Skip to content

Labour Leadership – The Betting Value’s With Rayner and Miliband – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,911
edited 8:09AM in General
Labour Leadership – The Betting Value’s With Rayner and Miliband – politicalbetting.com

In the absence of recent polling on the outcome of a contest as to who will  replace Starmer, this Survation polling from September is probably the best decent ball park guide. The sample is of Labour List readers who said they are Labour members (link here)

Read the full story here

«13

Comments

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,569
    First, like Burnham to fail.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,319
    A reminder that no Labour leader has been ousted by a vote since 1935, and it has never happened while the party is in office.

    Would be interesting to see Miliband win though. I know he's not flavour of the month on PB but he does at least have some imagination and an idea of what he wants to do, which appears to be more than Starmer or Sunak.

    Mind, we could have said the same of Massive or Lettuce Lady...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,319

    Imagine how smug you'd feel if you had tipped Ed Miliband at 100/1 succeed Starmer then also found yesterday you'd backed Wes Streeting to replace Starmer at 50/1 in 2022.

    Would you feel as smug as you are subtle?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 65,297
    Good analysis. Thanks @Wulfrun_Phil

    I wouldn't be surprised if Labour had their Liz Truss moment.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,319

    Good analysis. Thanks @Wulfrun_Phil

    I wouldn't be surprised if Labour had their Liz Truss moment.

    Bloody hell. You think they will pick...gulps...Richard Burgon?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 100,743
    Scott_xP said:

    Cruella at her RefUK press conference yesterday

    @implausibleblog.bsky.social‬

    Suella Braverman, "There is a very strong case to increase the powers of any immigration enforcement officers that we deploy"

    "At the moment they're hamstrung by human rights laws, by health and safety laws, by all sorts of needless and obstructive bureaucracy"

    @davidherdson.bsky.social‬

    It's also spectacularly bad politics by Reform here. Aping and lauding the worst excesses of the Trump administration - particularly at this moment - will go down very badly with the public.

    Farage usually has a good sense of when to downplay his Trumpism, which has a smaller target audience than Reform's current polling. Holding off on the message for a couple of weeks wouldnt have hurt, people will still support strong immigration enforcement then.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,905
    Suella is asked if she’ll call a by-election. Her answer? “Yes, I believe in them… but if I’m leaving a popular party for an unpopular one, no need. Besides, I apologized for the Tories’ failures, so no by-election.”

    Ladies & gents… I’m still trying to make sense of this. Weak. Afraid. Full stop.


    https://x.com/SlyForTheRight/status/2015923444228227263
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 100,743
    I'd admire Ed M is still in the hunt for being PM after nearly 20 years in politcs and losing a GE, but have his qualities improved in the last 10 years to make him a better prospect for them?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 65,297
    ydoethur said:

    Good analysis. Thanks @Wulfrun_Phil

    I wouldn't be surprised if Labour had their Liz Truss moment.

    Bloody hell. You think they will pick...gulps...Richard Burgon?
    Lol
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,569
    ydoethur said:

    Imagine how smug you'd feel if you had tipped Ed Miliband at 100/1 succeed Starmer then also found yesterday you'd backed Wes Streeting to replace Starmer at 50/1 in 2022.

    Would you feel as smug as you are subtle?
    His legendary modesty will prevent him answering that one.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,319

    Suella is asked if she’ll call a by-election. Her answer? “Yes, I believe in them… but if I’m leaving a popular party for an unpopular one, no need. Besides, I apologized for the Tories’ failures, so no by-election.”

    Ladies & gents… I’m still trying to make sense of this. Weak. Afraid. Full stop.


    https://x.com/SlyForTheRight/status/2015923444228227263

    Suella Braverman is a hypocrite who lacks even a smidgeon of integrity.

    I'm shocked.

    Shocked, I tell you.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,569

    Suella is asked if she’ll call a by-election. Her answer? “Yes, I believe in them… but if I’m leaving a popular party for an unpopular one, no need. Besides, I apologized for the Tories’ failures, so no by-election.”

    Ladies & gents… I’m still trying to make sense of this. Weak. Afraid. Full stop.


    https://x.com/SlyForTheRight/status/2015923444228227263

    Maybe that premature ejaculation of a press release had a point after all?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,319
    I sometimes think @Cyclefree is actually wrong about the police.

    As in, she's much too generous to them.

    If the officers in this case are not themselves banged up for perverting the course of justice, we might as well pack up the court system and go home.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gl0r0052po
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 2,146
    No Lammy? I hadn't cashed that bet in...
    Though I can get back on Ed M at longer odds than I cashed in still.

    For the Tory optimists out there Badenoch is available at up to 17 on Betfair to be next PM, which is longer odds than Shabana Mahmood. If you subscribed to the conspiracy that Reform is being funded to clear out problematic Conservatives then that would be a good bet.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 42,011
    Downfall Bovino Edition. You're welcome.

    https://bsky.app/profile/tom.medsky.social/post/3mdf22bpdz225
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 36,569
    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Surprised to see you advocating asset theft.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 42,011
    @ianboudreau.com‬

    Long way to go yet but I think it's worth pointing out that the entire rightwing media ecosystem went all in on the idea that Americans, or at least enough of us, would accept the idea that the government should be able to murder people in the street and they failed utterly
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 1,233
    kle4 said:

    I'd admire Ed M is still in the hunt for being PM after nearly 20 years in politcs and losing a GE, but have his qualities improved in the last 10 years to make him a better prospect for them?

    No but he won't be fighting someone anywhere near the quality of David Cameron. Maybe that will be enough.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,226
    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Yes - the problem with the £250 cap is that this doesn’t deal with the control of the building. Service charges will just rise to compensate.

    Mind you, the furious escalation in building and maintenance costs is real. In my old block of flats, it was all freehold. So we ran it through a committee. The last couple of years, things like painting have doubled in price. Window replacement is worse.

    And this is with serious shopping around, trying to get deals - such as offering turns a rolling project to replace all the windows - multiple hundreds.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,319

    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Surprised to see you advocating asset theft.
    Max doesn't like landlords.

    TBF, if these rules are actually needed he has a point. I went through every clause to check I wasn't going to be in trouble on my rental property, and I realised that there was nothing in there I wasn't doing already. There were two points were I needed to make slight adjustments and I will need to register as a landlord, but neither are exactly critical.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 41,219

    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Surprised to see you advocating asset theft.
    It's an asset class that should never have existed in the first place, similar to water companies. Ending a gravy train isn't asset theft.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,397
    kle4 said:

    I'd admire Ed M is still in the hunt for being PM after nearly 20 years in politcs and losing a GE, but have his qualities improved in the last 10 years to make him a better prospect for them?

    Not really, except that the alternatives are even more obviously worse.

    Once again, note the lack of traditional Great Office holders on the list. Becoming Prime Minister at a difficult time (if it's not a difficult time, Starmer hangs on) is not a thing for a novice to try.
    Hard not to conclude that red team supporters are as silly and self-indulgent as their blue counterparts.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,905
    Starmer: Britain should ‘get closer’ to single market

    The Prime Minister said deeper economic alignment with the EU would be more effective than a customs union


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/27/keir-starmer-eu-single-market-closer-labour-customs-union/
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,319

    kle4 said:

    I'd admire Ed M is still in the hunt for being PM after nearly 20 years in politcs and losing a GE, but have his qualities improved in the last 10 years to make him a better prospect for them?

