that they intended for the 2010 EA to be trans inclusionary.
It is my view that the SC Judgement has therefore nullified the 2004 GRA in practice, ignoring parliamentary intent. And the only way forward is through legislation that clarifies the rights of trans people to recognition in their acquired gender post Goodwin v UK.
Yep. Maybe so. Look forward to the upcoming Header on this anyway. I predict an excellent 'btl' discussion, free of prejudice, intelligent and well informed, leading to several minds being changed and a consensus way forward which all but the most extreme GCs and TRAs amongst us can sign up to. We might even (probably my dearest wish) ask ourselves how come so many other countries have managed to navigate this area without setting the world on fire.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
The bar for 'gross misconduct' is very high: I doubt an employment tribunal would regard Guilford's stupidity as clearing it.
Lying to parliament would probably clear the bar. Everything before that maybe not though.
Yes. Indeed I think he lied twice
Also, kowtowing to Islamist mosques threatening to kill Jewish football fans. A supposedly neutral and very important officer of the law, actually acting in favour of naked sectarian interests
He should be up in front of the beak, not retiring on full pension
We are blindly marching towards the Ulsterisation of the UK. It is a disastrous path to take
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
The bar for 'gross misconduct' is very high: I doubt an employment tribunal would regard Guilford's stupidity as clearing it.
Which is indeed a huge part of the problem.
Anyone with two eyes can see that he made up evidence and lied about it, including to Parliament.
Public trust in “the system” quickly evaporates when there isn’t serious punishment for obvious malfeasance in public office.
I agree.
And, of course, the same standards should apply to politicians who lie.
AckSHUallY I’ve just watched the end of “Tank” and @Theuniondivvie has a point. It does get unnecessarily surreal and sub-Apocalypse Now as it meanders to a conclusion
Shame
Still a nice solid war movie for the first 70 minutes. What the F was the director thinking with that denouement?
I love a bit of hallucinatory war Dada but that just didn’t quite work
It reminds me that the last really great memorable movie I’ve seen is the Zone of Interest. THAT is a work of art
Sadly I can’t think of much else of late. We’re in a fallow period TV and movie-wise
Very little of interest in the past few years. I think Covid really buggered up movies - nobody knows what to make to get people back into cinemas.
Independent film is really screwed. To get funding you now need one of a handful of stars. Who want money that the sales estimates used to fund the movie don't justify.
I think I do agree with @BatteryCorrectHorse on the chances of a Labour victory having increased (or at least a Labour led government - I’m not really seeing a path to a majority for anyone right now).
Things are very uncertain right now, so it’s very difficult to see how things will look at the time of the next GE (we could conceivably have different Labour/Tory/Lib Dem leaders, for instance). What I would say, is the Jenrick saga makes it much less likely that there will be any kind of arrangement or compact between the Tories and Reform before the next GE, which in turn means that the chances of a divided right have increased, which in turn increases the chance of vote splitting. That helps Labour, albeit that they are also experiencing their own vote splitting with the Greens.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
But by retiring early on full pension, the inference I take is that Craig is effectively getting more pension. I'm 50 and in a public sector pension. I still nèed to work another 17 years before I can retire on full pension (or as full as it will get). If I rwtired in disgrace tomorrow I would rightfully retain what pension I had earned, but couldn't start drawing it for years,and even when I did it wouldn't be a full pension because it would be short of 17 years of contributions. It looks to me like he is being rewarded for failure. But perhaps my inference of the details is not correct.
Without knowing which public sector scheme you are in, the Local Government Pension Scheme disincentivises early retirement by some pretty stringent penalties on what you get. If you go five years early, I think you lose 25% of your benefits. The nearer you go based on your actual pensionable age, the more you get.
I'm torn on this one - it encourages place holders to just stay on blocking career advancement for younger staff but it keeps experience and knowledge and above all contacts within the organisation.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
The bar for 'gross misconduct' is very high: I doubt an employment tribunal would regard Guilford's stupidity as clearing it.
Did he not deceive Parliament during testimony which is essentially on oath (even if they do not normally swear an actual oath)?
That alone is a stonking great breach of the employer-employee relationship.
To my jaundiced eye the outcome looks like a classic police "retire before being disciplined" effort.
Perhaps his post-retirement career will be lawyerly .
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
The bar for 'gross misconduct' is very high: I doubt an employment tribunal would regard Guilford's stupidity as clearing it.
Which is indeed a huge part of the problem.
Anyone with two eyes can see that he made up evidence and lied about it, including to Parliament.
Public trust in “the system” quickly evaporates when there isn’t serious punishment for obvious malfeasance in public office.
I agree.
And, of course, the same standards should apply to politicians who lie.
Seriously, you only want politicians to tell the truth all the time just like Jim Carrey in "Liar, Liar"?
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
The bar for 'gross misconduct' is very high: I doubt an employment tribunal would regard Guilford's stupidity as clearing it.
Lying to parliament would probably clear the bar. Everything before that maybe not though.
Yes. Indeed I think he lied twice
Also, kowtowing to Islamist mosques threatening to kill Jewish football fans. A supposedly neutral and very important officer of the law, actually acting in favour of naked sectarian interests
He should be up in front of the beak, not retiring on full pension
We are blindly marching towards the Ulsterisation of the UK. It is a disastrous path to take
Welcome back, Leon. The place was certainly duller without you.
And we can kick off the new term with a nice fat Like for that one.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
The bar for 'gross misconduct' is very high: I doubt an employment tribunal would regard Guilford's stupidity as clearing it.
Did he not deceive Parliament during testimony which is essentially on oath (even if they do not normally swear an actual oath)?
That alone is a stonking great breach of the employer-employee relationship.
To my jaundiced eye the outcome looks like a classic police "retire before being disciplined" effort.
Perhaps his post-retirement career will be lawyerly .
AckSHUallY I’ve just watched the end of “Tank” and @Theuniondivvie has a point. It does get unnecessarily surreal and sub-Apocalypse Now as it meanders to a conclusion
Shame
Still a nice solid war movie for the first 70 minutes. What the F was the director thinking with that denouement?
I love a bit of hallucinatory war Dada but that just didn’t quite work
It reminds me that the last really great memorable movie I’ve seen is the Zone of Interest. THAT is a work of art
Sadly I can’t think of much else of late. We’re in a fallow period TV and movie-wise
Very little of interest in the past few years. I think Covid really buggered up movies - nobody knows what to make to get people back into cinemas.
Independent film is really screwed. To get funding you now need one of a handful of stars. Who want money that the sales estimates used to fund the movie don't justify.
That does seem to be the case. Just done a bit of research. It’s bad out there
I’m not sure cinemas are coming back as we know them. Technology means the big movies of the future might be one-off masterpieces made by loners or a few people manipulating images
It could be a new golden age - and people will gather ad hoc to share the experience. Just not in multiplex cinemas
The Telegraph frequently misreport immigration cases. This doesn't say he's won his case, so it's not proof of a problem anyway.
That to me sounds like a judge is receiving the case, discovering it's not going to be finished in the time he's been allocated to deal with it and kicking down the road to the first gap that may have time to process the case.
It's also a political nightmare so I can see why the judge doesn't want to deal with it...
The Telegraph frequently misreport immigration cases. This doesn't say he's won his case, so it's not proof of a problem anyway.
Last August the judge declined to immediately order that Southern Housing could take possession of the flat, after hearing from Haque's barrister that removing him from the property would interfere with his right to family life under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
The judge had adjourned the case to Jan 2026, but that hearing has now been adjourned till May 2026
I should also say I think the chances of a Tory recovery (or at least a retreat from the brink) are also much higher at the end of this week than at the start.
Still not convinced that Farage’s recruits this week have done anything to help his cause, in fact they’ve potentially started to toxify his brand to the benefit of the remaining Tories.
I expect they’re still going to have a very bad May. They’re far from having been forgiven yet, and Badenoch, while growing into the role, is far from being seen as an election winning leader.
