“Although some of PA's actions did constitute acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Act 2000, the nature and scale of PA's activities falling within the definition of terrorism had not yet reached the level, scale and persistence to warrant proscription.”
I am not sure the courts should be making that assessment to be honest.
Is it not the role of the courts to interpret what laws mean?
Yeah, of course. The power is:
Terrorism Act 2000, s3
(4) The Secretary of State may exercise his power under subsection (3)(a) in respect of an organisation only if he believes that it is concerned in terrorism.
That’s a very wide power, but it doesn’t appear to give a “level of terrorism” to warrant proscription. It would presumably just have to be a rational opinion.
The word 'may' on its own (and in sub section 3) means that the SoS has to consider properly wider matters than whether it falls under the terrorism definition. It means the SoS has a discretion. Once you have a discretion it follows as night follows day that its use can be challenged, and among other things, the level of activity is going to be an arguable consideration. Starmer himself is an expert practitioner in exactly this field.
Perhaps you can help me. I've been reading a lot of legislation and court verdicts recently and I need guidance on words. Is my interpretation of the following correct?
"must": you are compelled by law to do so
"should": you are recommended to do so but there are circs in which you may not
"may": you are allowed to do so but may choose not to do so
So far as I can recall the word 'should' is never used in legislation. I don't think it is capable of having a meaning in law. Whereas 'must', 'shall', and 'may' are explicable. Yes, 'must' (and 'shall') means you have to, 'may' means there is a discretion. The use of discretion in law is always capable of being complicated.
Should is prominent in the highway code - ignoring should leaves you open to careless driving.
I think the problem with 'should' as a legal term is that it fails to compel, and therefore gives a discretion with an ill defined bias about how that discretion is exercised.
It is there in guidance, but I doubt if it is used in primary legislation.
The Highway Code has lots of "musts" which compel , and lots of "shoulds" which guide but also allow you to deviate if there is good reason.
If there is some traffic in the slow lane and I am travelling at the speed limit (so not impeding traffic) I remain in the middle lane as that is safer than dodging in and out of lanes. Using the inside lane is a "should" in the Highway Code. Check it out.
People who complain that I am breaking the law don't understand the distinction between "must" and "should". They are often the ones who do break the law by overtaking me at 80mph, sometimes on the inside.
If there is space for someone to undertake you then there is space for you to be in lane 1, and, unless you are overtaking traffic in lane 1, that's where you should be. Your speed is irrelevant.
You make my point for me.
Since we've been chatting AI recently, I thought I would see what my GPT had to say on the subject:
Under UK law, sitting in the middle lane when lane 1 is clear is usually treated as careless driving, also known as driving without due care and attention under Section 3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.
The Highway Code is not law by itself, but it does reflect legal duties. Rule 264 says:
You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear.
That “should” means it is advisory guidance. But ignoring it without good reason can be used as evidence of careless driving.
In 2013 the police were given powers to issue on-the-spot fixed penalties for careless driving, and “middle lane hogging” was specifically cited as an example. So if you’re cruising along in lane 2 with lane 1 empty, no overtaking happening, and no obvious reason, an officer can pull you and issue:
£100 fine 3 penalty points Or in more serious cases, report you to court.
Now the nuance, because nuance is everything: It is not automatically an offence simply to be in lane 2. It becomes an offence if your positioning is unreasonable or falls below the standard of a competent and careful driver.
Legitimate reasons to be in lane 2:
Overtaking Lane 1 full of HGVs spaced awkwardly Junction traffic merging Avoiding obstructions Short-term positioning before overtaking
Illegitimate reason:
“I prefer this lane” “Lane 1 feels slow” “It’s the vibe”
Enforcement is inconsistent. Plenty of drivers do it. But if a traffic officer feels you’re impeding flow or creating unnecessary risk, they can absolutely act on it.
So in summary:
Not a specific standalone offence called “middle lane hogging” Usually prosecuted as careless driving Yes, you can get points for it No, you are not required to glue yourself to lane 1 at all times like a motorway barnacle Drive left unless overtaking. It’s not complicated. Humans just make it complicated.
“Although some of PA's actions did constitute acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Act 2000, the nature and scale of PA's activities falling within the definition of terrorism had not yet reached the level, scale and persistence to warrant proscription.”
I am not sure the courts should be making that assessment to be honest.
Is it not the role of the courts to interpret what laws mean?
Yeah, of course. The power is:
Terrorism Act 2000, s3
(4) The Secretary of State may exercise his power under subsection (3)(a) in respect of an organisation only if he believes that it is concerned in terrorism.
That’s a very wide power, but it doesn’t appear to give a “level of terrorism” to warrant proscription. It would presumably just have to be a rational opinion.
The word 'may' on its own (and in sub section 3) means that the SoS has to consider properly wider matters than whether it falls under the terrorism definition. It means the SoS has a discretion. Once you have a discretion it follows as night follows day that its use can be challenged, and among other things, the level of activity is going to be an arguable consideration. Starmer himself is an expert practitioner in exactly this field.
Perhaps you can help me. I've been reading a lot of legislation and court verdicts recently and I need guidance on words. Is my interpretation of the following correct?
"must": you are compelled by law to do so
"should": you are recommended to do so but there are circs in which you may not
"may": you are allowed to do so but may choose not to do so
So far as I can recall the word 'should' is never used in legislation. I don't think it is capable of having a meaning in law. Whereas 'must', 'shall', and 'may' are explicable. Yes, 'must' (and 'shall') means you have to, 'may' means there is a discretion. The use of discretion in law is always capable of being complicated.
Should is prominent in the highway code - ignoring should leaves you open to careless driving.
I think the problem with 'should' as a legal term is that it fails to compel, and therefore gives a discretion with an ill defined bias about how that discretion is exercised.
It is there in guidance, but I doubt if it is used in primary legislation.
The Highway Code has lots of "musts" which compel , and lots of "shoulds" which guide but also allow you to deviate if there is good reason.
If there is some traffic in the slow lane and I am travelling at the speed limit (so not impeding traffic) I remain in the middle lane as that is safer than dodging in and out of lanes. Using the inside lane is a "should" in the Highway Code. Check it out.
People who complain that I am breaking the law don't understand the distinction between "must" and "should". They are often the ones who do break the law by overtaking me at 80mph, sometimes on the inside.
If there is space for someone to undertake you then there is space for you to be in lane 1, and, unless you are overtaking traffic in lane 1, that's where you should be. Your speed is irrelevant.
"Should"?
Indeed - do this thing, unless there's a compelling unstated reason not to do so.
For example, I've sometimes delayed pulling back over to lane 1 when approaching a slip lane merging from a junction. That's a sensible, and temporary, exception to the should.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Ukrainian forces outperformed two NATO battalions during a single day of training exercises.
The article refers to drills held in Estonia last year, involving roughly 16,000 troops from 12 NATO countries. In one simulated scenario, a British brigade and an Estonian division attacked Ukrainian units. The report says the Ukrainians achieved such a decisive result that the opposing force was no longer considered able to continue effective combat operations within the exercise.
The episode is being cited by some observers as evidence that the United States and NATO are operating with a major experience gap compared with Ukraine, and that they may not fully grasp the scale of it yet. The argument is that it could take years for Western forces to accumulate the same hard-earned lessons Ukraine has gathered under real combat conditions.
At the same time, the same observers point to Europe’s close cooperation with Ukraine as a strategic advantage, saying European countries are likely to keep supporting Ukraine with equipment and expand joint training, including more direct training alongside Ukrainian troops going forward. https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/2022300045345722397
Remains prescribed until order of court pending appeal process
Human Rights Act no doubt
A fantastic win for freedom and everyone who has fought for a Palestinian State and recognition.
I don't advocate violence or vandalism, but when you are the subject of genocide and a world order that either supports it like Trump or stands back and condones it like Starmer, then it is no surprise.
The Labour Government has too late in the day recognised the claims for a 2 state solution. It must now agree with this legal ruling, desist all prosecutions, release all prisoners and appoint a Minister for Palestine to work with and for a 2 state solution and lobby with other global powers who are supportive.
All arms sales to Israel should be stopped immediately.
That should not stop all ongoing measures to stop anti semitism, but the UK should be clear it supports the rights of all Jews to live peacefully and in safety in the UK but that extremes of Zionism will not be tolerated in the same way extremes of Islam are not tolerated.
There are some real signs in places like Manchester of decent moderate Jews and Muslims living and working together to fight extremes in both their religions.
Finally the UK must lead in any fight for regime change in Israel, so that the majority there that don't want Netanyahu either are supported and he is bought to justice for internal corruption and by the world at large for his genocide in Gaza and the West Bank.
Nothing short of a full apology from Starmer will suffice.
Instead we now hear that Starmer and Mahmood will appeal against the ruling.