    Not really, except that the alternatives are even more obviously worse.

    Once again, note the lack of traditional Great Office holders on the list. Becoming Prime Minister at a difficult time (if it's not a difficult time, Starmer hangs on) is not a thing for a novice to try.
    Hard not to conclude that red team supporters are as silly and self-indulgent as their blue counterparts.
    They twice voted for Jeremy Corbyn by huge margins. What more proof did you need to draw that conclusion?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 100,743
    Scott_xP said:

    @ianboudreau.com‬

    Long way to go yet but I think it's worth pointing out that the entire rightwing media ecosystem went all in on the idea that Americans, or at least enough of us, would accept the idea that the government should be able to murder people in the street and they failed utterly

    Even for that fetid swamp the recent enthusiasm at the killings was a little hasty. The audience will support a lot but perhaps even they thought a little investigation was needed before calling victims terrorists.

    Or maybe it was just the implication having a gun on you was sufficient post justification to bring it home for them - that could be me!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,319
    edited 8:37AM

    Starmer: Britain should ‘get closer’ to single market

    The Prime Minister said deeper economic alignment with the EU would be more effective than a customs union


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/27/keir-starmer-eu-single-market-closer-labour-customs-union/

    Was it a 'deep and special' partnership he was thinking of?

    Or May I be being unfair?
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,397
    ydoethur said:

    Starmer: Britain should ‘get closer’ to single market

    The Prime Minister said deeper economic alignment with the EU would be more effective than a customs union


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/27/keir-starmer-eu-single-market-closer-labour-customs-union/

    Was it a 'deep and special' partnership he was thinking of?

    Or May I be being unfair?
    Relatively meaningless waffle, unless the UK is prepared to engage with the something-for-something aspect of this.

    Linking to the header, is there any way for an ambitious Labour MP to get the leadership without showing a lot of leg on Europe; possibly up to single customs and united market arrangements? Compare with the way that Conservative leadership elections ratcheted them steadily more Eurosceptic.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 2,333

    Starmer: Britain should ‘get closer’ to single market

    The Prime Minister said deeper economic alignment with the EU would be more effective than a customs union


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/27/keir-starmer-eu-single-market-closer-labour-customs-union/

    I used to do a lot of economic alignment when we set up different production lines or sought country specific approvals for our products. If the market is big enough and profitable, companies make their own decisions.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,226
    ydoethur said:

    I sometimes think @Cyclefree is actually wrong about the police.

    As in, she's much too generous to them.

    If the officers in this case are not themselves banged up for perverting the course of justice, we might as well pack up the court system and go home.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gl0r0052po

    Many years back, there was a crime wave in Trujillo in Northern Peru.

    In a rare bit of sense from the Peruvian Government, they sent a new general of police (I think that is rank) to get a grip.

    He introduced several policies that were effective and popular - Our friends from #BigCycling would have approved of his pedestrianisation efforts (to put a brake on scooter borne theft from outdoor cafe clients).

    His methodology for dealing with car jacking was simple and effective.

    It was noticed, that his very first act was to arrest and have prosecuted, a number of police officers. And made sure then went to jail. This was for a range of offences - chiefly taking bribes, but also faking evidence to “fit up”. Given the life expectancy of a police officer in a Peruvian jail, this had a salutary effect on the remainder.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 21,320

    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Yes - the problem with the £250 cap is that this doesn’t deal with the control of the building. Service charges will just rise to compensate.

    Mind you, the furious escalation in building and maintenance costs is real. In my old block of flats, it was all freehold. So we ran it through a committee. The last couple of years, things like painting have doubled in price. Window replacement is worse.

    And this is with serious shopping around, trying to get deals - such as offering turns a rolling project to replace all the windows - multiple hundreds.
    Maintenance costs are in theory challengeable in court, whereas ground rents were/are just fixed income for the freeholder.
  • UnpopularUnpopular Posts: 923
    ydoethur said:

    Starmer: Britain should ‘get closer’ to single market

    The Prime Minister said deeper economic alignment with the EU would be more effective than a customs union


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/27/keir-starmer-eu-single-market-closer-labour-customs-union/

    Was it a 'deep and special' partnership he was thinking of?

    Or May I be being unfair?
    It's a better strategy than waving your Johnson about!
  • eekeek Posts: 32,377
    edited 8:53AM
    Rayner's HMRC problems should be over now - if my memory is correct the person involved will be over 18 and so the money that was owed to HMRC will now be owed by HMRC to her assuming she's paid it.

    And I fully understand why she wasn't rushing to pay HMRC when they took 17 months to pay me the £8,000 they owed me from tax year 2023/4...
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 2,333

    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Yes - the problem with the £250 cap is that this doesn’t deal with the control of the building. Service charges will just rise to compensate.

    Mind you, the furious escalation in building and maintenance costs is real. In my old block of flats, it was all freehold. So we ran it through a committee. The last couple of years, things like painting have doubled in price. Window replacement is worse.

    And this is with serious shopping around, trying to get deals - such as offering turns a rolling project to replace all the windows - multiple hundreds.
    Buying leasehold has always been a lottery. Know of a young woman who scraped together enough for a deposit on her first flat. Not long after she moved in, she was hit for a huge bill for maintenance that hadn't been carried out on the building for years.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 54,119

    Imagine how smug you'd feel if you had tipped Ed Miliband at 100/1 succeed Starmer then also found yesterday you'd backed Wes Streeting to replace Starmer at 50/1 in 2022.

    I've backed Streeting at 70/1 back in 2021! But only with a relatively small bet
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 8,217
    edited 8:58AM

    Starmer: Britain should ‘get closer’ to single market

    The Prime Minister said deeper economic alignment with the EU would be more effective than a customs union


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/27/keir-starmer-eu-single-market-closer-labour-customs-union/

    You post these nothing-has-changed Starmer-EU updates in bold just to wind us up, right?

    Breaking news! We're rejoining neither the single market nor the customs union. But the headline looks like something has changed. Have at it, PB!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 54,119
    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Will this start to unpick the Duke of Westminster's position as the UK's largest (by value) private landowner?
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 2,146

    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Yes - the problem with the £250 cap is that this doesn’t deal with the control of the building. Service charges will just rise to compensate.

    Mind you, the furious escalation in building and maintenance costs is real. In my old block of flats, it was all freehold. So we ran it through a committee. The last couple of years, things like painting have doubled in price. Window replacement is worse.

    And this is with serious shopping around, trying to get deals - such as offering turns a rolling project to replace all the windows - multiple hundreds.
    Share of freehold presumably, so you had a lease and also an equal share of the freehold.
    Leasehold exists for a good reason, the building has to be maintained for everyone's benefit.
    I had a similar SoF flat, it had been managed by volunteers, the other 80-90% of the leaseholders did sweet FA, there were large service charge arrears mainly from a few BtLs, and they'd spent 3-4 years getting nowhere on a roof replacement.
    When I joined the committee the others had determined to appoint a local estate agent as managing agent who were predictably useless, it took 3-4 years to get rid and appoint a competent managing agency. The woman assigned to us was very competent, we got back a good proportion of the arrears and 2-3 reasonable quotes for maintenance work were sourced in days.
    I was still very relieved when I sold up and could leave the board, almost their first act when I left was to fall out with the managing agent and when I passed I saw some 20 year olds wandering round the front garden with notebooks that they'd appointed instead.