AckSHUallY I’ve just watched the end of “Tank” and @Theuniondivvie has a point. It does get unnecessarily surreal and sub-Apocalypse Now as it meanders to a conclusion
Shame
Still a nice solid war movie for the first 70 minutes. What the F was the director thinking with that denouement?
I love a bit of hallucinatory war Dada but that just didn’t quite work
It reminds me that the last really great memorable movie I’ve seen is the Zone of Interest. THAT is a work of art
Sadly I can’t think of much else of late. We’re in a fallow period TV and movie-wise
Very little of interest in the past few years. I think Covid really buggered up movies - nobody knows what to make to get people back into cinemas.
Independent film is really screwed. To get funding you now need one of a handful of stars. Who want money that the sales estimates used to fund the movie don't justify.
That does seem to be the case. Just done a bit of research. It’s bad out there
I’m not sure cinemas are coming back as we know them. Technology means the big movies of the future might be one-off masterpieces made by loners or a few people manipulating images
It could be a new golden age - and people will gather ad hoc to share the experience. Just not in multiplex cinemas
Not quite the same as being there, but I think we need to have live streaming of big concerts in cinemas. Once the tickets for the concerts were sold, they should have sold tickets to screenings. Maybe live, maybe say the next day. Oasis would have rammed local cinemas.
Doesn't even have to be really big artists. Anyone that has a great live reputation.
AckSHUallY I’ve just watched the end of “Tank” and @Theuniondivvie has a point. It does get unnecessarily surreal and sub-Apocalypse Now as it meanders to a conclusion
Shame
Still a nice solid war movie for the first 70 minutes. What the F was the director thinking with that denouement?
I love a bit of hallucinatory war Dada but that just didn’t quite work
It reminds me that the last really great memorable movie I’ve seen is the Zone of Interest. THAT is a work of art
Sadly I can’t think of much else of late. We’re in a fallow period TV and movie-wise
Very little of interest in the past few years. I think Covid really buggered up movies - nobody knows what to make to get people back into cinemas.
Independent film is really screwed. To get funding you now need one of a handful of stars. Who want money that the sales estimates used to fund the movie don't justify.
That does seem to be the case. Just done a bit of research. It’s bad out there
I’m not sure cinemas are coming back as we know them. Technology means the big movies of the future might be one-off masterpieces made by loners or a few people manipulating images
It could be a new golden age - and people will gather ad hoc to share the experience. Just not in multiplex cinemas
Not quite the same as being there, but I think we need to have live streaming of big concerts in cinemas. Once the tickets for the concerts were sold, they should have sold tickets to screenings. Maybe live, maybe say the next day. Oasis would have rammed local cinemas.
Doesn't even have to be really big artists. Anyone that has a great live reputation.
The National Theatre already does that.
And as for gigs? The main competitor would be the festivals that are starting to dump their back catalogue on YouTube to sell tickets to next year’s festival.
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
AckSHUallY I’ve just watched the end of “Tank” and @Theuniondivvie has a point. It does get unnecessarily surreal and sub-Apocalypse Now as it meanders to a conclusion
Shame
Still a nice solid war movie for the first 70 minutes. What the F was the director thinking with that denouement?
I love a bit of hallucinatory war Dada but that just didn’t quite work
It reminds me that the last really great memorable movie I’ve seen is the Zone of Interest. THAT is a work of art
Sadly I can’t think of much else of late. We’re in a fallow period TV and movie-wise
Very little of interest in the past few years. I think Covid really buggered up movies - nobody knows what to make to get people back into cinemas.
Independent film is really screwed. To get funding you now need one of a handful of stars. Who want money that the sales estimates used to fund the movie don't justify.
That does seem to be the case. Just done a bit of research. It’s bad out there
I’m not sure cinemas are coming back as we know them. Technology means the big movies of the future might be one-off masterpieces made by loners or a few people manipulating images
It could be a new golden age - and people will gather ad hoc to share the experience. Just not in multiplex cinemas
Not quite the same as being there, but I think we need to have live streaming of big concerts in cinemas. Once the tickets for the concerts were sold, they should have sold tickets to screenings. Maybe live, maybe say the next day. Oasis would have rammed local cinemas.
Doesn't even have to be really big artists. Anyone that has a great live reputation.
In the coming world, humans that can perform well, live, are going to be supremely over-rewarded. This applies in all fields - music, dance, sport, theatre. It means the beautiful and/or charismatic will do even better than they do already
Those that work at a distance, removed, behind screens, oh dear
It is grossly unfair. But I don’t see any other outcome
AckSHUallY I’ve just watched the end of “Tank” and @Theuniondivvie has a point. It does get unnecessarily surreal and sub-Apocalypse Now as it meanders to a conclusion
Shame
Still a nice solid war movie for the first 70 minutes. What the F was the director thinking with that denouement?
I love a bit of hallucinatory war Dada but that just didn’t quite work
It reminds me that the last really great memorable movie I’ve seen is the Zone of Interest. THAT is a work of art
Sadly I can’t think of much else of late. We’re in a fallow period TV and movie-wise
Very little of interest in the past few years. I think Covid really buggered up movies - nobody knows what to make to get people back into cinemas.
Independent film is really screwed. To get funding you now need one of a handful of stars. Who want money that the sales estimates used to fund the movie don't justify.
That does seem to be the case. Just done a bit of research. It’s bad out there
I’m not sure cinemas are coming back as we know them. Technology means the big movies of the future might be one-off masterpieces made by loners or a few people manipulating images
It could be a new golden age - and people will gather ad hoc to share the experience. Just not in multiplex cinemas
Not quite the same as being there, but I think we need to have live streaming of big concerts in cinemas. Once the tickets for the concerts were sold, they should have sold tickets to screenings. Maybe live, maybe say the next day. Oasis would have rammed local cinemas.
Doesn't even have to be really big artists. Anyone that has a great live reputation.
AckSHUallY I’ve just watched the end of “Tank” and @Theuniondivvie has a point. It does get unnecessarily surreal and sub-Apocalypse Now as it meanders to a conclusion
Shame
Still a nice solid war movie for the first 70 minutes. What the F was the director thinking with that denouement?
I love a bit of hallucinatory war Dada but that just didn’t quite work
It reminds me that the last really great memorable movie I’ve seen is the Zone of Interest. THAT is a work of art
Sadly I can’t think of much else of late. We’re in a fallow period TV and movie-wise
Very little of interest in the past few years. I think Covid really buggered up movies - nobody knows what to make to get people back into cinemas.
Independent film is really screwed. To get funding you now need one of a handful of stars. Who want money that the sales estimates used to fund the movie don't justify.
That does seem to be the case. Just done a bit of research. It’s bad out there
I’m not sure cinemas are coming back as we know them. Technology means the big movies of the future might be one-off masterpieces made by loners or a few people manipulating images
It could be a new golden age - and people will gather ad hoc to share the experience. Just not in multiplex cinemas
Not quite the same as being there, but I think we need to have live streaming of big concerts in cinemas. Once the tickets for the concerts were sold, they should have sold tickets to screenings. Maybe live, maybe say the next day. Oasis would have rammed local cinemas.
Doesn't even have to be really big artists. Anyone that has a great live reputation.
In the coming world, humans that can perform well, live, are going to be supremely over-rewarded. This applies in all fields - music, dance, sport, theatre. It means the beautiful and/or charismatic will do even better than they do already
Those that work at a distance, removed, behind screens, oh dear
It is grossly unfair. But I don’t see any other outcome
Problem is most of us work at a distance, removed or behind screens now, so a UBI funded by a robot tax will likely be inevitable if the only well paid full time work goes to a few exceptional performers
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
We have discussed at length the challenges that pubs face with young people not drinking and going out as much. I reckon a reduction in social media use (which is already happening) can only be a good thing.
Silly internet image aside, this seems over optimistic for Putin Romance of the Three Kingdoms (2026 edition) Reminds me a bit of a scene in the show Rome when the triumvirs were assigning territiory, with Lepidus a complete afterthought.