They appear incapable of understanding the immense political damage that their approach to the Gaza conflict has done in fragmenting support for Labour across the left, particularly since the start of the 2024 general election campaign when the party was polling at around 45% rather than its current 20% average.
This was an opportunity to start to claw back some of that damage, simply by doing nothing and moving on. Instead they are doubling down by appealing.
So much for a supposed reset of Starmer's approach as PM. He is politically tone deaf on a monumental scale. I wonder what would have happened if the court judgement had been made on Monday not Friday morning, would his Cabinet ministers and the PLP still have decided that the time was not right to move against Starmer that evening?
Starmer must go. And when he is eventually dragged kicking and screaming from No 10, Mahmood doesn't stand a cat in hell's chance of replacing him.
Couldn't agree with you more. The kind old judges offered him a lifeline and he couldn't see it infront of his eyes. Mahmood was appointed in his aping Farage phase and she was as bad as expected.
They gave him a tiny window and he couldn't see it so time to look for a new leader. Despite his name he doesn't have an instinctive lefty bone in his body
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
“Although some of PA's actions did constitute acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Act 2000, the nature and scale of PA's activities falling within the definition of terrorism had not yet reached the level, scale and persistence to warrant proscription.”
I am not sure the courts should be making that assessment to be honest.
Is it not the role of the courts to interpret what laws mean?
Yeah, of course. The power is:
Terrorism Act 2000, s3
(4) The Secretary of State may exercise his power under subsection (3)(a) in respect of an organisation only if he believes that it is concerned in terrorism.
That’s a very wide power, but it doesn’t appear to give a “level of terrorism” to warrant proscription. It would presumably just have to be a rational opinion.
The word 'may' on its own (and in sub section 3) means that the SoS has to consider properly wider matters than whether it falls under the terrorism definition. It means the SoS has a discretion. Once you have a discretion it follows as night follows day that its use can be challenged, and among other things, the level of activity is going to be an arguable consideration. Starmer himself is an expert practitioner in exactly this field.
Perhaps you can help me. I've been reading a lot of legislation and court verdicts recently and I need guidance on words. Is my interpretation of the following correct?
"must": you are compelled by law to do so
"should": you are recommended to do so but there are circs in which you may not
"may": you are allowed to do so but may choose not to do so
So far as I can recall the word 'should' is never used in legislation. I don't think it is capable of having a meaning in law. Whereas 'must', 'shall', and 'may' are explicable. Yes, 'must' (and 'shall') means you have to, 'may' means there is a discretion. The use of discretion in law is always capable of being complicated.
Should is prominent in the highway code - ignoring should leaves you open to careless driving.
I think the problem with 'should' as a legal term is that it fails to compel, and therefore gives a discretion with an ill defined bias about how that discretion is exercised.
It is there in guidance, but I doubt if it is used in primary legislation.
The Highway Code has lots of "musts" which compel , and lots of "shoulds" which guide but also allow you to deviate if there is good reason.
If there is some traffic in the slow lane and I am travelling at the speed limit (so not impeding traffic) I remain in the middle lane as that is safer than dodging in and out of lanes. Using the inside lane is a "should" in the Highway Code. Check it out.
People who complain that I am breaking the law don't understand the distinction between "must" and "should". They are often the ones who do break the law by overtaking me at 80mph, sometimes on the inside.
If there is space for someone to undertake you then there is space for you to be in lane 1, and, unless you are overtaking traffic in lane 1, that's where you should be. Your speed is irrelevant.
"Should"?
{it’s 2030 and the Russians have invaded Lithuania}
Russian General : What’s holding up the advance? Why are we stuck at Raseiniai? Officer : There’s one man in a British WWII tank, parked on a roundabout. Anyone comes up to the stop line, he engages. General : 37 days!!! Officer : There’s no shifting him. He keeps shouting stuff about traffic laws.
The British forces are in Estonia. There seems to be some debate whether a Russian attack on Lithuania (where the Germans are deployed) or Estonia is the more likely.
Latvia - where Canada have taken the lead - doesn't seem to feature.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
“Although some of PA's actions did constitute acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Act 2000, the nature and scale of PA's activities falling within the definition of terrorism had not yet reached the level, scale and persistence to warrant proscription.”
I am not sure the courts should be making that assessment to be honest.
Is it not the role of the courts to interpret what laws mean?
Yeah, of course. The power is:
Terrorism Act 2000, s3
(4) The Secretary of State may exercise his power under subsection (3)(a) in respect of an organisation only if he believes that it is concerned in terrorism.
That’s a very wide power, but it doesn’t appear to give a “level of terrorism” to warrant proscription. It would presumably just have to be a rational opinion.
The word 'may' on its own (and in sub section 3) means that the SoS has to consider properly wider matters than whether it falls under the terrorism definition. It means the SoS has a discretion. Once you have a discretion it follows as night follows day that its use can be challenged, and among other things, the level of activity is going to be an arguable consideration. Starmer himself is an expert practitioner in exactly this field.
Perhaps you can help me. I've been reading a lot of legislation and court verdicts recently and I need guidance on words. Is my interpretation of the following correct?
"must": you are compelled by law to do so
"should": you are recommended to do so but there are circs in which you may not
"may": you are allowed to do so but may choose not to do so
So far as I can recall the word 'should' is never used in legislation. I don't think it is capable of having a meaning in law. Whereas 'must', 'shall', and 'may' are explicable. Yes, 'must' (and 'shall') means you have to, 'may' means there is a discretion. The use of discretion in law is always capable of being complicated.
Should is prominent in the highway code - ignoring should leaves you open to careless driving.
I think the problem with 'should' as a legal term is that it fails to compel, and therefore gives a discretion with an ill defined bias about how that discretion is exercised.
It is there in guidance, but I doubt if it is used in primary legislation.
The Highway Code has lots of "musts" which compel , and lots of "shoulds" which guide but also allow you to deviate if there is good reason.
If there is some traffic in the slow lane and I am travelling at the speed limit (so not impeding traffic) I remain in the middle lane as that is safer than dodging in and out of lanes. Using the inside lane is a "should" in the Highway Code. Check it out.
People who complain that I am breaking the law don't understand the distinction between "must" and "should". They are often the ones who do break the law by overtaking me at 80mph, sometimes on the inside.
If there is space for someone to undertake you then there is space for you to be in lane 1, and, unless you are overtaking traffic in lane 1, that's where you should be. Your speed is irrelevant.
You make my point for me.
Since we've been chatting AI recently, I thought I would see what my GPT had to say on the subject:
Under UK law, sitting in the middle lane when lane 1 is clear is usually treated as careless driving, also known as driving without due care and attention under Section 3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.
The Highway Code is not law by itself, but it does reflect legal duties. Rule 264 says:
You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear.
That “should” means it is advisory guidance. But ignoring it without good reason can be used as evidence of careless driving.
In 2013 the police were given powers to issue on-the-spot fixed penalties for careless driving, and “middle lane hogging” was specifically cited as an example. So if you’re cruising along in lane 2 with lane 1 empty, no overtaking happening, and no obvious reason, an officer can pull you and issue:
£100 fine 3 penalty points Or in more serious cases, report you to court.
Now the nuance, because nuance is everything: It is not automatically an offence simply to be in lane 2. It becomes an offence if your positioning is unreasonable or falls below the standard of a competent and careful driver.
Legitimate reasons to be in lane 2:
Overtaking Lane 1 full of HGVs spaced awkwardly Junction traffic merging Avoiding obstructions Short-term positioning before overtaking
Illegitimate reason:
“I prefer this lane” “Lane 1 feels slow” “It’s the vibe”
Enforcement is inconsistent. Plenty of drivers do it. But if a traffic officer feels you’re impeding flow or creating unnecessary risk, they can absolutely act on it.
So in summary:
Not a specific standalone offence called “middle lane hogging” Usually prosecuted as careless driving Yes, you can get points for it No, you are not required to glue yourself to lane 1 at all times like a motorway barnacle Drive left unless overtaking. It’s not complicated. Humans just make it complicated.
These days there is a further complication when the slip road turns into Lane One.
Big Jobby had a short about one of those recently.
The allegations against Peter Murrell include embezzling cash from the SNP to purchase a motorhome, a Jaguar and a VW Golf. Who drove the Jaguar, and who drove the Golf?
Asking for a friend.
Well it wouldn't have been Sturgeon. She didn't pass her driving test until October 2023.
Will she testify, do we think?
What are the Scottish laws on spouses testifying against/to back up each other?
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
The Wall Street Journal reported that Ukrainian forces outperformed two NATO battalions during a single day of training exercises.
The article refers to drills held in Estonia last year, involving roughly 16,000 troops from 12 NATO countries. In one simulated scenario, a British brigade and an Estonian division attacked Ukrainian units. The report says the Ukrainians achieved such a decisive result that the opposing force was no longer considered able to continue effective combat operations within the exercise.