    Brief summary, shortlist, interview, visit the properties they manage and then appoint a proper managing agent. It'll save money, time, stress and legal liabilities.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,658
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Cruella at her RefUK press conference yesterday

    @implausibleblog.bsky.social‬

    Suella Braverman, "There is a very strong case to increase the powers of any immigration enforcement officers that we deploy"

    "At the moment they're hamstrung by human rights laws, by health and safety laws, by all sorts of needless and obstructive bureaucracy"

    @davidherdson.bsky.social‬

    It's also spectacularly bad politics by Reform here. Aping and lauding the worst excesses of the Trump administration - particularly at this moment - will go down very badly with the public.

    Farage usually has a good sense of when to downplay his Trumpism, which has a smaller target audience than Reform's current polling. Holding off on the message for a couple of weeks wouldnt have hurt, people will still support strong immigration enforcement then.
    If a Reform government tries any ICE style antics in South London it will get very tasty very quickly. That might be their goal, of course, to stir up trouble in the inner city to advance their lawless Britain narrative. But if it doesn't work in the US, where the average person bends their knee to authority more enthusiastically than the typical Brit, I don't think it will be a winning strategy here either. I suspect a lot of places will burn in the process.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,953

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Cruella at her RefUK press conference yesterday

    @implausibleblog.bsky.social‬

    Suella Braverman, "There is a very strong case to increase the powers of any immigration enforcement officers that we deploy"

    "At the moment they're hamstrung by human rights laws, by health and safety laws, by all sorts of needless and obstructive bureaucracy"

    @davidherdson.bsky.social‬

    It's also spectacularly bad politics by Reform here. Aping and lauding the worst excesses of the Trump administration - particularly at this moment - will go down very badly with the public.

    Farage usually has a good sense of when to downplay his Trumpism, which has a smaller target audience than Reform's current polling. Holding off on the message for a couple of weeks wouldnt have hurt, people will still support strong immigration enforcement then.
    If a Reform government tries any ICE style antics in South London it will get very tasty very quickly. That might be their goal, of course, to stir up trouble in the inner city to advance their lawless Britain narrative. But if it doesn't work in the US, where the average person bends their knee to authority more enthusiastically than the typical Brit, I don't think it will be a winning strategy here either. I suspect a lot of places will burn in the process.
    I doubt it will be popular in my part of East London as well. The immigration enforcement people raided the hairdressers near us once and closed them for the grand total of two hours - back they opened with a whole new team of "barbers". It's amazing how many barbers have ended up in East Ham.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 42,011
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @ianboudreau.com‬

    Long way to go yet but I think it's worth pointing out that the entire rightwing media ecosystem went all in on the idea that Americans, or at least enough of us, would accept the idea that the government should be able to murder people in the street and they failed utterly

    Even for that fetid swamp the recent enthusiasm at the killings was a little hasty. The audience will support a lot but perhaps even they thought a little investigation was needed before calling victims terrorists.

    Or maybe it was just the implication having a gun on you was sufficient post justification to bring it home for them - that could be me!
    @davidallengreen.bsky.social‬

    So quick were they to "own the libs" they forgot about who owned the guns.

    https://bsky.app/profile/davidallengreen.bsky.social/post/3mdedwb5mic22
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 85,801
    A lot of stories coming out of Iran about patients being shot in their hospital beds, and some doctors being sentenced to death for treating the wounded.

    🆘🆘You might wonder how the regime is tracking down and arresting doctors who treat wounded protesters. This is how.

    They have turned healthcare into a surveillance trap. Over the past few years, all prescriptions were centralized and digitized.

    Pharmacies are banned from giving out even basic wound-care supplies without an official prescription. A simple IV saline bag now requires registration. Every bandage, painkiller, antibiotic, every drop of medicine leaves a digital footprint.

    So when doctors help the wounded, the regime does not need informants. It just audits prescription records, flags injury patterns, and follows the data straight to the physician. Treating the injured has been criminalized. The medical system itself is being used to identify, arrest, and silence doctors who chose humanity over obedience.

    Even in war, the wounded have the right to medical care. Violating that is a war crime. What’s happening now is one of the worst atrocities of our time, with chilling similarities to the darkest chapters of history, including the Holocaust.

    These people must receive care. There must be safe channels to get medicine and medical help to them. Iranians need help...

    https://x.com/__Injaneb96/status/2015961858482614527
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,931
    OT. Some good news. Trumps (dis)approval ratings

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/trump-approval-tracker

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,226

    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Yes - the problem with the £250 cap is that this doesn’t deal with the control of the building. Service charges will just rise to compensate.

    Mind you, the furious escalation in building and maintenance costs is real. In my old block of flats, it was all freehold. So we ran it through a committee. The last couple of years, things like painting have doubled in price. Window replacement is worse.

    And this is with serious shopping around, trying to get deals - such as offering turns a rolling project to replace all the windows - multiple hundreds.
    Maintenance costs are in theory challengeable in court, whereas ground rents were/are just fixed income for the freeholder.
    Which is still pretty useless - the smart ones will have a pile of justifications and going to law is expensive.

    It is very easy, in the current climate to get quotes to justify massive prices for maintenance or building work.

    See the scumbags who charged “fees” for work visas. Most of them stayed close enough to the law that they haven’t been prosecuted.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 54,119
    edited 9:24AM
    Roger said:

    OT. Some good news. Trumps (dis)approval ratings

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/trump-approval-tracker

    It's still "the economy, stupid". I wouldn't be surprised to see some crude cash giveaway to voters, from the pot of collected tariff money, in the run up to November.

    And he's still only just underwater with white voters, who clearly aren't paying attention
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,226
    Dopermean said:

    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Yes - the problem with the £250 cap is that this doesn’t deal with the control of the building. Service charges will just rise to compensate.

    Mind you, the furious escalation in building and maintenance costs is real. In my old block of flats, it was all freehold. So we ran it through a committee. The last couple of years, things like painting have doubled in price. Window replacement is worse.

    And this is with serious shopping around, trying to get deals - such as offering turns a rolling project to replace all the windows - multiple hundreds.
    Share of freehold presumably, so you had a lease and also an equal share of the freehold.
    Leasehold exists for a good reason, the building has to be maintained for everyone's benefit.
    I had a similar SoF flat, it had been managed by volunteers, the other 80-90% of the leaseholders did sweet FA, there were large service charge arrears mainly from a few BtLs, and they'd spent 3-4 years getting nowhere on a roof replacement.
    When I joined the committee the others had determined to appoint a local estate agent as managing agent who were predictably useless, it took 3-4 years to get rid and appoint a competent managing agency. The woman assigned to us was very competent, we got back a good proportion of the arrears and 2-3 reasonable quotes for maintenance work were sourced in days.
    I was still very relieved when I sold up and could leave the board, almost their first act when I left was to fall out with the managing agent and when I passed I saw some 20 year olds wandering round the front garden with notebooks that they'd appointed instead.