That almost exactly how the British partitioned India.
That was done when the British were leaving India. The rest of the world beyond China, the US and Russia has no interest being divided amongst them and in terms of actual territorial acquisition (rather than just economic leverage) even Xi isn't much interested beyond Taiwan, unlike Trump and Putin
I think I do agree with @BatteryCorrectHorse on the chances of a Labour victory having increased (or at least a Labour led government - I’m not really seeing a path to a majority for anyone right now).
Things are very uncertain right now, so it’s very difficult to see how things will look at the time of the next GE (we could conceivably have different Labour/Tory/Lib Dem leaders, for instance). What I would say, is the Jenrick saga makes it much less likely that there will be any kind of arrangement or compact between the Tories and Reform before the next GE, which in turn means that the chances of a divided right have increased, which in turn increases the chance of vote splitting. That helps Labour, albeit that they are also experiencing their own vote splitting with the Greens.
CHB said the odds of a Labour win have increased. Which means he thinks it's become less not more likely. Fwiw the actual market has barely moved. Labour are about 3.8. Pass on that but I have (quite avidly) laid Reform at 1.98.
Can anyone explain how Jenricks defection unites the right? I would have thought it makes arrangements between Reform and the Conservatives more difficult. Its personal. Badenoch will not work with Jenrick.
Hopefully the Tories will now clock that they have to fight Reform.
That is exactly it. Good post.
It will now dawn in the Conservative Party, you cannot beat Reform by photocopying their policies, but explaining why your own policies are different.
Ironically it’s Farage who yesterday has told the Conservative Party exactly how to take him on and better him.
“you know” [you know it’s Farage when it’s starts with you know and then a pause] “we will not be a Tory party 2.0 because we have a completely different set of policies and people [who join] have to say they admit that net zero, mass migration, North Sea taxes and many other things were a terrible mistake.
Okay. Simples. Defending immigration over the last 100 years, and the successful racially integrated country we have become is one policy differential the Conservatives can hammer Farage with. The success of the Conservatives Net Zero initiatives to combat climate change is another. Under the Conservatives the UK lead the world on combatting climate change. Some to reel off - UK first advanced economy in the world to pass a net zero target. Reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 25% since 2010. Commitment to phasing out unabated coal power by 2025.
The trouble is, Kemi is terminally online and supping from the alt-right meme goblet. That means she gets a constant stream of extremely anti-net zero American messaging and probably thinks the British public is united in dismissing climate change as a hoax.
The polling reality is that the fight against global warming is one of the topics Brits are most united in supporting. But her social feed isn’t going to be telling her that.
There is a lot of truth in your post. Following Farage down the “Climate Change not a priority” hole is huge policy error from Kemi right now.
But party policy it’s not just one person with one feed in reality is it. It’s a whole team of policy wonks, close colleagues, business managers etc, and what extent they all draw from the same Mad, US Neo Con feed so they are an echo chamber, and not robust discussion group.
Conservative Party policy under Badenoch now needs to come under the spotlight. Is Badenoch Policy platform actually shrinking the parties appeal across the electorate, and puts it in direct fight with Reform for the same group of “not enough to win” voters?
If there isn’t policy clarity by the time of the campaign, it will be as disastrous as the one under Sunak. You can’t just put meat on the bones at the last moment, you need to be winning voters back long before that, with the aroma of beef rib roasting in your oven.
She does have this problem now of looking like the more moderate alternative to Honest Bob and his friends, and handling yesterday's issues with a certain amount of wittier, airier aplomb than him, but still with her track record of being friendly with people like Vance, contradicting this potential image.
She needs to decide what horse to ride, which sounds like a Beatles song.
As TSE was quick to point out in his breaking news header, Badenoch owes an amount of her getting top job from being the Bobby Blocker, so this instantly changes things in many ways for her. a lot of Conservative voices share the same view TSE had - like George Osbornes comments, with the immediate feeling this is not necessarily such a great thing for the Conservatives.
Isn’t the point of politics to build broad tent with everybody pissing out? At the moment because Bobby was such a marmite figure, within the Conservative Party and outside, we have Labour and Lib Dem’s joining in on the Con campaign to discredit him. But he is top of the Conservative home members poll. He was final 2 in the last leadership election. If Bobbys attacks on Badenoch’s Conservatives are punchy and effective, and the defections increase, it will turn round to ask was losing Bobby down to policy, or Badenoch’s Psychological Immaturity and personality type?
On the Eve of Badenoch telling her business team to let it be known she has sacked him, Bobby and Kemi had a chat - of course there were attempts to keep him. How long did Badenoch’s call with Jenrick this week urging him to stay actually last, before she snapped and said, okay, fuck off then - and hung up on him?
No idea where you sourced your last paragraph but here is the BBC report
Are you still insisting there was no call from Kemi to Bobby to try and keep him in the tent?
There were talks and he insisted he was staying and he simply lied to Badenoch and his colleagues
He was at the shadow cabinet meeting the day before notwithstanding he was about to jump ship
I read all your advice to Kemi but I do not expect she will sees it as you do
She should see it as I do. These are not just the centre ground differentials to Farage’s ruinous madness, that the voters will turn to as alternative to Labours failed term in office, these are traditional Conservative Party centre ground differentials to Farages ruinous madness.
Yesterday Jenrick said Britain is Broken. Kemi has no choice now but come out and state that Britain is not Broken. Labour have only been in power 17 months! The Conservatives must now stand up to Farage, explain to voters they are different, and why Farage policies are wrong and ruinous. Explain the difference. We can’t just keep photocopying Farage’s policies and allow him to do all leading of the right without confrontation.
As for knowing Jenrick was lying, Where’s the “smoking gun” found on the photocopier that killed Bobby J’s Conservative membership? What if it was a sting? a false flag so faked it can’t be faxed to a newsroom?
Badenoch will be her own person and will make her own decisions freed of Jenrick
I have no idea how closely you follow these things, but her publishing Jenrick's resignation speech even before he got to deliver it is sufficient to prove she was in possesion of it
Indeed it is not disputed it was leaked to her, and that Jenrick had been in discussions with Farage since September and lied and lied whenever he was challenged
20 minutes before Farage announced the defection he openly said live on Sky he had not made up his mind
Farage and Jenrick are a perfect fit, and will be found out over the next 3 years
What was that fable about the frog and the scorpion again?
Nigel is taking Bobby J across the river on his back. "Now you won't challenge me as Prime Minister in waiting will you Bobby J.?" And Bobby replies...
Tom Harwood has an interesting article in which he says Jenrick sees himself as the Stephen Harper to Farage's Preston Manning based on the parallel of the Canadian Reform Party and CPC from 1993-2015 https://tomharwood.substack.com/p/a-very-canadian-defection
AckSHUallY I’ve just watched the end of “Tank” and @Theuniondivvie has a point. It does get unnecessarily surreal and sub-Apocalypse Now as it meanders to a conclusion
Shame
Still a nice solid war movie for the first 70 minutes. What the F was the director thinking with that denouement?
I love a bit of hallucinatory war Dada but that just didn’t quite work
It reminds me that the last really great memorable movie I’ve seen is the Zone of Interest. THAT is a work of art
Sadly I can’t think of much else of late. We’re in a fallow period TV and movie-wise
Very little of interest in the past few years. I think Covid really buggered up movies - nobody knows what to make to get people back into cinemas.
Independent film is really screwed. To get funding you now need one of a handful of stars. Who want money that the sales estimates used to fund the movie don't justify.
That does seem to be the case. Just done a bit of research. It’s bad out there
I’m not sure cinemas are coming back as we know them. Technology means the big movies of the future might be one-off masterpieces made by loners or a few people manipulating images
It could be a new golden age - and people will gather ad hoc to share the experience. Just not in multiplex cinemas
Not quite the same as being there, but I think we need to have live streaming of big concerts in cinemas. Once the tickets for the concerts were sold, they should have sold tickets to screenings. Maybe live, maybe say the next day. Oasis would have rammed local cinemas.