The episode is being cited by some observers as evidence that the United States and NATO are operating with a major experience gap compared with Ukraine, and that they may not fully grasp the scale of it yet. The argument is that it could take years for Western forces to accumulate the same hard-earned lessons Ukraine has gathered under real combat conditions.
At the same time, the same observers point to Europe’s close cooperation with Ukraine as a strategic advantage, saying European countries are likely to keep supporting Ukraine with equipment and expand joint training, including more direct training alongside Ukrainian troops going forward. https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/2022300045345722397
Transitive logic would imply that Russian forces are likely to outperform NATO forces, given that the Ukrainians haven't swept Russia out of Ukraine.
Via @Moreincommon_, 30 Jan - 10 Feb. Changes w/ 18 Jun - 3 Jul.
Unlikely, the Tories have also leaked heavily to Reform since 2021
Although there is not the visible enthusiasm in Wales for Reform that I saw in central and coastal Lincolnshire yesterday, they are still popular. That poll is a warning to Plaid to crush Labour or risk a fascist- conservative coalition.
Most likely Wales will be a Plaid and Labour government but Reform most seats on that poll
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
Hahaha. Many alternative explanations available from the open-minded.... - aha I see your problem.
Only other explanation is 5 times as many 2024 Labour voters as Tory voters went Reform
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
The point is that in Worth Valley there were only two potential winners. So vote for the least worst. That's what I'd have done.
“Although some of PA's actions did constitute acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Act 2000, the nature and scale of PA's activities falling within the definition of terrorism had not yet reached the level, scale and persistence to warrant proscription.”
I am not sure the courts should be making that assessment to be honest.
Is it not the role of the courts to interpret what laws mean?
Yeah, of course. The power is:
Terrorism Act 2000, s3
(4) The Secretary of State may exercise his power under subsection (3)(a) in respect of an organisation only if he believes that it is concerned in terrorism.
That’s a very wide power, but it doesn’t appear to give a “level of terrorism” to warrant proscription. It would presumably just have to be a rational opinion.
The word 'may' on its own (and in sub section 3) means that the SoS has to consider properly wider matters than whether it falls under the terrorism definition. It means the SoS has a discretion. Once you have a discretion it follows as night follows day that its use can be challenged, and among other things, the level of activity is going to be an arguable consideration. Starmer himself is an expert practitioner in exactly this field.
Perhaps you can help me. I've been reading a lot of legislation and court verdicts recently and I need guidance on words. Is my interpretation of the following correct?
"must": you are compelled by law to do so
"should": you are recommended to do so but there are circs in which you may not
"may": you are allowed to do so but may choose not to do so
So far as I can recall the word 'should' is never used in legislation. I don't think it is capable of having a meaning in law. Whereas 'must', 'shall', and 'may' are explicable. Yes, 'must' (and 'shall') means you have to, 'may' means there is a discretion. The use of discretion in law is always capable of being complicated.
Should is prominent in the highway code - ignoring should leaves you open to careless driving.
I think the problem with 'should' as a legal term is that it fails to compel, and therefore gives a discretion with an ill defined bias about how that discretion is exercised.
It is there in guidance, but I doubt if it is used in primary legislation.
The Highway Code has lots of "musts" which compel , and lots of "shoulds" which guide but also allow you to deviate if there is good reason.
If there is some traffic in the slow lane and I am travelling at the speed limit (so not impeding traffic) I remain in the middle lane as that is safer than dodging in and out of lanes. Using the inside lane is a "should" in the Highway Code. Check it out.
People who complain that I am breaking the law don't understand the distinction between "must" and "should". They are often the ones who do break the law by overtaking me at 80mph, sometimes on the inside.
If there is space for someone to undertake you then there is space for you to be in lane 1, and, unless you are overtaking traffic in lane 1, that's where you should be. Your speed is irrelevant.
You make my point for me.
Since we've been chatting AI recently, I thought I would see what my GPT had to say on the subject:
Under UK law, sitting in the middle lane when lane 1 is clear is usually treated as careless driving, also known as driving without due care and attention under Section 3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.
The Highway Code is not law by itself, but it does reflect legal duties. Rule 264 says:
You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear.
That “should” means it is advisory guidance. But ignoring it without good reason can be used as evidence of careless driving.
In 2013 the police were given powers to issue on-the-spot fixed penalties for careless driving, and “middle lane hogging” was specifically cited as an example. So if you’re cruising along in lane 2 with lane 1 empty, no overtaking happening, and no obvious reason, an officer can pull you and issue:
£100 fine 3 penalty points Or in more serious cases, report you to court.
Now the nuance, because nuance is everything: It is not automatically an offence simply to be in lane 2. It becomes an offence if your positioning is unreasonable or falls below the standard of a competent and careful driver.
Legitimate reasons to be in lane 2:
Overtaking Lane 1 full of HGVs spaced awkwardly Junction traffic merging Avoiding obstructions Short-term positioning before overtaking
Illegitimate reason:
“I prefer this lane” “Lane 1 feels slow” “It’s the vibe”
Enforcement is inconsistent. Plenty of drivers do it. But if a traffic officer feels you’re impeding flow or creating unnecessary risk, they can absolutely act on it.
So in summary:
Not a specific standalone offence called “middle lane hogging” Usually prosecuted as careless driving Yes, you can get points for it No, you are not required to glue yourself to lane 1 at all times like a motorway barnacle Drive left unless overtaking. It’s not complicated. Humans just make it complicated.
These days there is a further complication when the slip road turns into Lane One.
Big Jobby had a short about one of those recently.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
The point is that in Worth Valley there were only two potential winners. So vote for the least worst. That's what I'd have done.
Do you know what? I don't believe I could do it. A c*ck and b@lls on the ballot paper it is then.
I don't see many PB faithful voting Labour over Reform in a LabRef marginal. I believe they would take their chances with anything but Labour.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Ukrainian forces outperformed two NATO battalions during a single day of training exercises.
The article refers to drills held in Estonia last year, involving roughly 16,000 troops from 12 NATO countries. In one simulated scenario, a British brigade and an Estonian division attacked Ukrainian units. The report says the Ukrainians achieved such a decisive result that the opposing force was no longer considered able to continue effective combat operations within the exercise.
The episode is being cited by some observers as evidence that the United States and NATO are operating with a major experience gap compared with Ukraine, and that they may not fully grasp the scale of it yet. The argument is that it could take years for Western forces to accumulate the same hard-earned lessons Ukraine has gathered under real combat conditions.
At the same time, the same observers point to Europe’s close cooperation with Ukraine as a strategic advantage, saying European countries are likely to keep supporting Ukraine with equipment and expand joint training, including more direct training alongside Ukrainian troops going forward. https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/2022300045345722397
Transitive logic would imply that Russian forces are likely to outperform NATO forces, given that the Ukrainians haven't swept Russia out of Ukraine.
The further implication is that the argument that, "Russia won't attack NATO because they can't even win against Ukraine," doesn't hold any water if Ukraine are stronger than NATO.
Assisted suicide would be a lot better if they flew you to Disko Bay in Greenland, gave you an Inuit girl for a night, then a load of heroin cocaine and fentanyl, and let you walk alone on to the ice cap. Never to return
That’s so much than some hideous beige sofa in a Zurich suburb
Under the Northern Lights. Quite the sales pitch for the check out...
Assisted suicide would be a lot better if they flew you to Disko Bay in Greenland, gave you an Inuit girl for a night, then a load of heroin cocaine and fentanyl, and let you walk alone on to the ice cap. Never to return
That’s so much than some hideous beige sofa in a Zurich suburb
Under the Northern Lights. Quite the sales pitch for the check out...
The Wall Street Journal reported that Ukrainian forces outperformed two NATO battalions during a single day of training exercises.
The article refers to drills held in Estonia last year, involving roughly 16,000 troops from 12 NATO countries. In one simulated scenario, a British brigade and an Estonian division attacked Ukrainian units. The report says the Ukrainians achieved such a decisive result that the opposing force was no longer considered able to continue effective combat operations within the exercise.
The episode is being cited by some observers as evidence that the United States and NATO are operating with a major experience gap compared with Ukraine, and that they may not fully grasp the scale of it yet. The argument is that it could take years for Western forces to accumulate the same hard-earned lessons Ukraine has gathered under real combat conditions.
At the same time, the same observers point to Europe’s close cooperation with Ukraine as a strategic advantage, saying European countries are likely to keep supporting Ukraine with equipment and expand joint training, including more direct training alongside Ukrainian troops going forward. https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/2022300045345722397
Transitive logic would imply that Russian forces are likely to outperform NATO forces, given that the Ukrainians haven't swept Russia out of Ukraine.
The further implication is that the argument that, "Russia won't attack NATO because they can't even win against Ukraine," doesn't hold any water if Ukraine are stronger than NATO.
"Peace has cost you your strength! Victory has defeated you!"