    Brief summary, shortlist, interview, visit the properties they manage and then appoint a proper managing agent. It'll save money, time, stress and legal liabilities.
    Yes - we used an agent for the day-to-day. Big works (yearly repaint, roof work, window replacement) we investigated ourselves and got bids.

    Share of freehold is critical for control.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,953
    Morning all :)

    This week's YouGov:

    Reform: 25% (+1)
    Labour: 21% (+2)
    Conservative: 17% (-1)
    Green: 16% (-1)
    Liberal Democrat: 14% (=)

    From 25th - 26th January
    Changes with 19th January

    Not much change in all honesty.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 6,030
    On topic an excellent thread.

    Thank God that electing a Labour government with a massive majority has meant we've left behind the endless instability and personality-based psychodramas of the Tory years.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 6,849
    edited 9:24AM
    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    This week's YouGov:

    Reform: 25% (+1)
    Labour: 21% (+2)
    Conservative: 17% (-1)
    Green: 16% (-1)
    Liberal Democrat: 14% (=)

    From 25th - 26th January
    Changes with 19th January

    Not much change in all honesty.

    Labour will be overjoyed with that poll.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,336
    edited 9:30AM
    Streeting, Rayner and Miliband certainly seem to be the frontrunners for next Labour leader now Burnham is out as the Survation Labour members poll shows.

    Rayner if she got 80 Labour MPs to nominate her a Yougov Labour members poll showed would beat Streeting and Ed Miliband but that is a big if. Streeting though would beat Ed Miliband, so it looks like the race would really be between Streeting and Rayner (if she got her HMRC issues sorted) with Ed Miliband a likely Chancellor for the winner.
    https://news.sky.com/story/almost-two-in-three-labour-members-back-burnham-over-starmer-for-leader-poll-show-13441078

    As Labour leadership elections are run on preferential voting even if Starmer was challenged and still ran it would not effect the result as it is not FPTP
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 21,320
    nico67 said:

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    This week's YouGov:

    Reform: 25% (+1)
    Labour: 21% (+2)
    Conservative: 17% (-1)
    Green: 16% (-1)
    Liberal Democrat: 14% (=)

    From 25th - 26th January
    Changes with 19th January

    Not much change in all honesty.

    Labour will be overjoyed with that poll.
    I want it to be right but it doesn’t feel right
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 2,333
    On topic. Should I write off my bet on Bridget Phillipson as the next Labour PM (16/1)?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,905
    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    This week's YouGov:

    Reform: 25% (+1)
    Labour: 21% (+2)
    Conservative: 17% (-1)
    Green: 16% (-1)
    Liberal Democrat: 14% (=)

    From 25th - 26th January
    Changes with 19th January

    Not much change in all honesty.

    Just imagine how bad it would be for the Tories if Kemi Badenoch wasn’t doing so well.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,336

    Starmer: Britain should ‘get closer’ to single market

    The Prime Minister said deeper economic alignment with the EU would be more effective than a customs union


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/27/keir-starmer-eu-single-market-closer-labour-customs-union/

    Starmer is right on that point, a customs union would mean we could no longer do our own trade deals, so on a forced choice single market would be better. Note he has not say rejoin the EEA though, which would mean restoring free movement, only get closer to it
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 125,905
    Battlebus said:

    On topic. Should I write off my bet on Bridget Phillipson as the next Labour PM (16/1)?

    Yes, that bet is a Bridget too far, the deputy leadership contest showed how unpopular she is.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,935
    Broadly agree with the header, though I'd question whether Rayner is seen by many as a remotely left-wing candidate, in the way that Burnham and Miliband are. A good many left-wingers have now left the party, though. I stood down as CLP chair last week to free myself from commitments - I'll see how things work out over the next year.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,336
    IanB2 said:

    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Will this start to unpick the Duke of Westminster's position as the UK's largest (by value) private landowner?
    No, he could still charge for the lease and maintenance of his properties even if no groundrents
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,397
    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    This week's YouGov:

    Reform: 25% (+1)
    Labour: 21% (+2)
    Conservative: 17% (-1)
    Green: 16% (-1)
    Liberal Democrat: 14% (=)

    From 25th - 26th January
    Changes with 19th January

    Not much change in all honesty.

    Central mystery of our times.

    If YouGov are right, Labour are doing perfectly adequately for a mid-term government, and all this Change The Leader stuff is a mixture of panic in the ranks and selfish ambition amongst the officers.

    If FoN are right, Labour are in pretty deep doodoo.

    It's all about how they collect and read their runes, and right now it's impossible to tell who is doing it right.
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,397
    Dopermean said:

    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Yes - the problem with the £250 cap is that this doesn’t deal with the control of the building. Service charges will just rise to compensate.

    Mind you, the furious escalation in building and maintenance costs is real. In my old block of flats, it was all freehold. So we ran it through a committee. The last couple of years, things like painting have doubled in price. Window replacement is worse.

    And this is with serious shopping around, trying to get deals - such as offering turns a rolling project to replace all the windows - multiple hundreds.
    Share of freehold presumably, so you had a lease and also an equal share of the freehold.
    Leasehold exists for a good reason, the building has to be maintained for everyone's benefit.
    I had a similar SoF flat, it had been managed by volunteers, the other 80-90% of the leaseholders did sweet FA, there were large service charge arrears mainly from a few BtLs, and they'd spent 3-4 years getting nowhere on a roof replacement.
    When I joined the committee the others had determined to appoint a local estate agent as managing agent who were predictably useless, it took 3-4 years to get rid and appoint a competent managing agency. The woman assigned to us was very competent, we got back a good proportion of the arrears and 2-3 reasonable quotes for maintenance work were sourced in days.
    I was still very relieved when I sold up and could leave the board, almost their first act when I left was to fall out with the managing agent and when I passed I saw some 20 year olds wandering round the front garden with notebooks that they'd appointed instead.

    Brief summary, shortlist, interview, visit the properties they manage and then appoint a proper managing agent. It'll save money, time, stress and legal liabilities.
    I've had a very poor leasehold experience in the past (including being foolish enough to organise the building into buying out the freehold, which took forever -- in retrospect I should have just sold up and got out early instead). Yes, the building has to be maintained for everyone's benefit, and some of the problems of a shared building are just inevitable as not everybody agrees or has the funds or wants to pay their share. But I think leasehold makes this worse as it introduces a third party -- the freeholder -- who has very little interest in the condition of the building or what it's like to live there, as they are just treating it as a source of income. Ours did basically nothing beyond the absolute bare minimum critical items, and were a big firm that you could find a ton of complaints about online.

    The setups I've heard about in the occasional news article where a single occupant building that could perfectly well have been owner occupied freehold is set up with a leasehold should be banned, if they haven't been already.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,336
    ydoethur said:

    A reminder that no Labour leader has been ousted by a vote since 1935, and it has never happened while the party is in office.

    Would be interesting to see Miliband win though. I know he's not flavour of the month on PB but he does at least have some imagination and an idea of what he wants to do, which appears to be more than Starmer or Sunak.