Doesn't even have to be really big artists. Anyone that has a great live reputation.
I'm pretty sure I've seen adverts for ballet live at Vue cinemas. Not gone though.
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
I think I do agree with @BatteryCorrectHorse on the chances of a Labour victory having increased (or at least a Labour led government - I’m not really seeing a path to a majority for anyone right now).
Things are very uncertain right now, so it’s very difficult to see how things will look at the time of the next GE (we could conceivably have different Labour/Tory/Lib Dem leaders, for instance). What I would say, is the Jenrick saga makes it much less likely that there will be any kind of arrangement or compact between the Tories and Reform before the next GE, which in turn means that the chances of a divided right have increased, which in turn increases the chance of vote splitting. That helps Labour, albeit that they are also experiencing their own vote splitting with the Greens.
CHB said the odds of a Labour win have increased. Which means he thinks it's become less not more likely. Fwiw the actual market has barely moved. Labour are about 3.8. Pass on that but I have (quite avidly) laid Reform at 1.98.
AckSHUallY I’ve just watched the end of “Tank” and @Theuniondivvie has a point. It does get unnecessarily surreal and sub-Apocalypse Now as it meanders to a conclusion
Shame
Still a nice solid war movie for the first 70 minutes. What the F was the director thinking with that denouement?
I love a bit of hallucinatory war Dada but that just didn’t quite work
It reminds me that the last really great memorable movie I’ve seen is the Zone of Interest. THAT is a work of art
Sadly I can’t think of much else of late. We’re in a fallow period TV and movie-wise
Very little of interest in the past few years. I think Covid really buggered up movies - nobody knows what to make to get people back into cinemas.
Independent film is really screwed. To get funding you now need one of a handful of stars. Who want money that the sales estimates used to fund the movie don't justify.
That does seem to be the case. Just done a bit of research. It’s bad out there
I’m not sure cinemas are coming back as we know them. Technology means the big movies of the future might be one-off masterpieces made by loners or a few people manipulating images
It could be a new golden age - and people will gather ad hoc to share the experience. Just not in multiplex cinemas
Not quite the same as being there, but I think we need to have live streaming of big concerts in cinemas. Once the tickets for the concerts were sold, they should have sold tickets to screenings. Maybe live, maybe say the next day. Oasis would have rammed local cinemas.
Doesn't even have to be really big artists. Anyone that has a great live reputation.
I'm pretty sure I've seen adverts for ballet live at Vue cinemas. Not gone though.
It's never live but Ballet / Opera / Theatre are premium tickets at cinemas. Heck the 2 night cinema run is the way that the smaller west end theatres can afford to pay the mega star appearing in their production.
I think I do agree with @BatteryCorrectHorse on the chances of a Labour victory having increased (or at least a Labour led government - I’m not really seeing a path to a majority for anyone right now).
Things are very uncertain right now, so it’s very difficult to see how things will look at the time of the next GE (we could conceivably have different Labour/Tory/Lib Dem leaders, for instance). What I would say, is the Jenrick saga makes it much less likely that there will be any kind of arrangement or compact between the Tories and Reform before the next GE, which in turn means that the chances of a divided right have increased, which in turn increases the chance of vote splitting. That helps Labour, albeit that they are also experiencing their own vote splitting with the Greens.
Con-Ref arrangement before the GE, probably not; but afterwards is a different barrel of fish.
Craig Guildford to be allowed to retire early on full pension.
There needs to be a way of clawing back these crazy public-sector pensions from those who resign or are fired in disgrace.
Are private sector pensions clawed back from those fired in disgrace?
Yes, remuneration policies across the private sector include pension contribution and bonus clawbacks for gross misconduct. It wasn't very common but after the 2008 crash and subsequent bailouts they've become pretty standard for senior roles. My contract includes a pretty big percentage clawback clause in the event of gross misconduct.
The bar for 'gross misconduct' is very high: I doubt an employment tribunal would regard Guilford's stupidity as clearing it.
Lying to parliament would probably clear the bar. Everything before that maybe not though.
Yes. Indeed I think he lied twice
Also, kowtowing to Islamist mosques threatening to kill Jewish football fans. A supposedly neutral and very important officer of the law, actually acting in favour of naked sectarian interests
He should be up in front of the beak, not retiring on full pension
We are blindly marching towards the Ulsterisation of the UK. It is a disastrous path to take
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
It's a ludicrous policy..💩 which seems to have a very high level of support on this forum..🥴 But then so did face masks and social distancing..
How? Reform won't stop cannibalising the Tories as much as they can as it increases their power, so the only option would either be for the Tories to capitulate and become the junior partners despite having 10x the MPs, or for the Tories to rise above Reform in the polls somehow and hope that Farage will agree to be the junior - but he might just decide not to and so undercut them anyway.
Top of the in-tray for the cleaning up of the mess post-Trump, if that ever happens, must be the pardon thing:
"President Trump was in a merciful mood this week, quietly handing out a raft of pardons."
NY Times
Sam Bankman-Fried is desperate for a pardon, but may lack the funds necessary to procure one, sympathetic though Trump is to crypto-fraudsters. I hope in this one case Trump can hold out.
I’ve just checked *google* for the best movies of 2024-25. Jesus it’s dire. Mediocre movies are praised because there’s nothing else
What’s the opposite of a Golden Age? We’re in it
Could just be we're all getting older, but it didn't feel like a strong period.
Nah, I’m an enthusiast by nature. There’s just nothing to get enthusiastic about. Right now
This will change soon as technology transforms movie and TV making, meaning every kid in a shed can bring their ideas to screen
Bit shit for Hollywood, could be great for punters
If I recall TRiE correctly, there are two or three problems for Hollywood films. Content-hungry streamers tempted away a lot of talent or even bought whole studios. Domination of IP-based sci-fi film series means there's not a lot left for the rest of us. And Hollywood is an expensive place to make films.
As for technology, there have been already been fan-made content of eg Dr Who in what look suspiciously like 5-second bursts which is the free-tier limit on one or other of the AI machines.
How? Reform won't stop cannibalising the Tories as much as they can as it increases their power, so the only option would either be for the Tories to capitulate and become the junior partners despite having 10x the MPs, or for the Tories to rise above Reform in the polls somehow and hope that Farage will agree to be the junior - but he might just decide not to and so undercut them anyway.
Yes, at the moment it is a race to the death, whichever of Reform or the Tories wins most seats at the next general election will likely end up reuniting them and the right eventually (with a few discontents in Reform going off to Advance or in the Tories to the LDs).
Unless we get PR of course in which case they could both remain separate forever and both still win over 100 to 200 seats and then come together post election to form governments if they wish
Why Scottish X accounts vanished after Iran’s internet shutdown
The sudden halt to criticism of the King, calls of ‘death to the Union’ and attacks on Westminster MPs may be the result of pro-independence bots going dark
On January 7, Jennifer Harris, a Scottish nationalist and regular poster on X, stopped tweeting. Two days later, Sophie, a “Scottish lass with a passion for travel” who “proudly” supports independence, also went offline, despite previously posting daily.
Why the sudden halt to their criticism of the King, calls of “death to the Union” and attacks on Westminster MPs? Because Iran cut itself off from the internet, sending Jennifer, Sophie and dozens of other Iranian bots dark.
This was the third time in eight months that Tehran’s apparent attempts to undermine British democracy with bots on X had been exposed.
After the Israeli bombing of Iran in June 2025, there was a 16-day silence from a network of 1,332 fake profiles linked to Iran, according to the Israeli cybersecurity company Cyabra. The bots had amassed an estimated 224 million views for posts promoting independence, “Brexit betrayal” and alleged bias by the BBC against Scotland.
In November, a new tool on X revealed the location of accounts, exposing Iranian links for many “Scottish nationalists” on the platform.