“Although some of PA's actions did constitute acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Act 2000, the nature and scale of PA's activities falling within the definition of terrorism had not yet reached the level, scale and persistence to warrant proscription.”
I am not sure the courts should be making that assessment to be honest.
Is it not the role of the courts to interpret what laws mean?
Yeah, of course. The power is:
Terrorism Act 2000, s3
(4) The Secretary of State may exercise his power under subsection (3)(a) in respect of an organisation only if he believes that it is concerned in terrorism.
That’s a very wide power, but it doesn’t appear to give a “level of terrorism” to warrant proscription. It would presumably just have to be a rational opinion.
The word 'may' on its own (and in sub section 3) means that the SoS has to consider properly wider matters than whether it falls under the terrorism definition. It means the SoS has a discretion. Once you have a discretion it follows as night follows day that its use can be challenged, and among other things, the level of activity is going to be an arguable consideration. Starmer himself is an expert practitioner in exactly this field.
Perhaps you can help me. I've been reading a lot of legislation and court verdicts recently and I need guidance on words. Is my interpretation of the following correct?
"must": you are compelled by law to do so
"should": you are recommended to do so but there are circs in which you may not
"may": you are allowed to do so but may choose not to do so
So far as I can recall the word 'should' is never used in legislation. I don't think it is capable of having a meaning in law. Whereas 'must', 'shall', and 'may' are explicable. Yes, 'must' (and 'shall') means you have to, 'may' means there is a discretion. The use of discretion in law is always capable of being complicated.
Should is prominent in the highway code - ignoring should leaves you open to careless driving.
I think the problem with 'should' as a legal term is that it fails to compel, and therefore gives a discretion with an ill defined bias about how that discretion is exercised.
It is there in guidance, but I doubt if it is used in primary legislation.
The Highway Code has lots of "musts" which compel , and lots of "shoulds" which guide but also allow you to deviate if there is good reason.
If there is some traffic in the slow lane and I am travelling at the speed limit (so not impeding traffic) I remain in the middle lane as that is safer than dodging in and out of lanes. Using the inside lane is a "should" in the Highway Code. Check it out.
People who complain that I am breaking the law don't understand the distinction between "must" and "should". They are often the ones who do break the law by overtaking me at 80mph, sometimes on the inside.
If there is space for someone to undertake you then there is space for you to be in lane 1, and, unless you are overtaking traffic in lane 1, that's where you should be. Your speed is irrelevant.
"Should"?
{it’s 2030 and the Russians have invaded Lithuania}
Russian General : What’s holding up the advance? Why are we stuck at Raseiniai? Officer : There’s one man in a British WWII tank, parked on a roundabout. Anyone comes up to the stop line, he engages. General : 37 days!!! Officer : There’s no shifting him. He keeps shouting stuff about traffic laws.
The British forces are in Estonia. There seems to be some debate whether a Russian attack on Lithuania (where the Germans are deployed) or Estonia is the more likely.
Latvia - where Canada have taken the lead - doesn't seem to feature.
Die Welt did a super complicated Kriegspiel involving serious looking middle aged men in glasses about what would happen if the Russian Federation forced a link between Belarus and Kaliningrad by occupying a thin strip of the Suwalki Corridor on humanitarian grounds. It was enough to a break an Ultra's heart. USA did fuck all except half-hearted mediation (totally believable). NATO did NOT invoke A5 despite Lithuania having a Menty B (quite believable) and the EU eventually put Brigade strength into Lithuania to stop the Russian occupation spreading (maybe believable). UK not mentioned. (LOL)
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
The point is that in Worth Valley there were only two potential winners. So vote for the least worst. That's what I'd have done.
Do you know what? I don't believe I could do it. A c*ck and b@lls on the ballot paper it is then.
I don't see many PB faithful voting Labour over Reform in a LabRef marginal. I believe they would take their chances with anything but Labour.
I can't see me voting for Priti Patel. That might well be my non-Reform option.
The allegations against Peter Murrell include embezzling cash from the SNP to purchase a motorhome, a Jaguar and a VW Golf. Who drove the Jaguar, and who drove the Golf?
Asking for a friend.
Some marriages must be much more incurious than my own. If a high five-figure campervan appeared on my drive, the missus would be very vigorously quizzing me on how the effing eff I had funded that...
I can't help thinking the wifely first words would be "Who is she?". And the convo went something like this
NS: "Who is she? WHO DID YOU BUY THE CAMPERVAN FOR?" PM: "um...it's for you, love of my life! Honest!" NS: "Oh, Peter, that's so sweet! PM: "Thank you" (sotto voce on the phone) "Yes, she's seen it: look I'll buy you *another* one...."
Assisted suicide would be a lot better if they flew you to Disko Bay in Greenland, gave you an Inuit girl for a night, then a load of heroin cocaine and fentanyl, and let you walk alone on to the ice cap. Never to return
That’s so much than some hideous beige sofa in a Zurich suburb
Under the Northern Lights. Quite the sales pitch for the check out...
Assisted suicide would be a lot better if they flew you to Disko Bay in Greenland, gave you an Inuit girl for a night, then a load of heroin cocaine and fentanyl, and let you walk alone on to the ice cap. Never to return
That’s so much than some hideous beige sofa in a Zurich suburb
Under the Northern Lights. Quite the sales pitch for the check out...
It would be bloody cold though...
Not for long.......
Technically that's not correct.
It would continue to be bloody cold with a dead body somewhere.
Assisted suicide would be a lot better if they flew you to Disko Bay in Greenland, gave you an Inuit girl for a night, then a load of heroin cocaine and fentanyl, and let you walk alone on to the ice cap. Never to return
That’s so much than some hideous beige sofa in a Zurich suburb
Under the Northern Lights. Quite the sales pitch for the check out...
It would be bloody cold though...
Not for long.......
Arriving in only shorts and a tee shirt would be way cheaper than booking into Dignitas.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
The allegations against Peter Murrell include embezzling cash from the SNP to purchase a motorhome, a Jaguar and a VW Golf. Who drove the Jaguar, and who drove the Golf?
Asking for a friend.
Some marriages must be much more incurious than my own. If a high five-figure campervan appeared on my drive, the missus would be very vigorously quizzing me on how the effing eff I had funded that...
I can't help thinking the wifely first words would be "Who is she?". And the convo went something like this
NS: "Who is she? WHO DID YOU BUY THE CAMPERVAN FOR?" PM: "um...it's for you, love of my life! Honest!" NS: "Oh, Peter, that's so sweet! PM: "Thank you" (sotto voce on the phone) "Yes, she's seen it: look I'll buy you *another* one...."
Are campervans a romantic gesture I was unaware of? An equivalent of flowers and chocolate?
Assisted suicide would be a lot better if they flew you to Disko Bay in Greenland, gave you an Inuit girl for a night, then a load of heroin cocaine and fentanyl, and let you walk alone on to the ice cap. Never to return
That’s so much than some hideous beige sofa in a Zurich suburb
Under the Northern Lights. Quite the sales pitch for the check out...
It would be bloody cold though...
Not for long.......
Technically that's not correct.
It would continue to be bloody cold with a dead body somewhere.
True. But wasn't that what elderly Inuit were alleged to do? Go out of the igloo and sit on the snow? Same like Capt. Oates.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
The point is that in Worth Valley there were only two potential winners. So vote for the least worst. That's what I'd have done.
Do you know what? I don't believe I could do it. A c*ck and b@lls on the ballot paper it is then.
I don't see many PB faithful voting Labour over Reform in a LabRef marginal. I believe they would take their chances with anything but Labour.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
That's a point. I've said I'm up for it, and I am, but it would have to be a clean Tory party to get my tactical vote. I wouldn't do it for a dirty one. If they had got clean, I mean properly clean, had a really good wash, and I lived in a Ref v Con seat for my sins, then, yes, they'd get my vote.
Assisted suicide would be a lot better if they flew you to Disko Bay in Greenland, gave you an Inuit girl for a night, then a load of heroin cocaine and fentanyl, and let you walk alone on to the ice cap. Never to return
That’s so much than some hideous beige sofa in a Zurich suburb
Under the Northern Lights. Quite the sales pitch for the check out...
It would be bloody cold though...
Not for long.......
Arriving in only shorts and a tee shirt would be way cheaper than booking into Dignitas.
They come to your house in Switzerland but you have to be a signed up member like the AA. My mate's mother-in-law did it. She was really bored so she phoned up and booked herself in for the following Friday. A serious man arrived in a Peugeot Partner van and prepared two drinks of whatever (in case you spill or spew one). So she rattled that into her skull while my mate and his Mrs took the dog for a walk. All over in 20 minutes. Very civilised.
Assisted suicide would be a lot better if they flew you to Disko Bay in Greenland, gave you an Inuit girl for a night, then a load of heroin cocaine and fentanyl, and let you walk alone on to the ice cap. Never to return
That’s so much than some hideous beige sofa in a Zurich suburb
Under the Northern Lights. Quite the sales pitch for the check out...