    Mind, we could have said the same of Massive or Lettuce Lady...

    True but if Labour come third in NEV in May behind the Tories as well as Reform I can see Streeting and /or Rayner challenging Starmer for the leadership.

    If however Labour are second it will be Kemi, not Sir Keir, facing a leadership threat
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,336
    edited 9:39AM
    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    This week's YouGov:

    Reform: 25% (+1)
    Labour: 21% (+2)
    Conservative: 17% (-1)
    Green: 16% (-1)
    Liberal Democrat: 14% (=)

    From 25th - 26th January
    Changes with 19th January

    Not much change in all honesty.

    Starmer will be pleased with that I suspect, Labour up 2% in a poll largely taken after the Burnham blocking. The Tory defections to Reform not done much for Farage, Reform up 1% but Labour closed the gap with Reform to just 4%.

    Bad poll for Kemi, the Tories now just 1% ahead of the Greens and with the LDs also closer to the Tories than the Tories are to Labour with Yougov.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 15,244

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    This week's YouGov:

    Reform: 25% (+1)
    Labour: 21% (+2)
    Conservative: 17% (-1)
    Green: 16% (-1)
    Liberal Democrat: 14% (=)

    From 25th - 26th January
    Changes with 19th January

    Not much change in all honesty.

    Central mystery of our times.

    If YouGov are right, Labour are doing perfectly adequately for a mid-term government, and all this Change The Leader stuff is a mixture of panic in the ranks and selfish ambition amongst the officers.

    If FoN are right, Labour are in pretty deep doodoo.

    It's all about how they collect and read their runes, and right now it's impossible to tell who is doing it right.
    It all makes sense when you appreciate that nobody really wanted this Labour Government but the alternatives were much worse and so it was elected without enthusiasm. The voting public continues to be unenthusiastic whilst the search for plausible alternatives goes on. We will see in a few years time whether it thinks it has found one. On current evidence you have to say it may not.

    Btw, on Burnham I have to say I would care more if I thought he might make a decent PM. I do not.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,336
    India and EU announce landmark trade deal
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crrnee01r9jo
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,226
    pm215 said:

    Dopermean said:

    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Yes - the problem with the £250 cap is that this doesn’t deal with the control of the building. Service charges will just rise to compensate.

    Mind you, the furious escalation in building and maintenance costs is real. In my old block of flats, it was all freehold. So we ran it through a committee. The last couple of years, things like painting have doubled in price. Window replacement is worse.

    And this is with serious shopping around, trying to get deals - such as offering turns a rolling project to replace all the windows - multiple hundreds.
    Share of freehold presumably, so you had a lease and also an equal share of the freehold.
    Leasehold exists for a good reason, the building has to be maintained for everyone's benefit.
    I had a similar SoF flat, it had been managed by volunteers, the other 80-90% of the leaseholders did sweet FA, there were large service charge arrears mainly from a few BtLs, and they'd spent 3-4 years getting nowhere on a roof replacement.
    When I joined the committee the others had determined to appoint a local estate agent as managing agent who were predictably useless, it took 3-4 years to get rid and appoint a competent managing agency. The woman assigned to us was very competent, we got back a good proportion of the arrears and 2-3 reasonable quotes for maintenance work were sourced in days.
    I was still very relieved when I sold up and could leave the board, almost their first act when I left was to fall out with the managing agent and when I passed I saw some 20 year olds wandering round the front garden with notebooks that they'd appointed instead.

    Brief summary, shortlist, interview, visit the properties they manage and then appoint a proper managing agent. It'll save money, time, stress and legal liabilities.
    I've had a very poor leasehold experience in the past (including being foolish enough to organise the building into buying out the freehold, which took forever -- in retrospect I should have just sold up and got out early instead). Yes, the building has to be maintained for everyone's benefit, and some of the problems of a shared building are just inevitable as not everybody agrees or has the funds or wants to pay their share. But I think leasehold makes this worse as it introduces a third party -- the freeholder -- who has very little interest in the condition of the building or what it's like to live there, as they are just treating it as a source of income. Ours did basically nothing beyond the absolute bare minimum critical items, and were a big firm that you could find a ton of complaints about online.

    The setups I've heard about in the occasional news article where a single occupant building that could perfectly well have been owner occupied freehold is set up with a leasehold should be banned, if they haven't been already.
    On your last point 100%

    As to the problem of non-resident freeholders - yes, this a big part of it.

    Being able to hire and fire the management company is vital, I think.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 8,217
    edited 9:44AM
    Fishing said:

    On topic an excellent thread.

    Thank God that electing a Labour government with a massive majority has meant we've left behind the endless instability and personality-based psychodramas of the Tory years.

    How often have big majorities meant stability? Only Blair, Boris and Starmer in my lifetime - one out of three - so I will have to defer to others for the long view.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,655
    edited 9:46AM
    On Sunday, I said I had agreed with @TSE's 'lay Burnham' strategy. And I had, up until yesterday. But I now see Burnham as the favourite. He is now the clear challenger to Starmer in a way which he wasn't before the weekend. A colleague laid out a scenario which I find convincing: following Labour's shellacking at the by-election and then again in May, another by-election in GM is engineered (it is rumoured that G&D isn't even the one AB had his eye on). Having turned him down - and got a very negative reaction from the party and its voters - the NEC will struggle to justify doing so again. Burnham then wins a by-election, returns to parliament, and immediately challenges Starmer, and wins.
    (FWIW, a friend of mine who works at the GM combined authority yesterday received a hilariously terse email from the head of the CA confirming the mayor had made it clear that 'his full focus remains on Greater Manchester' - which was apparently greeted with laughter.)

    If I was exposed to AB becoming the next Labour leader and/or PM, I would probably be trying to ease myself out of that position now with a view to swinging modestly the other way should Labour lose the G&D by-election (which I think they will).
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,397
    carnforth said:

    Fishing said:

    On topic an excellent thread.

    Thank God that electing a Labour government with a massive majority has meant we've left behind the endless instability and personality-based psychodramas of the Tory years.

    How often have big majorities meant stability? Only Blair, Boris and Starmer in my lifetime - one out of three - so I will have to defer to others for the long view.
    Francis Pym had something to say about the subject.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,336

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    This week's YouGov:

    Reform: 25% (+1)
    Labour: 21% (+2)
    Conservative: 17% (-1)
    Green: 16% (-1)
    Liberal Democrat: 14% (=)

    From 25th - 26th January
    Changes with 19th January

    Not much change in all honesty.

    Just imagine how bad it would be for the Tories if Kemi Badenoch wasn’t doing so well.
    Certainly on that poll it will be Kemi facing the VONC after the May locals from Tory MPs and talk of Starmer facing a leadership challenge is just hot air.

    Kemi certainly needs to get the Tories back to a clear second ahead of Labour to ensure she avoids a no confidence vote in the Spring after the local and devolved elections and avoids being replaced by Cleverly
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 13,249
    edited 9:48AM

    MaxPB said:

    On the changes to the leasehold system, I've rarely seen such unanimous support for ending it completely. The government needs to put two fingers up at the "investors" and move to completely eliminate ground rents. The leeches can put their money into equities rather than these nonsense asset classes that carry no risk.