Top of the in-tray for the cleaning up of the mess post-Trump, if that ever happens, must be the pardon thing:
"President Trump was in a merciful mood this week, quietly handing out a raft of pardons."
NY Times
Sam Bankman-Fried is desperate for a pardon, but may lack the funds necessary to procure one, sympathetic though Trump is to crypto-fraudsters. I hope in this one case Trump can hold out.
Like the Ritz Trump's pardons are available to anyone who can pay the price.
How? Reform won't stop cannibalising the Tories as much as they can as it increases their power, so the only option would either be for the Tories to capitulate and become the junior partners despite having 10x the MPs, or for the Tories to rise above Reform in the polls somehow and hope that Farage will agree to be the junior - but he might just decide not to and so undercut them anyway.
Yes, at the moment it is a race to the death, whichever of Reform or the Tories wins most seats at the next general election will likely end up reuniting them and the right eventually (with a few discontents in Reform going off to Advance or in the Tories to the LDs).
Unless we get PR of course in which case they could both remain separate forever and both still win over 100 to 200 seats and then come together post election to form governments if they wish
It's not obvious to me that they will unite (I wouldn't say reunite, because much of Ref was never Tory). Mergers of parties don't seem common. They might, but there is no inevitability about it, and the differences - both political and personality - seem significant obstacles.
I think I do agree with @BatteryCorrectHorse on the chances of a Labour victory having increased (or at least a Labour led government - I’m not really seeing a path to a majority for anyone right now).
Things are very uncertain right now, so it’s very difficult to see how things will look at the time of the next GE (we could conceivably have different Labour/Tory/Lib Dem leaders, for instance). What I would say, is the Jenrick saga makes it much less likely that there will be any kind of arrangement or compact between the Tories and Reform before the next GE, which in turn means that the chances of a divided right have increased, which in turn increases the chance of vote splitting. That helps Labour, albeit that they are also experiencing their own vote splitting with the Greens.
Con-Ref arrangement before the GE, probably not; but afterwards is a different barrel of fish.
The trouble is that RefCon need at least an understanding before the election. Ideally an "oops, we're so careless, we left a copy of our target/hopeless seats list in a bin in St James's Park. You definitely shouldn't go and take it" sort. Kind of what Labour and the Lib Dems weren't doing in 2019 but pretty obviously were doing in 2024 and 1997.
Otherwise, there will be too many seats where they split the vote and let some version of Ghastly Lefty through.
The problem with organising a carveup is that "Reform get the Red Wall, Conservatives get everywhere else" from 2019 won't fly. A lot of Reform strength is in lower-rent shire counties; Linconshire, Kent, Essex and so on. The Conservatives can't afford to let those go... not yet, anyway. By way of context, RefCan made their big breakthrough in 1993; it took until 2003 for the new, feistier Conservative Party of Canada to reunite the Canadian right and 2011 for them to get a majority.
The wounds of a civil war always take time to heal, and often the changing of the generational guard.
I can see and understand the rationale of banning u16s from social media, but how is social media to be defined?
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
Bans from social media for under 16s would mean mandatory digital ID for the rest of us. Good luck with that. I'll use a VPN or failing that, emigrate, before I'll hand over my ID to Twitter, Facebook etc.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Just for some balance (because PB leans heavily towards this kind of view), the YouGov poll on this from December found 74% support for this policy (19% against). In Australia they just have a list of sites - there are obvious grey areas around things like gaming; whatsapp is not included.
Unfortunately I have a near total lack of faith in the UK to be sensible. The precedent set by the online safety act suggests a poorly worded, blanket, catch-all ban with far reaching consequences. Hence why half the internet is unusable from home now without a VPN due to sites like imgur cutting off UK access or hobbyist subreddits such as beer brewing being off limits to UK users without handing over ID etc. IIRC some gaming mod sites won't even let you download mods without handing over your papers unless you use a VPN now.
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
It's a ludicrous policy..💩 which seems to have a very high level of support on this forum..🥴 But then so did face masks and social distancing..
No it doesn't - and certainly not compared to the UK population. I agree that implementation is going to be basically impossible, but it does tell you where sentiment is heading when it comes to social media.
I’ve just checked *google* for the best movies of 2024-25. Jesus it’s dire. Mediocre movies are praised because there’s nothing else
What’s the opposite of a Golden Age? We’re in it
Could just be we're all getting older, but it didn't feel like a strong period.
Nah, I’m an enthusiast by nature. There’s just nothing to get enthusiastic about. Right now
This will change soon as technology transforms movie and TV making, meaning every kid in a shed can bring their ideas to screen
Bit shit for Hollywood, could be great for punters
If I recall TRiE correctly, there are two or three problems for Hollywood films. Content-hungry streamers tempted away a lot of talent or even bought whole studios. Domination of IP-based sci-fi film series means there's not a lot left for the rest of us. And Hollywood is an expensive place to make films.
As for technology, there have been already been fan-made content of eg Dr Who in what look suspiciously like 5-second bursts which is the free-tier limit on one or other of the AI machines.
The other thing is - if making films is expensive you stick to what you know works.
Which is why you end up with sequels and Sci-Fi movies, as they've worked in the past so are safe bets.
How? Reform won't stop cannibalising the Tories as much as they can as it increases their power, so the only option would either be for the Tories to capitulate and become the junior partners despite having 10x the MPs, or for the Tories to rise above Reform in the polls somehow and hope that Farage will agree to be the junior - but he might just decide not to and so undercut them anyway.
Yes, at the moment it is a race to the death, whichever of Reform or the Tories wins most seats at the next general election will likely end up reuniting them and the right eventually (with a few discontents in Reform going off to Advance or in the Tories to the LDs).
Unless we get PR of course in which case they could both remain separate forever and both still win over 100 to 200 seats and then come together post election to form governments if they wish
I am sitting back at present quietly very pleased with Kemi and her decisive action
There may be others who go, but for me that is fine because it means Kemi can design a new conservative offer without the deadwood of failed conservatives, largely Boris supporters, who ironically may well drag down Farage
It will be interesting to see how the polls evolve going forward and to the May elections, but Kemi is in a much safer position today then she was yesterday and Starmer is likely to be the one in the spotlight
I’ve just checked *google* for the best movies of 2024-25. Jesus it’s dire. Mediocre movies are praised because there’s nothing else
What’s the opposite of a Golden Age? We’re in it
Could just be we're all getting older, but it didn't feel like a strong period.
Nah, I’m an enthusiast by nature. There’s just nothing to get enthusiastic about. Right now
This will change soon as technology transforms movie and TV making, meaning every kid in a shed can bring their ideas to screen
Bit shit for Hollywood, could be great for punters
If I recall TRiE correctly, there are two or three problems for Hollywood films. Content-hungry streamers tempted away a lot of talent or even bought whole studios. Domination of IP-based sci-fi film series means there's not a lot left for the rest of us. And Hollywood is an expensive place to make films.
As for technology, there have been already been fan-made content of eg Dr Who in what look suspiciously like 5-second bursts which is the free-tier limit on one or other of the AI machines.
The other thing is - if making films is expensive you stick to what you know works.
Which is why you end up with sequels and Sci-Fi movies, as they've worked in the past so are safe bets.
One other factor, at least in this country, is going to the pictures is a lot less fun than it used to be if there is even one person eating smelly food or taking phone calls, especially as it competes with a high-res, large screen telly at home.
How? Reform won't stop cannibalising the Tories as much as they can as it increases their power, so the only option would either be for the Tories to capitulate and become the junior partners despite having 10x the MPs, or for the Tories to rise above Reform in the polls somehow and hope that Farage will agree to be the junior - but he might just decide not to and so undercut them anyway.
Yes, at the moment it is a race to the death, whichever of Reform or the Tories wins most seats at the next general election will likely end up reuniting them and the right eventually (with a few discontents in Reform going off to Advance or in the Tories to the LDs).