It would be bloody cold though...
Not for long.......
Arriving in only shorts and a tee shirt would be way cheaper than booking into Dignitas.
There was an article on assisted dying with an interview with a Dr in one of the Nordics who had "assisted dying" fatigue, he said fed up with a patient's repeated demands for a "check-out" he'd suggested he sit out in the garden with a bottle of vodka
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
The point is that in Worth Valley there were only two potential winners. So vote for the least worst. That's what I'd have done.
Do you know what? I don't believe I could do it. A c*ck and b@lls on the ballot paper it is then.
I don't see many PB faithful voting Labour over Reform in a LabRef marginal. I believe they would take their chances with anything but Labour.
I am sure I would. But then I was fairly comfortable voting LibDem last time, in the knowledge it would facilitate a Labour government, and often vote for them in local elections.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I don't buy that for one moment
So you believe more Labour voters went Reform than Tory voters, fine
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
The point is that in Worth Valley there were only two potential winners. So vote for the least worst. That's what I'd have done.
Do you know what? I don't believe I could do it. A c*ck and b@lls on the ballot paper it is then.
I don't see many PB faithful voting Labour over Reform in a LabRef marginal. I believe they would take their chances with anything but Labour.
Some types of hot food are ok cold the next day. Pizza is a good example. I thought lasagne might be too but I can today report that it isn't.
Doner Kebab the day after is majestic
It really isn't. It is barely edible on the day when it is covered in chilled garlic mayonnaise and salad.
Oh it is. From the Sea Spray in Shirley. Marvellous. The fat has congealed jn the pitta and can be peeled out.
The hot chilli sauce still,rocks.
Sounds vile. The only exotic restaurant I remember from when I lived in Wythall was the Shirley Temple.
In 1975 my uncle and aunt came to stay and fancied a Chinese. My dad had to drive to Alcester Lanes End in his Austin 1300 before he found one. I think they have several takeaways at Station Road shops now and certainly at Drakes Cross.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
The point is that in Worth Valley there were only two potential winners. So vote for the least worst. That's what I'd have done.
Do you know what? I don't believe I could do it. A c*ck and b@lls on the ballot paper it is then.
I don't see many PB faithful voting Labour over Reform in a LabRef marginal. I believe they would take their chances with anything but Labour.
I can't see me voting for Priti Patel. That might well be my non-Reform option.
Priti did implement the Boriswave, she is more pro migrant than Farage
“Although some of PA's actions did constitute acts of terrorism under the Terrorism Act 2000, the nature and scale of PA's activities falling within the definition of terrorism had not yet reached the level, scale and persistence to warrant proscription.”
I am not sure the courts should be making that assessment to be honest.
Is it not the role of the courts to interpret what laws mean?
Yeah, of course. The power is:
Terrorism Act 2000, s3
(4) The Secretary of State may exercise his power under subsection (3)(a) in respect of an organisation only if he believes that it is concerned in terrorism.
That’s a very wide power, but it doesn’t appear to give a “level of terrorism” to warrant proscription. It would presumably just have to be a rational opinion.
The word 'may' on its own (and in sub section 3) means that the SoS has to consider properly wider matters than whether it falls under the terrorism definition. It means the SoS has a discretion. Once you have a discretion it follows as night follows day that its use can be challenged, and among other things, the level of activity is going to be an arguable consideration. Starmer himself is an expert practitioner in exactly this field.
Perhaps you can help me. I've been reading a lot of legislation and court verdicts recently and I need guidance on words. Is my interpretation of the following correct?
"must": you are compelled by law to do so
"should": you are recommended to do so but there are circs in which you may not
"may": you are allowed to do so but may choose not to do so
So far as I can recall the word 'should' is never used in legislation. I don't think it is capable of having a meaning in law. Whereas 'must', 'shall', and 'may' are explicable. Yes, 'must' (and 'shall') means you have to, 'may' means there is a discretion. The use of discretion in law is always capable of being complicated.
Should is prominent in the highway code - ignoring should leaves you open to careless driving.
I think the problem with 'should' as a legal term is that it fails to compel, and therefore gives a discretion with an ill defined bias about how that discretion is exercised.
It is there in guidance, but I doubt if it is used in primary legislation.
The Highway Code has lots of "musts" which compel , and lots of "shoulds" which guide but also allow you to deviate if there is good reason.
If there is some traffic in the slow lane and I am travelling at the speed limit (so not impeding traffic) I remain in the middle lane as that is safer than dodging in and out of lanes. Using the inside lane is a "should" in the Highway Code. Check it out.
People who complain that I am breaking the law don't understand the distinction between "must" and "should". They are often the ones who do break the law by overtaking me at 80mph, sometimes on the inside.
If there is space for someone to undertake you then there is space for you to be in lane 1, and, unless you are overtaking traffic in lane 1, that's where you should be. Your speed is irrelevant.
"Should"?
{it’s 2030 and the Russians have invaded Lithuania}
Russian General : What’s holding up the advance? Why are we stuck at Raseiniai? Officer : There’s one man in a British WWII tank, parked on a roundabout. Anyone comes up to the stop line, he engages. General : 37 days!!! Officer : There’s no shifting him. He keeps shouting stuff about traffic laws.
The British forces are in Estonia. There seems to be some debate whether a Russian attack on Lithuania (where the Germans are deployed) or Estonia is the more likely.
Latvia - where Canada have taken the lead - doesn't seem to feature.
Terrain aside, Latvia doesn’t make sense. Take Estonia and turn south and strike Lithuania from Kaliningrad. Latvia just puts you in the middle and requires you divide your forces.
A chap shoots some people, deliberately, *16* times
“… was cleared of attempted murder but unanimously found guilty of two counts of wounding with intent and possession of a firearm following a trial in January.”
Call be judgemental, but I tend to think it’s attempted murder when you shoot people 10 times. Maybe even less.
The allegations against Peter Murrell include embezzling cash from the SNP to purchase a motorhome, a Jaguar and a VW Golf. Who drove the Jaguar, and who drove the Golf?
Asking for a friend.
Some marriages must be much more incurious than my own. If a high five-figure campervan appeared on my drive, the missus would be very vigorously quizzing me on how the effing eff I had funded that...
I can't help thinking the wifely first words would be "Who is she?". And the convo went something like this
NS: "Who is she? WHO DID YOU BUY THE CAMPERVAN FOR?" PM: "um...it's for you, love of my life! Honest!" NS: "Oh, Peter, that's so sweet! PM: "Thank you" (sotto voce on the phone) "Yes, she's seen it: look I'll buy you *another* one...."
He might have more difficulty explaining the cosmetics and jewellery.
A friend was advising on a potential takeover of an insolvent company based in East Anglia, it had a small technical office in the outskirts of London but also a long and expensive lease on a flat in Mayfair used by the Managing Director. The client asked why and it was suggested they address the query to the MD's wife.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
The point is that in Worth Valley there were only two potential winners. So vote for the least worst. That's what I'd have done.
Do you know what? I don't believe I could do it. A c*ck and b@lls on the ballot paper it is then.
I don't see many PB faithful voting Labour over Reform in a LabRef marginal. I believe they would take their chances with anything but Labour.
Then Reform almost certainly win that seat
So what if the Tories remain Reform-lite? My measure of a Tory I could vote for is the late Peter Temple -Morris, who of course crossed the floor.
Remains prescribed until order of court pending appeal process
Human Rights Act no doubt
A fantastic win for freedom and everyone who has fought for a Palestinian State and recognition.
I don't advocate violence or vandalism, but when you are the subject of genocide and a world order that either supports it like Trump or stands back and condones it like Starmer, then it is no surprise.
The Labour Government has too late in the day recognised the claims for a 2 state solution. It must now agree with this legal ruling, desist all prosecutions, release all prisoners and appoint a Minister for Palestine to work with and for a 2 state solution and lobby with other global powers who are supportive.
All arms sales to Israel should be stopped immediately.
That should not stop all ongoing measures to stop anti semitism, but the UK should be clear it supports the rights of all Jews to live peacefully and in safety in the UK but that extremes of Zionism will not be tolerated in the same way extremes of Islam are not tolerated.
There are some real signs in places like Manchester of decent moderate Jews and Muslims living and working together to fight extremes in both their religions.
Finally the UK must lead in any fight for regime change in Israel, so that the majority there that don't want Netanyahu either are supported and he is bought to justice for internal corruption and by the world at large for his genocide in Gaza and the West Bank.
Nothing short of a full apology from Starmer will suffice.
Instead we now hear that Starmer and Mahmood will appeal against the ruling.
They appear incapable of understanding the immense political damage that their approach to the Gaza conflict has done in fragmenting support for Labour across the left, particularly since the start of the 2024 general election campaign when the party was polling at around 45% rather than its current 20% average.