    Yes - the problem with the £250 cap is that this doesn’t deal with the control of the building. Service charges will just rise to compensate.

    Mind you, the furious escalation in building and maintenance costs is real. In my old block of flats, it was all freehold. So we ran it through a committee. The last couple of years, things like painting have doubled in price. Window replacement is worse.

    And this is with serious shopping around, trying to get deals - such as offering turns a rolling project to replace all the windows - multiple hundreds.
    At least you can shop around though. Ending a contract with a factor is deeply gratifying.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,336
    carnforth said:

    Fishing said:

    On topic an excellent thread.

    Thank God that electing a Labour government with a massive majority has meant we've left behind the endless instability and personality-based psychodramas of the Tory years.

    How often have big majorities meant stability? Only Blair, Boris and Starmer in my lifetime - one out of three - so I will have to defer to others for the long view.
    Thatcher and Blair certainly proved it
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 34,875

    Battlebus said:

    On topic. Should I write off my bet on Bridget Phillipson as the next Labour PM (16/1)?

    Yes, that bet is a Bridget too far, the deputy leadership contest showed how unpopular she is.
    An alternative view might be the Deputy election was a proxy confidence vote on Starmer and so has limited forecasting value. Phillipson has been getting a lot of stick in the Telegraph for closing private schools but perhaps that is the sort of thing that might go down well with Labour members. She is also in the news this week for wanting to ban phones from classrooms.

    As with Ed Miliband, you might not like what she is doing but at least she is doing something.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,226

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    This week's YouGov:

    Reform: 25% (+1)
    Labour: 21% (+2)
    Conservative: 17% (-1)
    Green: 16% (-1)
    Liberal Democrat: 14% (=)

    From 25th - 26th January
    Changes with 19th January

    Not much change in all honesty.

    Central mystery of our times.

    If YouGov are right, Labour are doing perfectly adequately for a mid-term government, and all this Change The Leader stuff is a mixture of panic in the ranks and selfish ambition amongst the officers.

    If FoN are right, Labour are in pretty deep doodoo.

    It's all about how they collect and read their runes, and right now it's impossible to tell who is doing it right.
    Errrr.

    Whichever way you slice it, both “main” parties are plumbing depths of unpopularity. Their support is now below what most observers saw as their core vote.

    Both have seen a large chunk of support leave (ha) and seem to do so in a rather more permanent manner that has happened in the past.

    Labour is only (relatively) lucky that the Conservatives are in a similar state.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 8,217
    edited 9:51AM
    HYUFD said:

    carnforth said:

    Fishing said:

    On topic an excellent thread.

    Thank God that electing a Labour government with a massive majority has meant we've left behind the endless instability and personality-based psychodramas of the Tory years.

    How often have big majorities meant stability? Only Blair, Boris and Starmer in my lifetime - one out of three - so I will have to defer to others for the long view.
    Thatcher and Blair certainly proved it
    Oh dear - apparently I am old enough for a Senior Moment - forgetting Thatcher! Though I was a child at the time, I suppose.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,657

    Starmer: Britain should ‘get closer’ to single market

    The Prime Minister said deeper economic alignment with the EU would be more effective than a customs union


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/27/keir-starmer-eu-single-market-closer-labour-customs-union/

    We are going to attach tug boats to Dover and drag the Britain across the channel?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,657

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    This week's YouGov:

    Reform: 25% (+1)
    Labour: 21% (+2)
    Conservative: 17% (-1)
    Green: 16% (-1)
    Liberal Democrat: 14% (=)

    From 25th - 26th January
    Changes with 19th January

    Not much change in all honesty.

    Central mystery of our times.

    If YouGov are right, Labour are doing perfectly adequately for a mid-term government, and all this Change The Leader stuff is a mixture of panic in the ranks and selfish ambition amongst the officers.

    If FoN are right, Labour are in pretty deep doodoo.

    It's all about how they collect and read their runes, and right now it's impossible to tell who is doing it right.
    I guess that 'swingback', the idea that pretty much all governments will suffer in mid-term but recover closer to the election is one of those rules that is there to be broken. It certainly is possible that Labour will recover by enough to be comfortably largest party or even a Cameron style small majority. I think what mitigates against that is Starmer and his governments actual governing so far. He has been shown to be utterly devoid of ideas. It was all slogans, such as 'smash the gangs'. Well we are waiting for the gangs to be smashed, Keir. Not being the Tories was enough to get you into power, but that mandate which you seem so proud of was a massive artefact of a broken voting system not designed for multiparty politics.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 77,319
    carnforth said:

    HYUFD said:

    carnforth said:

    Fishing said:

    On topic an excellent thread.

    Thank God that electing a Labour government with a massive majority has meant we've left behind the endless instability and personality-based psychodramas of the Tory years.

    How often have big majorities meant stability? Only Blair, Boris and Starmer in my lifetime - one out of three - so I will have to defer to others for the long view.
    Thatcher and Blair certainly proved it
    Oh dear - apparently I am old enough for a Senior Moment - forgetting Thatcher! Though I was a child at the time, I suppose.
    How stable a government was the Thatcher one post 83? She faced the Miners’ Strike, the Westland affair, the abandonment of monetarism, a financial panic, the splits over Europe, the psychodramas of Howe, Heseltine and Lawson, and the poll tax.

    Yes with hindsight we know she surmounted all but the last one, but it’s easy to be wise with hindsight and I doubt if it felt so stable at the time.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,865

    Starmer: Britain should ‘get closer’ to single market

    The Prime Minister said deeper economic alignment with the EU would be more effective than a customs union


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/27/keir-starmer-eu-single-market-closer-labour-customs-union/

    We are going to attach tug boats to Dover and drag the Britain across the channel?
    No, obviously he doesn't mean that.

    He's talking about reclaiming Doggerland, it's going to be populated with refugees and governed like Hong Kong used to be.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,657
    Cookie said:

    On Sunday, I said I had agreed with @TSE's 'lay Burnham' strategy. And I had, up until yesterday. But I now see Burnham as the favourite. He is now the clear challenger to Starmer in a way which he wasn't before the weekend. A colleague laid out a scenario which I find convincing: following Labour's shellacking at the by-election and then again in May, another by-election in GM is engineered (it is rumoured that G&D isn't even the one AB had his eye on). Having turned him down - and got a very negative reaction from the party and its voters - the NEC will struggle to justify doing so again. Burnham then wins a by-election, returns to parliament, and immediately challenges Starmer, and wins.
    (FWIW, a friend of mine who works at the GM combined authority yesterday received a hilariously terse email from the head of the CA confirming the mayor had made it clear that 'his full focus remains on Greater Manchester' - which was apparently greeted with laughter.)

    If I was exposed to AB becoming the next Labour leader and/or PM, I would probably be trying to ease myself out of that position now with a view to swinging modestly the other way should Labour lose the G&D by-election (which I think they will).

    Swiss cheese model suggests a lot of holes to get through for ALL that to happen. The NEC don't give a shit - they showed that at the weekend. These are people in deep in the tribal politics of the left. They life for the fight. No, not the fight against the Tories, or Reform, the internal fights in their own party.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 13,249

    Starmer: Britain should ‘get closer’ to single market

    The Prime Minister said deeper economic alignment with the EU would be more effective than a customs union


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/27/keir-starmer-eu-single-market-closer-labour-customs-union/

    We are going to attach tug boats to Dover and drag the Britain across the channel?
    No, obviously he doesn't mean that.