Unless we get PR of course in which case they could both remain separate forever and both still win over 100 to 200 seats and then come together post election to form governments if they wish
I am sitting back at present quietly very pleased with Kemi and her decisive action
There may be others who go, but for me that is fine because it means Kemi can design a new conservative offer without the deadwood of failed conservatives, largely Boris supporters, who ironically may well drag down Farage
It will be interesting to see how the polls evolve going forward and to the May elections, but Kemi is in a much safer position today then she was yesterday and Starmer is likely to be the one in the spotlight
Difficult now to see how she does not contest the 2028/9 GE as leader.
I bet there's a few glasses being downed in the Badenoch household this friday evening.
I was in the hot-desking hub earlier this week and someone was talking to ChatGPT at lunch.
Human: "How many t's in ballet?" ChatGPT: "There are no t's in ballet." Human: "Are you certain?" ChatGPT: Yes mate. Absolutely certain. No t's in ballet." Human: "Can you spell ballet?" ChatGPT: "Sure thing. B-A-L-L-E-T, there are no t's in ballet." Onlookers:
I think the reputation of "AI" is being trashed, because people have claimed that it is doing things it isn't doing and are trying to get it to do things out isn't capable of doing. The damage to its reputation might become so severe that it acts as a block for AI being used for things where it would help.
Over promise and under deliver is a story we've seen so many times before.
How? Reform won't stop cannibalising the Tories as much as they can as it increases their power, so the only option would either be for the Tories to capitulate and become the junior partners despite having 10x the MPs, or for the Tories to rise above Reform in the polls somehow and hope that Farage will agree to be the junior - but he might just decide not to and so undercut them anyway.
Yes, at the moment it is a race to the death, whichever of Reform or the Tories wins most seats at the next general election will likely end up reuniting them and the right eventually (with a few discontents in Reform going off to Advance or in the Tories to the LDs).
Unless we get PR of course in which case they could both remain separate forever and both still win over 100 to 200 seats and then come together post election to form governments if they wish
I am sitting back at present quietly very pleased with Kemi and her decisive action
There may be others who go, but for me that is fine because it means Kemi can design a new conservative offer without the deadwood of failed conservatives, largely Boris supporters, who ironically may well drag down Farage
It will be interesting to see how the polls evolve going forward and to the May elections, but Kemi is in a much safer position today then she was yesterday and Starmer is likely to be the one in the spotlight
Difficult now to see how she does not contest the 2028/9 GE as leader.
I bet there's a few glasses being downed in the Badenoch household this friday evening.
Pretty easy, I'd have thought.
One of the factors keeping her in place was the 'if we get rid of KB, the party membership might vote for Jenrick' thing. For which Our Esteemed Eagles has a colourful metaphor. That risk gone now, and that probably makes Badenoch more vulnerable in the medium term.
Somebody is going to fill that "top National Populist" niche in the Conservative party. Katy Lam, maybe? Once it is clear who that is, and how electable they are, we'll see.
(Talking of which, sort of, Patrick Maguire had a plausible take on yesterday in today's Times. In that version of events, Farage was preparing a press conference on the postponed/cancelled local elections for yesterday afternoon. Jenirck was certainly thinking of defecting, but not yet. KB certainly got ahead of events, but possibly by precipitating something that wouldn't have happened otherwise. A bit like "Man Overboard" in Yes, Prime Minister, with KB as Jim Hacker.)
Captain Mark Kelly @CaptMarkKelly It’s easy to watch the news and feel overwhelmed or even helpless at everything going on. I need you to fight that feeling.
I’m an optimist. You have to be when you strap yourself to a rocket for a living. But there’s real reason to be hopeful this year and l’ll tell you why.
Captain Mark Kelly @CaptMarkKelly President Trump is scared. He’s scared because he knows, just like all of us do, that his free rein to do whatever he wants could end this year.
Captain Mark Kelly @CaptMarkKelly · Jan 15 Congress is supposed to hold the executive in check, but Trump acts like a wanna-be authoritarian and gets away with it because Washington Republicans chose to roll over to protect their jobs. It’s time to put them out of a job, and that’s what 2026 is all about.
I was in the hot-desking hub earlier this week and someone was talking to ChatGPT at lunch.
Human: "How many t's in ballet?" ChatGPT: "There are no t's in ballet." Human: "Are you certain?" ChatGPT: Yes mate. Absolutely certain. No t's in ballet." Human: "Can you spell ballet?" ChatGPT: "Sure thing. B-A-L-L-E-T, there are no t's in ballet." Onlookers:
I think the reputation of "AI" is being trashed, because people have claimed that it is doing things it isn't doing and are trying to get it to do things out isn't capable of doing. The damage to its reputation might become so severe that it acts as a block for AI being used for things where it would help.
Over promise and under deliver is a story we've seen so many times before.
Interesting that there's a big backlash by Mail readers against Trump over his Greenland comments, even with an absurd puff piece on Trump right above. A surprising amount of upticks even for posts criticising Farage for his links with Trump, too.
Farage's tendency to defer to Trump over the E.U. could come back to create difficulties for him.
How? Reform won't stop cannibalising the Tories as much as they can as it increases their power, so the only option would either be for the Tories to capitulate and become the junior partners despite having 10x the MPs, or for the Tories to rise above Reform in the polls somehow and hope that Farage will agree to be the junior - but he might just decide not to and so undercut them anyway.
Yes, at the moment it is a race to the death, whichever of Reform or the Tories wins most seats at the next general election will likely end up reuniting them and the right eventually (with a few discontents in Reform going off to Advance or in the Tories to the LDs).
Unless we get PR of course in which case they could both remain separate forever and both still win over 100 to 200 seats and then come together post election to form governments if they wish
I am sitting back at present quietly very pleased with Kemi and her decisive action
There may be others who go, but for me that is fine because it means Kemi can design a new conservative offer without the deadwood of failed conservatives, largely Boris supporters, who ironically may well drag down Farage
It will be interesting to see how the polls evolve going forward and to the May elections, but Kemi is in a much safer position today then she was yesterday and Starmer is likely to be the one in the spotlight
Well, that's a typically positive viewpoint.
As a non-Conservative, I'm much less convinced. Her actions were overly theatrical and a sense of watching Jenrick leave in sorrow rather than anger might have isolated him further. Let's not forget he got a substantial vote among the Conservative membership in 2024 and there's a hint from early polling some Conservative voters are less than happy.
The newspaper front pages were full of Jenrick claiming the Conservatives had "failed" and there remains a strong sense BOTH Labour and Conservative represent the failed policies of the past.
I will be interested in what you describe as a "new conservative offer" but the times have changed and what might have worked in the mid-1970s may not play so well in the mid-2020s. There will need to be some serious detail on prospective welfare cuts and tax cuts and it will need to make sense fiscally.
What I think might happen to the Conservatives is what happened to the SDP post the merger in 1989 -the party itself failed but the ideas didn't and they ultimately infiltrated and took over BOTH Labour and the Conservatives.
Captain Mark Kelly @CaptMarkKelly It’s easy to watch the news and feel overwhelmed or even helpless at everything going on. I need you to fight that feeling.
I’m an optimist. You have to be when you strap yourself to a rocket for a living. But there’s real reason to be hopeful this year and l’ll tell you why.
Captain Mark Kelly @CaptMarkKelly President Trump is scared. He’s scared because he knows, just like all of us do, that his free rein to do whatever he wants could end this year.
Captain Mark Kelly @CaptMarkKelly · Jan 15 Congress is supposed to hold the executive in check, but Trump acts like a wanna-be authoritarian and gets away with it because Washington Republicans chose to roll over to protect their jobs. It’s time to put them out of a job, and that’s what 2026 is all about.
If the mood in 2028 is "someone to end the long national nightmare", and that mood is permitted to be reflected in the voting, the USA could do a lot worse.
Interesting that there's a big backlash by Mail readers against Trump over his Greenland comments, even with an absurd puff piece on Trump right above. A surprising amount of upticks even for posts criticising Farage for his links with Trump, too.