This was an opportunity to start to claw back some of that damage, simply by doing nothing and moving on. Instead they are doubling down by appealing.
So much for a supposed reset of Starmer's approach as PM. He is politically tone deaf on a monumental scale. I wonder what would have happened if the court judgement had been made on Monday not Friday morning, would his Cabinet ministers and the PLP still have decided that the time was not right to move against Starmer that evening?
Starmer must go. And when he is eventually dragged kicking and screaming from No 10, Mahmood doesn't stand a cat in hell's chance of replacing him.
Couldn't agree with you more. The kind old judges offered him a lifeline and he couldn't see it infront of his eyes. Mahmood was appointed in his aping Farage phase and she was as bad as expected.
They gave him a tiny window and he couldn't see it so time to look for a new leader. Despite his name he doesn't have an instinctive lefty bone in his body
You don't know how this works do you
Yvette Cooper prescribed Palestine Action and the High Court declares that unlawful but subject to appeal
No government is going to accept a decision that compromises it's ruling without making the appeal
I would expect the government to lose, but until the decision is made in accordance with legal process then the ban remains in place
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
That's a point. I've said I'm up for it, and I am, but it would have to be a clean Tory party to get my tactical vote. I wouldn't do it for a dirty one. If they had got clean, I mean properly clean, had a really good wash, and I lived in a Ref v Con seat for my sins, then, yes, they'd get my vote.
You'll regret it...
Just imagine if that bumbling tw@t Johnson won a by election and became PM.
Via @Moreincommon_, 30 Jan - 10 Feb. Changes w/ 18 Jun - 3 Jul.
Unlikely, the Tories have also leaked heavily to Reform since 2021
Although there is not the visible enthusiasm in Wales for Reform that I saw in central and coastal Lincolnshire yesterday, they are still popular. That poll is a warning to Plaid to crush Labour or risk a fascist- conservative coalition.
Most likely Wales will be a Plaid and Labour government but Reform most seats on that poll
I am not concerned Plaid will want to be associated with labour
The allegations against Peter Murrell include embezzling cash from the SNP to purchase a motorhome, a Jaguar and a VW Golf. Who drove the Jaguar, and who drove the Golf?
Asking for a friend.
Some marriages must be much more incurious than my own. If a high five-figure campervan appeared on my drive, the missus would be very vigorously quizzing me on how the effing eff I had funded that...
I can't help thinking the wifely first words would be "Who is she?". And the convo went something like this
NS: "Who is she? WHO DID YOU BUY THE CAMPERVAN FOR?" PM: "um...it's for you, love of my life! Honest!" NS: "Oh, Peter, that's so sweet! PM: "Thank you" (sotto voce on the phone) "Yes, she's seen it: look I'll buy you *another* one...."
Are campervans a romantic gesture I was unaware of? An equivalent of flowers and chocolate?
Perhaps in the older, less agile dogging community?
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
The point is that in Worth Valley there were only two potential winners. So vote for the least worst. That's what I'd have done.
Do you know what? I don't believe I could do it. A c*ck and b@lls on the ballot paper it is then.
I don't see many PB faithful voting Labour over Reform in a LabRef marginal. I believe they would take their chances with anything but Labour.
I can't see me voting for Priti Patel. That might well be my non-Reform option.
Priti did implement the Boriswave, she is more pro migrant than Farage
She comes across in her constancy letters as nasty. Although, to be fair, she's OK, AFAIK, to individual constituents, if her assistance to me is any guide.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I don't buy that for one moment
So you believe more Labour voters went Reform than Tory voters, fine
Writing from downtown Keighley........Rock solid Tory vote, see Robbie Moore MP performance at last GE. Reform vote largely direct switch from Labour. At GEs will remain a Tory/Lab marginal but short odds on Tory win next time out with increased majority.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
The point is that in Worth Valley there were only two potential winners. So vote for the least worst. That's what I'd have done.
Hey mate. I’ve possibly got a quick week in Taiwan approaching
Didn’t you live there for a while? I want to make the most of my short time there. Any travel advice welcome - as much as I can do in one week
The allegations against Peter Murrell include embezzling cash from the SNP to purchase a motorhome, a Jaguar and a VW Golf. Who drove the Jaguar, and who drove the Golf?
Asking for a friend.
Some marriages must be much more incurious than my own. If a high five-figure campervan appeared on my drive, the missus would be very vigorously quizzing me on how the effing eff I had funded that...
I can't help thinking the wifely first words would be "Who is she?". And the convo went something like this
NS: "Who is she? WHO DID YOU BUY THE CAMPERVAN FOR?" PM: "um...it's for you, love of my life! Honest!" NS: "Oh, Peter, that's so sweet! PM: "Thank you" (sotto voce on the phone) "Yes, she's seen it: look I'll buy you *another* one...."
Are campervans a romantic gesture I was unaware of? An equivalent of flowers and chocolate?
Via @Moreincommon_, 30 Jan - 10 Feb. Changes w/ 18 Jun - 3 Jul.
Unlikely, the Tories have also leaked heavily to Reform since 2021
Although there is not the visible enthusiasm in Wales for Reform that I saw in central and coastal Lincolnshire yesterday, they are still popular. That poll is a warning to Plaid to crush Labour or risk a fascist- conservative coalition.
Most likely Wales will be a Plaid and Labour government but Reform most seats on that poll
I am not concerned Plaid will want to be associated with labour
Then on the MiC Poll Wales will get a Reform FM and Reform minority government
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I don't buy that for one moment
So you believe more Labour voters went Reform than Tory voters, fine
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
It's the only sensible move. If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
But, but if voting for the second worst party only for them to coalesce with the worst party, what is the point?
The point is that in Worth Valley there were only two potential winners. So vote for the least worst. That's what I'd have done.
Hey mate. I’ve possibly got a quick week in Taiwan approaching
Didn’t you live there for a while? I want to make the most of my short time there. Any travel advice welcome - as much as I can do in one week
Via @Moreincommon_, 30 Jan - 10 Feb. Changes w/ 18 Jun - 3 Jul.
Unlikely, the Tories have also leaked heavily to Reform since 2021
Although there is not the visible enthusiasm in Wales for Reform that I saw in central and coastal Lincolnshire yesterday, they are still popular. That poll is a warning to Plaid to crush Labour or risk a fascist- conservative coalition.
Most likely Wales will be a Plaid and Labour government but Reform most seats on that poll
I am not concerned Plaid will want to be associated with labour
I'd expect Reform to underperform the polls due to tactical voting. A lot of their votes come from Labour, so that could boost PC also Greens and LibDems, wouldn't be surprised to see a PC/Green Welsh government
A chap shoots some people, deliberately, *16* times
“… was cleared of attempted murder but unanimously found guilty of two counts of wounding with intent and possession of a firearm following a trial in January.”
Call be judgemental, but I tend to think it’s attempted murder when you shoot people 10 times. Maybe even less.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I don't buy that for one moment
So you believe more Labour voters went Reform than Tory voters, fine
Writing from downtown Keighley........Rock solid Tory vote, see Robbie Moore MP performance at last GE. Reform vote largely direct switch from Labour. At GEs will remain a Tory/Lab marginal but short odds on Tory win next time out with increased majority.
Agreed and @HYUFD wrong but he will not admit even from someone on the spot
Via @Moreincommon_, 30 Jan - 10 Feb. Changes w/ 18 Jun - 3 Jul.
Unlikely, the Tories have also leaked heavily to Reform since 2021
Although there is not the visible enthusiasm in Wales for Reform that I saw in central and coastal Lincolnshire yesterday, they are still popular. That poll is a warning to Plaid to crush Labour or risk a fascist- conservative coalition.
Most likely Wales will be a Plaid and Labour government but Reform most seats on that poll
I am not concerned Plaid will want to be associated with labour
I'd expect Reform to underperform the polls due to tactical voting. A lot of their votes come from Labour, so that could boost PC also Greens and LibDems, wouldn't be surprised to see a PC/Green Welsh government
In general conversation along the M4 corridor and particularly up to 20 miles North of the M4, Reform remain incredibly popular.
A chap shoots some people, deliberately, *16* times
“… was cleared of attempted murder but unanimously found guilty of two counts of wounding with intent and possession of a firearm following a trial in January.”
Call be judgemental, but I tend to think it’s attempted murder when you shoot people 10 times. Maybe even less.
‘ His son then stood up in the dock and shouted toward the judge "suck your mum, rudeboy" before leaving the court.’
Via @Moreincommon_, 30 Jan - 10 Feb. Changes w/ 18 Jun - 3 Jul.
Unlikely, the Tories have also leaked heavily to Reform since 2021
Although there is not the visible enthusiasm in Wales for Reform that I saw in central and coastal Lincolnshire yesterday, they are still popular. That poll is a warning to Plaid to crush Labour or risk a fascist- conservative coalition.