    He's talking about reclaiming Doggerland, it's going to be populated with refugees and governed like Hong Kong used to be.
    Not too far from the truth - there are plans to build an artificial island as a renewables hub there. Could be our Christmas Island.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 8,217

    Starmer: Britain should ‘get closer’ to single market

    The Prime Minister said deeper economic alignment with the EU would be more effective than a customs union


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/01/27/keir-starmer-eu-single-market-closer-labour-customs-union/

    We are going to attach tug boats to Dover and drag the Britain across the channel?
    No, obviously he doesn't mean that.

    He's talking about reclaiming Doggerland, it's going to be populated with refugees and governed like Hong Kong used to be.
    The Belgians are on manoeuvres:

    https://www.globalconstructionreview.com/construction-begins-on-belgiums-e7bn-energy-island/
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 22,173
    Thanks Phil, much obliged.

    The question on my mind is whether the soft-left back Streeting's assumed attempt after the May elections to unseat Starmer, or if they decide they'd rather keep Starmer in place until either Rayner or Burnham is available to stand for the leadership.

    Reports are that Miliband had a deal to support Burnham in exchange for becoming Chancellor, and Miliband gives every indication of being happy to be a senior Cabinet minster rather than leader, so I think he'd be happy to bide his time to wait until Rayner was free of the HMRC investigation.

    But is that a realistic option given Labour leadership rules and processes?
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 9,344
    ydoethur said:

    carnforth said:

    HYUFD said:

    carnforth said:

    Fishing said:

    On topic an excellent thread.

    Thank God that electing a Labour government with a massive majority has meant we've left behind the endless instability and personality-based psychodramas of the Tory years.

    How often have big majorities meant stability? Only Blair, Boris and Starmer in my lifetime - one out of three - so I will have to defer to others for the long view.
    Thatcher and Blair certainly proved it
    Oh dear - apparently I am old enough for a Senior Moment - forgetting Thatcher! Though I was a child at the time, I suppose.
    How stable a government was the Thatcher one post 83? She faced the Miners’ Strike, the Westland affair, the abandonment of monetarism, a financial panic, the splits over Europe, the psychodramas of Howe, Heseltine and Lawson, and the poll tax.

    Yes with hindsight we know she surmounted all but the last one, but it’s easy to be wise with hindsight and I doubt if it felt so stable at the time.
    You're right; it didn't feel particularly stable at the time. In addition to your excellent list, we also had both unemployment and interest rates averaging around 10% for most of the 80s. I remember it vividly as quite a torrid time for many people.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 27,236
    ydoethur said:

    A reminder that no Labour leader has been ousted by a vote since 1935, and it has never happened while the party is in office.

    Would be interesting to see Miliband win though. I know he's not flavour of the month on PB but he does at least have some imagination and an idea of what he wants to do, which appears to be more than Starmer or Sunak.

    Mind, we could have said the same of Massive or Lettuce Lady...

    A reminder: https://xkcd.com/1122/

    Precedents are there to be broken, not a rule of nature.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 21,397

    Cookie said:

    On Sunday, I said I had agreed with @TSE's 'lay Burnham' strategy. And I had, up until yesterday. But I now see Burnham as the favourite. He is now the clear challenger to Starmer in a way which he wasn't before the weekend. A colleague laid out a scenario which I find convincing: following Labour's shellacking at the by-election and then again in May, another by-election in GM is engineered (it is rumoured that G&D isn't even the one AB had his eye on). Having turned him down - and got a very negative reaction from the party and its voters - the NEC will struggle to justify doing so again. Burnham then wins a by-election, returns to parliament, and immediately challenges Starmer, and wins.
    (FWIW, a friend of mine who works at the GM combined authority yesterday received a hilariously terse email from the head of the CA confirming the mayor had made it clear that 'his full focus remains on Greater Manchester' - which was apparently greeted with laughter.)

    If I was exposed to AB becoming the next Labour leader and/or PM, I would probably be trying to ease myself out of that position now with a view to swinging modestly the other way should Labour lose the G&D by-election (which I think they will).

    Swiss cheese model suggests a lot of holes to get through for ALL that to happen. The NEC don't give a shit - they showed that at the weekend. These are people in deep in the tribal politics of the left. They life for the fight. No, not the fight against the Tories, or Reform, the internal fights in their own party.
    One of the stories doing the rounds is that Labour HQ are cool with Burnham moving back to Westminster, but not until next year;

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jan/26/andy-burnham-try-again-westminster-return

    Makes rational sense- the electoral system by then would be SV not FPTP. Alternatively, they know that their current excuse won't wash by then. For some reason, Andy doesn't want to wait until 2027.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,439
    Nigelb said:

    A lot of stories coming out of Iran about patients being shot in their hospital beds, and some doctors being sentenced to death for treating the wounded.

    🆘🆘You might wonder how the regime is tracking down and arresting doctors who treat wounded protesters. This is how.

    They have turned healthcare into a surveillance trap. Over the past few years, all prescriptions were centralized and digitized.

    Pharmacies are banned from giving out even basic wound-care supplies without an official prescription. A simple IV saline bag now requires registration. Every bandage, painkiller, antibiotic, every drop of medicine leaves a digital footprint.

    So when doctors help the wounded, the regime does not need informants. It just audits prescription records, flags injury patterns, and follows the data straight to the physician. Treating the injured has been criminalized. The medical system itself is being used to identify, arrest, and silence doctors who chose humanity over obedience.

    Even in war, the wounded have the right to medical care. Violating that is a war crime. What’s happening now is one of the worst atrocities of our time, with chilling similarities to the darkest chapters of history, including the Holocaust.

    These people must receive care. There must be safe channels to get medicine and medical help to them. Iranians need help...

    https://x.com/__Injaneb96/status/2015961858482614527

    Deeply disturbing. Using tech to track individuals is rising and will only get worse, from this most bloody use, to China's social credit, and the 'for your own good' bullshit over here that will ensue if fools get their dream of axing real money so there's only digital purchasing of goods and services.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,341
    Miliband and value are incongruent. As is Rayner. No value to.the electorate.. in fact the exact opposite.
    God knows what QEII would have thought if she had still been alive.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 22,173

    Good analysis. Thanks @Wulfrun_Phil

    I wouldn't be surprised if Labour had their Liz Truss moment.

    A few questions follow from that.

    Firstly, without the delay to the process of government implosion that the death of the Queen provided during Truss's Ministry, would the Labour Truss end up lasting even less time in post?

    Alternatively, might a similar crisis play out rather differently with Labour MPs not being as ruthless about defenestrating a second PM in quick succession, and what might that mean?

    How high will the Greens poll as a backlash? Until the debacle with Truss, Reform were only polling ~3% - if the Greens receive a similar rocket in support as a result of a Labour Truss tribute act...
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 4,645
    kle4 said:

    I'd admire Ed M is still in the hunt for being PM after nearly 20 years in politcs and losing a GE, but have his qualities improved in the last 10 years to make him a better prospect for them?