I'd like to think even the most America loving 'disruptive' online rightist would at the least hesitate over the Greenland stuff, which has come out of nowhere and is hard to justify when the USA can put as many troops there as it likes, but love of Trump and upsetting the libs seems to eclipse all in the end - the GOP public are skeptical but they'll come around the more Trump persists in it, already I've been seeing more supportive comments on twitter ramping up.
Felt sick reading this. The idea that Jenrick might actually matter is nauseating frankly.
Jenrick does not simply believe immigration was too high, but that the “Boriswave” of new arrivals into the country since 2019 amounts to a national scandal, which has become an emergency. He does not believe the “wave” should be stopped – he believes it must be reversed or the country will not recover. He also believes the small boats issue will only be tackled by force. According to those close to Jenrick, he fears the real test for the next government could come in tragedy, should a woman or child die at sea after being turned back trying to reach Britain, sparking outrage at home and abroad. This, he believes, will be the government’s “Thatcher moment” when only the assertion of government authority will suffice, much as – in his view – the Tory heroine saw off the hunger strikers, miners and Argentines.
Yet, doomed or not, Nigel Farage has found an ideological foil — one who, like JD Vance, has his eye on something more than mere instinctive populism.
How? Reform won't stop cannibalising the Tories as much as they can as it increases their power, so the only option would either be for the Tories to capitulate and become the junior partners despite having 10x the MPs, or for the Tories to rise above Reform in the polls somehow and hope that Farage will agree to be the junior - but he might just decide not to and so undercut them anyway.
Yes, at the moment it is a race to the death, whichever of Reform or the Tories wins most seats at the next general election will likely end up reuniting them and the right eventually (with a few discontents in Reform going off to Advance or in the Tories to the LDs).
Unless we get PR of course in which case they could both remain separate forever and both still win over 100 to 200 seats and then come together post election to form governments if they wish
It's not obvious to me that they will unite (I wouldn't say reunite, because much of Ref was never Tory). Mergers of parties don't seem common. They might, but there is no inevitability about it, and the differences - both political and personality - seem significant obstacles.
Bobajob's new slogan is "Unite the Right", if I have it correctly.
Captain Mark Kelly @CaptMarkKelly It’s easy to watch the news and feel overwhelmed or even helpless at everything going on. I need you to fight that feeling.
I’m an optimist. You have to be when you strap yourself to a rocket for a living. But there’s real reason to be hopeful this year and l’ll tell you why.
Captain Mark Kelly @CaptMarkKelly President Trump is scared. He’s scared because he knows, just like all of us do, that his free rein to do whatever he wants could end this year.
Captain Mark Kelly @CaptMarkKelly · Jan 15 Congress is supposed to hold the executive in check, but Trump acts like a wanna-be authoritarian and gets away with it because Washington Republicans chose to roll over to protect their jobs. It’s time to put them out of a job, and that’s what 2026 is all about.
Obviously Naval Aviators should be nowhere near the reigns of power, but is a this a 2028 POTUS run brewing? He is the anti-Trump in every single possible way.
Comments
Like death in paradise. Even bought a bucket get like his for my vacation
I find it notable that advocating further legislation is not main goal of those opposed to the judgement. Why is that?
1) Anyone publishing text/images is a publisher of the material and completely liable for its content.
2) Unless they are publishing comments, in strict time order. Deletion of comments would be allowed.
Romance of the Three Kingdoms (2026 edition)
Reminds me a bit of a scene in the show Rome when the triumvirs were assigning territiory, with Lepidus a complete afterthought.
Labour shouldn't complain if people can't see the point in voting.
The only significant advanced democracies which afaics is missing are Australia and Taiwan. With a few more on the periphery. The USA participates but not as a Member or Associate.
A map, with Japan not yet included.
I'm 50 and in a public sector pension. I still nèed to work another 17 years before I can retire on full pension (or as full as it will get). If I rwtired in disgrace tomorrow I would rightfully retain what pension I had earned, but couldn't start drawing it for years,and even when I did it wouldn't be a full pension because it would be short of 17 years of contributions.
It looks to me like he is being rewarded for failure. But perhaps my inference of the details is not correct.
But then again....
McAngus: (stands) My Lord, I’m honoured. All I ask for is a scrap of land. Grant me fair Selkirk, and the noble sire of Roxburgh.
Edmund: (stands) What?!
Harry: Very well. By the power invested in me–
Edmund: Er, excuse me… Erm, I’m sorry to dip my little fly in your ointment, but, er, those lands do, in fact, belong to me.
Harry: (as if to say `So?’) Yes?
Edmund: Well, so, perhaps, perhaps he’d like to choose somewhere else.
Harry: McAngus?
McAngus: No, no; I’ll have Roxburgh and Selkirk.
Edmund: But that leaves me with Peebles!
McAngus: Oh, aye! and Peebles.
That's one to remember.
It's one thing to give him his already earned pension. It's another thing altogether to effectively bung him another five or six years of pension contributions.
For the policy to meet its objectives, mustn’t we ban children from any online chat or messaging service, and any use of group messaging at all?
And how can any of it be effectively enforced?
The US has moved from being a necessary friend (e.g. on Ukraine) to being an adversary. Pretending that trade deals are the most important thing right now is to be deluded.
Let's stop caving in to the bully.
As to your second point, the generally accepted wisdom in pro trans spaces is that the whole thing could be cleared up with a 'single sentence' amendment to the existing 2010 EA to restore Parliamentary intent. I think it's a bit more complicated than that, mainly because not all trans people have gender recognition certificates and, bizarrely, recent court rulings have made it so you don't have to have surgery to have a GRC, which complicates things further. Which is why I think more comprehensive clarification through new legislation is required.
Anyone with two eyes can see that he made up evidence and lied about it, including to Parliament.
Public trust in “the system” quickly evaporates when there isn’t serious punishment for obvious malfeasance in public office.
Also, kowtowing to Islamist mosques threatening to kill
Jewish football fans. A supposedly neutral and very important officer of the law, actually acting in favour of naked sectarian interests
He should be up in front of the beak, not retiring on full pension
We are blindly marching towards the Ulsterisation of the UK. It is a disastrous path to take
And, of course, the same standards should apply to politicians who lie.
Independent film is really screwed. To get funding you now need one of a handful of stars. Who want money that the sales estimates used to fund the movie don't justify.
Things are very uncertain right now, so it’s very difficult to see how things will look at the time of the next GE (we could conceivably have different Labour/Tory/Lib Dem leaders, for instance). What I would say, is the Jenrick saga makes it much less likely that there will be any kind of arrangement or compact between the Tories and Reform before the next GE, which in turn means that the chances of a divided right have increased, which in turn increases the chance of vote splitting. That helps Labour, albeit that they are also experiencing their own vote splitting with the Greens.
I'm torn on this one - it encourages place holders to just stay on blocking career advancement for younger staff but it keeps experience and knowledge and above all contacts within the organisation.
That alone is a stonking great breach of the employer-employee relationship.
To my jaundiced eye the outcome looks like a classic police "retire before being disciplined" effort.
Perhaps his post-retirement career will be lawyerly
It's a thought...
And we can kick off the new term with a nice fat Like for that one.
I’m not sure cinemas are coming back as we know them. Technology means the big movies of the future might be one-off masterpieces made by loners or a few people manipulating images
It could be a new golden age - and people will gather ad hoc to share the experience. Just not in multiplex cinemas
Why does [a Guernseyman] smile when there's a red sky at morning?
Because he thinks Jersey's on fire!
(Runs for cover)
It's also a political nightmare so I can see why the judge doesn't want to deal with it...
The judge had adjourned the case to Jan 2026, but that hearing has now been adjourned till May 2026
Still not convinced that Farage’s recruits this week have done anything to help his cause, in fact they’ve potentially started to toxify his brand to the benefit of the remaining Tories.
I expect they’re still going to have a very bad May. They’re far from having been forgiven yet, and Badenoch, while growing into the role, is far from being seen as an election winning leader.