Most likely Wales will be a Plaid and Labour government but Reform most seats on that poll
I am not concerned Plaid will want to be associated with labour
Then on the MiC Poll Wales will get a Reform FM and Reform minority government
I am not interested in your constant misreading of polling as shown today in Worth
Via @Moreincommon_, 30 Jan - 10 Feb. Changes w/ 18 Jun - 3 Jul.
Unlikely, the Tories have also leaked heavily to Reform since 2021
Although there is not the visible enthusiasm in Wales for Reform that I saw in central and coastal Lincolnshire yesterday, they are still popular. That poll is a warning to Plaid to crush Labour or risk a fascist- conservative coalition.
Most likely Wales will be a Plaid and Labour government but Reform most seats on that poll
I am not concerned Plaid will want to be associated with labour
I'd expect Reform to underperform the polls due to tactical voting. A lot of their votes come from Labour, so that could boost PC also Greens and LibDems, wouldn't be surprised to see a PC/Green Welsh government
On MIC poll Reform beat even Plaid and Greens combined so only a Plaid and Labour government could stop Reform taking power in the Senedd
Via @Moreincommon_, 30 Jan - 10 Feb. Changes w/ 18 Jun - 3 Jul.
Unlikely, the Tories have also leaked heavily to Reform since 2021
Although there is not the visible enthusiasm in Wales for Reform that I saw in central and coastal Lincolnshire yesterday, they are still popular. That poll is a warning to Plaid to crush Labour or risk a fascist- conservative coalition.
Most likely Wales will be a Plaid and Labour government but Reform most seats on that poll
I am not concerned Plaid will want to be associated with labour
I'd expect Reform to underperform the polls due to tactical voting. A lot of their votes come from Labour, so that could boost PC also Greens and LibDems, wouldn't be surprised to see a PC/Green Welsh government
That is very much my view
I know today's poll gives Reform a lead but I am not convinced
The Wall Street Journal reported that Ukrainian forces outperformed two NATO battalions during a single day of training exercises.
The article refers to drills held in Estonia last year, involving roughly 16,000 troops from 12 NATO countries. In one simulated scenario, a British brigade and an Estonian division attacked Ukrainian units. The report says the Ukrainians achieved such a decisive result that the opposing force was no longer considered able to continue effective combat operations within the exercise.
The episode is being cited by some observers as evidence that the United States and NATO are operating with a major experience gap compared with Ukraine, and that they may not fully grasp the scale of it yet. The argument is that it could take years for Western forces to accumulate the same hard-earned lessons Ukraine has gathered under real combat conditions.
At the same time, the same observers point to Europe’s close cooperation with Ukraine as a strategic advantage, saying European countries are likely to keep supporting Ukraine with equipment and expand joint training, including more direct training alongside Ukrainian troops going forward. https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/2022300045345722397
Transitive logic would imply that Russian forces are likely to outperform NATO forces, given that the Ukrainians haven't swept Russia out of Ukraine.
Depends on whether the US continue to deny Starlink.
There is chatter of Ukrainian breakthroughs in bits of the front over the last couple of days. FWIW.
A few months ago Russians had their commanders sitting in the rear watching drone feeds in real time. With commanders from many battalions across multiple brigades and maybe even divisions all in a room together collaborating. Planning Iskander strikes, airstrikes, etc.
Now discord is banned so sharing the video feeds is really hard.
Now starlink is gone so having internet near the front is difficult/impossible
Now telegram is gone, so side chats, relationships, archived communications, etc are all gone
Via @Moreincommon_, 30 Jan - 10 Feb. Changes w/ 18 Jun - 3 Jul.
Unlikely, the Tories have also leaked heavily to Reform since 2021
Although there is not the visible enthusiasm in Wales for Reform that I saw in central and coastal Lincolnshire yesterday, they are still popular. That poll is a warning to Plaid to crush Labour or risk a fascist- conservative coalition.
Most likely Wales will be a Plaid and Labour government but Reform most seats on that poll
I am not concerned Plaid will want to be associated with labour
I'd expect Reform to underperform the polls due to tactical voting. A lot of their votes come from Labour, so that could boost PC also Greens and LibDems, wouldn't be surprised to see a PC/Green Welsh government
On MIC poll Reform beat even Plaid and Greens combined so only a Plaid and Labour government could stop Reform taking power in the Senedd
You can read whatever you want in individual polls but they change and vary
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
A Reform Tory Alliance would be a golden get out card for any new Labour Leader in Wales and the UK
It would be an utter shit show, in Wales and the UK
It would enforce the view that there is no room for 2 right wing parties, popularity for both would implode within 18 months.
A newly elected Labour leader late in 2026 would have a golden period of improved economy, NHS, crime, closer EU links that 65% want.
Go to the Country in Autumn 2027.
Reduced majority but still overall control, LD and Green more seats than Tories
Farage smashed and resigned as he's not hanging round 2032
Take the heat when it happens I'm May and then just stand back and watch them eat themselves like 2 starving rats
On Twickers' public urination issue, surely the obvious mitigations are: 1) Provide more toilet facilities 2) Sell less alcohol
I'm perplexed as to how "anti-pee" paint results in the urinator being covered in their own urine or how this resolves the issue.
The RFU needs to decide whether the additional concert revenue and better relations with residents is more important to it than the drinks revenue / cost-saving on toilet facilities.
Via @Moreincommon_, 30 Jan - 10 Feb. Changes w/ 18 Jun - 3 Jul.
Unlikely, the Tories have also leaked heavily to Reform since 2021
Although there is not the visible enthusiasm in Wales for Reform that I saw in central and coastal Lincolnshire yesterday, they are still popular. That poll is a warning to Plaid to crush Labour or risk a fascist- conservative coalition.
Most likely Wales will be a Plaid and Labour government but Reform most seats on that poll
I am not concerned Plaid will want to be associated with labour
I'd expect Reform to underperform the polls due to tactical voting. A lot of their votes come from Labour, so that could boost PC also Greens and LibDems, wouldn't be surprised to see a PC/Green Welsh government
On MIC poll Reform beat even Plaid and Greens combined so only a Plaid and Labour government could stop Reform taking power in the Senedd
You are ignoring tactical voting. In a real election people would vote for a party other than the one they prefer, to block Reform. In Fishguard on Tuesday both Tories and Labour were crushed, with the benefit going to PC https://x.com/i/status/2021368971023229297
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
A Reform Tory Alliance would be a golden get out card for any new Labour Leader in Wales and the UK
It would be an utter shit show, in Wales and the UK
It would enforce the view that there is no room for 2 right wing parties, popularity for both would implode within 18 months.
A newly elected Labour leader late in 2026 would have a golden period of improved economy, NHS, crime, closer EU links that 65% want.
Go to the Country in Autumn 2027.
Reduced majority but still overall control, LD and Green more seats than Tories
Farage smashed and resigned as he's not hanging round 2032
Take the heat when it happens I'm May and then just stand back and watch them eat themselves like 2 starving rats
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
Hahaha. Many alternative explanations available from the open-minded.... - aha I see your problem.
Only other explanation is 5 times as many 2024 Labour voters as Tory voters went Reform
How does turnout compare?
I think there are usually rather fewer actual switchers in elections that the vote shares imply, because very often the driving force is differential turnout.
If the typical Labour voters in the seat woke up yesterday, decided that the seat was a lost cause, it was raining and miserable, and they'd rather Starmer got a bit of a message that the think he's a dud, they probably didn't toddle off to the polls and vote Tory or Reform. They probably just didn't bother.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Ref vote is mainly a mixture of former Tories and former non-voters (that's essentially their coalition).
The Tory vote may well have declined in absolute numbers (because some have drifted to Ref), and increased as percentage, if there was lower turnout because Lab voters stayed away. I'd imagine that the remaining Tory vote is amongst the section of the population most likely to vote, and knowing that the seat was probably winnable they were also probably quite motivated to turn out.
The raw percentages have some value, but I think they hide as much of the real story as they reveal.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Ukrainian forces outperformed two NATO battalions during a single day of training exercises.
The article refers to drills held in Estonia last year, involving roughly 16,000 troops from 12 NATO countries. In one simulated scenario, a British brigade and an Estonian division attacked Ukrainian units. The report says the Ukrainians achieved such a decisive result that the opposing force was no longer considered able to continue effective combat operations within the exercise.
The episode is being cited by some observers as evidence that the United States and NATO are operating with a major experience gap compared with Ukraine, and that they may not fully grasp the scale of it yet. The argument is that it could take years for Western forces to accumulate the same hard-earned lessons Ukraine has gathered under real combat conditions.
At the same time, the same observers point to Europe’s close cooperation with Ukraine as a strategic advantage, saying European countries are likely to keep supporting Ukraine with equipment and expand joint training, including more direct training alongside Ukrainian troops going forward. https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/2022300045345722397
This seems… unsurprising? You get good at doing something by doing it. The Ukrainians are fighting a real war. It does not surprise me that they are much better at doing it than armies that have seen minimal action. I’m sure were we to be unfortunate enough to be in the same situation, our armed forces would rapidly gain the same experience.