    It's the qualities of those around him that count.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 42,011
    @Peston
    And this, writing in Tribune, is Andrea Egan, the new general secretary of one of Labour’s most important trade union backers, Unison, on how Starmer and the NEC committee rejected Burnham: “I know that I speak for many of my colleagues across the trade union movement, and in chorus with a significant number of Labour MPs, when I say that we cannot allow those currently in charge of the party to take us down with them. A radical change in direction — in party culture, in policy for the country, in how we deal with the far-right threat — could not be more urgently needed. I am confident that a broad, pluralist coalition across our movement will now come together to ensure we see that change.”
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,655
    edited 10:12AM

    Cookie said:

    On Sunday, I said I had agreed with @TSE's 'lay Burnham' strategy. And I had, up until yesterday. But I now see Burnham as the favourite. He is now the clear challenger to Starmer in a way which he wasn't before the weekend. A colleague laid out a scenario which I find convincing: following Labour's shellacking at the by-election and then again in May, another by-election in GM is engineered (it is rumoured that G&D isn't even the one AB had his eye on). Having turned him down - and got a very negative reaction from the party and its voters - the NEC will struggle to justify doing so again. Burnham then wins a by-election, returns to parliament, and immediately challenges Starmer, and wins.
    (FWIW, a friend of mine who works at the GM combined authority yesterday received a hilariously terse email from the head of the CA confirming the mayor had made it clear that 'his full focus remains on Greater Manchester' - which was apparently greeted with laughter.)

    If I was exposed to AB becoming the next Labour leader and/or PM, I would probably be trying to ease myself out of that position now with a view to swinging modestly the other way should Labour lose the G&D by-election (which I think they will).

    Swiss cheese model suggests a lot of holes to get through for ALL that to happen. The NEC don't give a shit - they showed that at the weekend. These are people in deep in the tribal politics of the left. They life for the fight. No, not the fight against the Tories, or Reform, the internal fights in their own party.
    Yes, and that's why I was reasonably sure AB would not succeed SKS. There are, what six hurdles:
    - there being a by-election
    - AB having the balls to put himself forward for the by-election
    - the NEC acceding
    - Winning the by-election
    - Engineering a challenge for the leadership
    - Winning the leadership

    But I have been surprised by the strength of feeling within the Labour Party that the NEC have made the wrong decision. I have become convinced that enough pressure will be applied. I'm convinced 1 can be re-engineered, and clearly there is no problem with 2. 4 will be tricky but not insurmountable and I'm sure 5 and 6 are relatively easy. 3 is the biggest, and arguably the only significant barrier. It is just a case for the not-SKS bloc - which is large - of applying enough pressure.

    i.e. it was Swiss Cheese theory, but it isn't any more. It's simply a case of hammering the NEC nut hard enough - and last weekend was the start of that. The others can all line up fairly easily.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 22,173
    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    This week's YouGov:

    Reform: 25% (+1)
    Labour: 21% (+2)
    Conservative: 17% (-1)
    Green: 16% (-1)
    Liberal Democrat: 14% (=)

    From 25th - 26th January
    Changes with 19th January

    Not much change in all honesty.

    Starmer will be pleased with that I suspect, Labour up 2% in a poll largely taken after the Burnham blocking. The Tory defections to Reform not done much for Farage, Reform up 1% but Labour closed the gap with Reform to just 4%.

    Bad poll for Kemi, the Tories now just 1% ahead of the Greens and with the LDs also closer to the Tories than the Tories are to Labour with Yougov.
    It's another poll that would seem to suggest that the decline in the Reform share has halted. If there are more defections in the weeks ahead then we could see Reform rebuild their vote share going in to the May elections.
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 7,305
    I worry about Ed Miliband. Each time I see him talk about the free energy that’s costing more and more, he looks increasingly deranged
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 36,536

    ydoethur said:

    carnforth said:

    HYUFD said:

    carnforth said:

    Fishing said:

    On topic an excellent thread.

    Thank God that electing a Labour government with a massive majority has meant we've left behind the endless instability and personality-based psychodramas of the Tory years.

    How often have big majorities meant stability? Only Blair, Boris and Starmer in my lifetime - one out of three - so I will have to defer to others for the long view.
    Thatcher and Blair certainly proved it
    Oh dear - apparently I am old enough for a Senior Moment - forgetting Thatcher! Though I was a child at the time, I suppose.
    How stable a government was the Thatcher one post 83? She faced the Miners’ Strike, the Westland affair, the abandonment of monetarism, a financial panic, the splits over Europe, the psychodramas of Howe, Heseltine and Lawson, and the poll tax.

    Yes with hindsight we know she surmounted all but the last one, but it’s easy to be wise with hindsight and I doubt if it felt so stable at the time.
    You're right; it didn't feel particularly stable at the time. In addition to your excellent list, we also had both unemployment and interest rates averaging around 10% for most of the 80s. I remember it vividly as quite a torrid time for many people.
    Morning ll; not a good one here. Wind and rain.

    You're right about interest rates; haven't looked at the figures but 10% seems low for the average. I was trying to run a small business at the time and it was, especially when added to the landlords bizarre idea as to how high the rent could go it was crippling.
    I was very glad when I found someone else to take over the lease.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 133,336

    Miliband and value are incongruent. As is Rayner. No value to.the electorate.. in fact the exact opposite.
    God knows what QEII would have thought if she had still been alive.

    Ed Miliband returned as Labour leader would be a dream scenario for the Tories and Reform, albeit less so for the Greens
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 22,173
    AnneJGP said:

    kle4 said:

    I'd admire Ed M is still in the hunt for being PM after nearly 20 years in politcs and losing a GE, but have his qualities improved in the last 10 years to make him a better prospect for them?

    It's the qualities of those around him that count.
    If Labour led by Miliband achieved just over 30% of the vote at the next GE, as they did in 2015, they would be delighted.

    Given that they're currently 10pp behind in the polls, even losing by the ~7pp margin of 2015 would be an improvement.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 46,382
    What a signing Offord has been for Reform.

    STV News
    @STVNews
    Reform's leader in Scotland has said the country "should be rolling out the red carpet" for Donald Trump. https://i.stv.tv/3LD61Um

    https://x.com/STVNews/status/2015834459220672991?s=20
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 36,536

    What a signing Offord has been for Reform.

    STV News
    @STVNews
    Reform's leader in Scotland has said the country "should be rolling out the red carpet" for Donald Trump. https://i.stv.tv/3LD61Um

    https://x.com/STVNews/status/2015834459220672991?s=20

    Traitor. And not in the TV sense of the term.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 69,797
    (((Dan Hodges)))
    @DPJHodges
    ·
    13m
    A declaration of war from the head of Unison on the Labour Party leadership. This is a big deal.

    https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/2016090888183628104

  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 2,146
    HYUFD said:

    Miliband and value are incongruent. As is Rayner. No value to.the electorate.. in fact the exact opposite.
    God knows what QEII would have thought if she had still been alive.

    Ed Miliband returned as Labour leader would be a dream scenario for the Tories and Reform, albeit less so for the Greens
    True, they'd be able to relax back into dogwhistle anti-semitism as well
Sign In or Register to comment.