Doesn't even have to be really big artists. Anyone that has a great live reputation.
And as for gigs? The main competitor would be the festivals that are starting to dump their back catalogue on YouTube to sell tickets to next year’s festival.
And that's before, to your point, we consider what social media is defined as.
How many of you would be happy to hand over a copy of your ID to the admins here before posting on PB?
Once again the state dresses up the march towards a draconian "papers please" society in the wrapping paper of "protecting the kids". I have two words for to say to that, and the second one is "off".
Those that work at a distance, removed, behind screens, oh dear
It is grossly unfair. But I don’t see any other outcome
https://www.rbo.org.uk/tickets-and-events/live-in-cinemas-la-traviata-details
Siegfried in March I think.
We have discussed at length the challenges that pubs face with young people not drinking and going out as much. I reckon a reduction in social media use (which is already happening) can only be a good thing.
https://tomharwood.substack.com/p/a-very-canadian-defection
https://www.gbnews.com/opinion/robert-jenrick-reform-defection-jacob-rees-mogg
Like I say. A march towards a papers please society dressed up in hysterical "won't someone please think of the children" language despite the fact the children know very well how to circumvent these bans.
In which case, sorry CHB but we disagree.
"President Trump was in a merciful mood this week, quietly handing out a raft of pardons."
NY Times
As for technology, there have been already been fan-made content of eg Dr Who in what look suspiciously like 5-second bursts which is the free-tier limit on one or other of the AI machines.
Unless we get PR of course in which case they could both remain separate forever and both still win over 100 to 200 seats and then come together post election to form governments if they wish
The sudden halt to criticism of the King, calls of ‘death to the Union’ and attacks on Westminster MPs may be the result of pro-independence bots going dark
On January 7, Jennifer Harris, a Scottish nationalist and regular poster on X, stopped tweeting. Two days later, Sophie, a “Scottish lass with a passion for travel” who “proudly” supports independence, also went offline, despite previously posting daily.
Why the sudden halt to their criticism of the King, calls of “death to the Union” and attacks on Westminster MPs? Because Iran cut itself off from the internet, sending Jennifer, Sophie and dozens of other Iranian bots dark.
This was the third time in eight months that Tehran’s apparent attempts to undermine British democracy with bots on X had been exposed.
After the Israeli bombing of Iran in June 2025, there was a 16-day silence from a network of 1,332 fake profiles linked to Iran, according to the Israeli cybersecurity company Cyabra. The bots had amassed an estimated 224 million views for posts promoting independence, “Brexit betrayal” and alleged bias by the BBC against Scotland.
In November, a new tool on X revealed the location of accounts, exposing Iranian links for many “Scottish nationalists” on the platform.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/technology-uk/article/scottish-x-accounts-iran-internet-shutdown-32jgblq05
Otherwise, there will be too many seats where they split the vote and let some version of Ghastly Lefty through.
The problem with organising a carveup is that "Reform get the Red Wall, Conservatives get everywhere else" from 2019 won't fly. A lot of Reform strength is in lower-rent shire counties; Linconshire, Kent, Essex and so on. The Conservatives can't afford to let those go... not yet, anyway. By way of context, RefCan made their big breakthrough in 1993; it took until 2003 for the new, feistier Conservative Party of Canada to reunite the Canadian right and 2011 for them to get a majority.
The wounds of a civil war always take time to heal, and often the changing of the generational guard.
Which is why you end up with sequels and Sci-Fi movies, as they've worked in the past so are safe bets.
There may be others who go, but for me that is fine because it means Kemi can design a new conservative offer without the deadwood of failed conservatives, largely Boris supporters, who ironically may well drag down Farage
It will be interesting to see how the polls evolve going forward and to the May elections, but Kemi is in a much safer position today then she was yesterday and Starmer is likely to be the one in the spotlight
I bet there's a few glasses being downed in the Badenoch household this friday evening.
Human: "How many t's in ballet?"
ChatGPT: "There are no t's in ballet."
Human: "Are you certain?"
ChatGPT: Yes mate. Absolutely certain. No t's in ballet."
Human: "Can you spell ballet?"
ChatGPT: "Sure thing. B-A-L-L-E-T, there are no t's in ballet."
Onlookers:
I think the reputation of "AI" is being trashed, because people have claimed that it is doing things it isn't doing and are trying to get it to do things out isn't capable of doing. The damage to its reputation might become so severe that it acts as a block for AI being used for things where it would help.
Over promise and under deliver is a story we've seen so many times before.
One of the factors keeping her in place was the 'if we get rid of KB, the party membership might vote for Jenrick' thing. For which Our Esteemed Eagles has a colourful metaphor. That risk gone now, and that probably makes Badenoch more vulnerable in the medium term.
Somebody is going to fill that "top National Populist" niche in the Conservative party. Katy Lam, maybe? Once it is clear who that is, and how electable they are, we'll see.
(Talking of which, sort of, Patrick Maguire had a plausible take on yesterday in today's Times. In that version of events, Farage was preparing a press conference on the postponed/cancelled local elections for yesterday afternoon. Jenirck was certainly thinking of defecting, but not yet. KB certainly got ahead of events, but possibly by precipitating something that wouldn't have happened otherwise. A bit like "Man Overboard" in Yes, Prime Minister, with KB as Jim Hacker.)
@CaptMarkKelly
It’s easy to watch the news and feel overwhelmed or even helpless at everything going on. I need you to fight that feeling.
I’m an optimist. You have to be when you strap yourself to a rocket for a living. But there’s real reason to be hopeful this year and l’ll tell you why.
Captain Mark Kelly
@CaptMarkKelly
President Trump is scared. He’s scared because he knows, just like all of us do, that his free rein to do whatever he wants could end this year.
Captain Mark Kelly
@CaptMarkKelly
·
Jan 15
Congress is supposed to hold the executive in check, but Trump acts like a wanna-be authoritarian and gets away with it because Washington Republicans chose to roll over to protect their jobs. It’s time to put them out of a job, and that’s what 2026 is all about.
https://x.com/CaptMarkKelly/status/2011876149308338623
Farage's tendency to defer to Trump over the E.U. could come back to create difficulties for him.
As a non-Conservative, I'm much less convinced. Her actions were overly theatrical and a sense of watching Jenrick leave in sorrow rather than anger might have isolated him further. Let's not forget he got a substantial vote among the Conservative membership in 2024 and there's a hint from early polling some Conservative voters are less than happy.
The newspaper front pages were full of Jenrick claiming the Conservatives had "failed" and there remains a strong sense BOTH Labour and Conservative represent the failed policies of the past.
I will be interested in what you describe as a "new conservative offer" but the times have changed and what might have worked in the mid-1970s may not play so well in the mid-2020s. There will need to be some serious detail on prospective welfare cuts and tax cuts and it will need to make sense fiscally.
What I think might happen to the Conservatives is what happened to the SDP post the merger in 1989 -the party itself failed but the ideas didn't and they ultimately infiltrated and took over BOTH Labour and the Conservatives.
Two big ifs, though.
Jenrick does not simply believe immigration was too high, but that the “Boriswave” of new arrivals into the country since 2019 amounts to a national scandal, which has become an emergency. He does not believe the “wave” should be stopped – he believes it must be reversed or the country will not recover. He also believes the small boats issue will only be tackled by force. According to those close to Jenrick, he fears the real test for the next government could come in tragedy, should a woman or child die at sea after being turned back trying to reach Britain, sparking outrage at home and abroad. This, he believes, will be the government’s “Thatcher moment” when only the assertion of government authority will suffice, much as – in his view – the Tory heroine saw off the hunger strikers, miners and Argentines.
Yet, doomed or not, Nigel Farage has found an ideological foil — one who, like JD Vance, has his eye on something more than mere instinctive populism.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2026/01/jenrickism-has-arrived
"Vietnamese spam network promoting Nigel Farage."
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/the-vietnamese-run-spam-network-promoting-nigel-farage/