But, yes, we should be supporting Ukraine because that’s the right thing to do, but while we’re already doing that, let’s make sure that we can learn from their experience. I think this is even more true in tech. Let’s not spend money on buying tech. Give that money to Ukraine and ask them in 6 months what worked.
The allegations against Peter Murrell include embezzling cash from the SNP to purchase a motorhome, a Jaguar and a VW Golf. Who drove the Jaguar, and who drove the Golf?
Asking for a friend.
Some marriages must be much more incurious than my own. If a high five-figure campervan appeared on my drive, the missus would be very vigorously quizzing me on how the effing eff I had funded that...
I can't help thinking the wifely first words would be "Who is she?". And the convo went something like this
NS: "Who is she? WHO DID YOU BUY THE CAMPERVAN FOR?" PM: "um...it's for you, love of my life! Honest!" NS: "Oh, Peter, that's so sweet! PM: "Thank you" (sotto voce on the phone) "Yes, she's seen it: look I'll buy you *another* one...."
Are campervans a romantic gesture I was unaware of? An equivalent of flowers and chocolate?
Have you not got a campervan for your beloved for tomorrow?!? Oh my God, you are going to be in so much trouble.
Via @Moreincommon_, 30 Jan - 10 Feb. Changes w/ 18 Jun - 3 Jul.
Unlikely, the Tories have also leaked heavily to Reform since 2021
Although there is not the visible enthusiasm in Wales for Reform that I saw in central and coastal Lincolnshire yesterday, they are still popular. That poll is a warning to Plaid to crush Labour or risk a fascist- conservative coalition.
Most likely Wales will be a Plaid and Labour government but Reform most seats on that poll
I am not concerned Plaid will want to be associated with labour
I'd expect Reform to underperform the polls due to tactical voting. A lot of their votes come from Labour, so that could boost PC also Greens and LibDems, wouldn't be surprised to see a PC/Green Welsh government
Tactical voting is not necessary under d'Hondt. Any non-Party X vote helps get a non-Party X candidate elected instead. Unless you vote for a fringe party that will get nowhere near the threshold for a seat.
"Bloated and overpaid back office staff". My son is on minimum wage and rolling six monthly contracts with a break when the two year continuity mark is in sight.
I can understand having to pay the f***-off, scumbags poverty wages when Kuennsberg and Mason need proper incentives to stay.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Ukrainian forces outperformed two NATO battalions during a single day of training exercises.
The article refers to drills held in Estonia last year, involving roughly 16,000 troops from 12 NATO countries. In one simulated scenario, a British brigade and an Estonian division attacked Ukrainian units. The report says the Ukrainians achieved such a decisive result that the opposing force was no longer considered able to continue effective combat operations within the exercise.
The episode is being cited by some observers as evidence that the United States and NATO are operating with a major experience gap compared with Ukraine, and that they may not fully grasp the scale of it yet. The argument is that it could take years for Western forces to accumulate the same hard-earned lessons Ukraine has gathered under real combat conditions.
At the same time, the same observers point to Europe’s close cooperation with Ukraine as a strategic advantage, saying European countries are likely to keep supporting Ukraine with equipment and expand joint training, including more direct training alongside Ukrainian troops going forward. https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/2022300045345722397
Transitive logic would imply that Russian forces are likely to outperform NATO forces, given that the Ukrainians haven't swept Russia out of Ukraine.
Depends on whether the US continue to deny Starlink.
There is chatter of Ukrainian breakthroughs in bits of the front over the last couple of days. FWIW.
A few months ago Russians had their commanders sitting in the rear watching drone feeds in real time. With commanders from many battalions across multiple brigades and maybe even divisions all in a room together collaborating. Planning Iskander strikes, airstrikes, etc.
Now discord is banned so sharing the video feeds is really hard.
Now starlink is gone so having internet near the front is difficult/impossible
Now telegram is gone, so side chats, relationships, archived communications, etc are all gone
The Starlink thing was actually more related to Ukrainian actions.
Previously, Russia had been using small numbers of Starlink terminals, bought in 3rd countries.
Simply blocking all non-official terminals in Ukraine wasn’t an option because so many terminals in the Ukrainian army are unofficial and unregistered. There was great reluctance to register such terminals -any were personal purchases, and front line units worried about registration meaning that the terminals might be taken/reasigned.
Also many civilians rely on Starlink. Cutting them off would be really unpopular.
What happened was that Russian military usage jumped, and Ukraine finally established a white list. Any terminal not on the white list is blocked.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Ukrainian forces outperformed two NATO battalions during a single day of training exercises.
The article refers to drills held in Estonia last year, involving roughly 16,000 troops from 12 NATO countries. In one simulated scenario, a British brigade and an Estonian division attacked Ukrainian units. The report says the Ukrainians achieved such a decisive result that the opposing force was no longer considered able to continue effective combat operations within the exercise.
The episode is being cited by some observers as evidence that the United States and NATO are operating with a major experience gap compared with Ukraine, and that they may not fully grasp the scale of it yet. The argument is that it could take years for Western forces to accumulate the same hard-earned lessons Ukraine has gathered under real combat conditions.
At the same time, the same observers point to Europe’s close cooperation with Ukraine as a strategic advantage, saying European countries are likely to keep supporting Ukraine with equipment and expand joint training, including more direct training alongside Ukrainian troops going forward. https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/2022300045345722397
This seems… unsurprising? You get good at doing something by doing it. The Ukrainians are fighting a real war. It does not surprise me that they are much better at doing it than armies that have seen minimal action. I’m sure were we to be unfortunate enough to be in the same situation, our armed forces would rapidly gain the same experience.
But, yes, we should be supporting Ukraine because that’s the right thing to do, but while we’re already doing that, let’s make sure that we can learn from their experience. I think this is even more true in tech. Let’s not spend money on buying tech. Give that money to Ukraine and ask them in 6 months what worked.
Plenty of Western armies got battle experience in Afghanistan.
"Bloated and overpaid back office staff". My son is on minimum wage and rolling six monthly contracts with a break when the two year continuity mark is in sight.
I can understand having to pay the f***-off, scumbags poverty wages when Kuennsberg and Mason need proper incentives to stay.
Vikkki Derbyshire could do Mason and Kuenssberg jobs by herself and 100 more objectively and firmer
Vicky Young should have got the job over Mason in the first place
Sack Mason and Laura, she can always get a job counting postal votes for the Tories
The Reform vote is not going to subside. Why? Because we’ve now let in sufficient unvetted young men from patriarchal, misogynistic, primitive Muslim societies the rate of sexual offences is going to surge
So the new policy question will be How do we kick them out
Only Reform look remotely capable of addressing that (and I doubt they have the backbone to see it through)
The Wall Street Journal reported that Ukrainian forces outperformed two NATO battalions during a single day of training exercises.
The article refers to drills held in Estonia last year, involving roughly 16,000 troops from 12 NATO countries. In one simulated scenario, a British brigade and an Estonian division attacked Ukrainian units. The report says the Ukrainians achieved such a decisive result that the opposing force was no longer considered able to continue effective combat operations within the exercise.
The episode is being cited by some observers as evidence that the United States and NATO are operating with a major experience gap compared with Ukraine, and that they may not fully grasp the scale of it yet. The argument is that it could take years for Western forces to accumulate the same hard-earned lessons Ukraine has gathered under real combat conditions.
At the same time, the same observers point to Europe’s close cooperation with Ukraine as a strategic advantage, saying European countries are likely to keep supporting Ukraine with equipment and expand joint training, including more direct training alongside Ukrainian troops going forward. https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/2022300045345722397
This seems… unsurprising? You get good at doing something by doing it. The Ukrainians are fighting a real war. It does not surprise me that they are much better at doing it than armies that have seen minimal action. I’m sure were we to be unfortunate enough to be in the same situation, our armed forces would rapidly gain the same experience.
But, yes, we should be supporting Ukraine because that’s the right thing to do, but while we’re already doing that, let’s make sure that we can learn from their experience. I think this is even more true in tech. Let’s not spend money on buying tech. Give that money to Ukraine and ask them in 6 months what worked.
It is unsurprising - but something European militaries were reluctant to accept; always harder to deny hard evidence.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
A Reform Tory Alliance would be a golden get out card for any new Labour Leader in Wales and the UK
It would be an utter shit show, in Wales and the UK
It would enforce the view that there is no room for 2 right wing parties, popularity for both would implode within 18 months.
A newly elected Labour leader late in 2026 would have a golden period of improved economy, NHS, crime, closer EU links that 65% want.
Go to the Country in Autumn 2027.
Reduced majority but still overall control, LD and Green more seats than Tories
Farage smashed and resigned as he's not hanging round 2032
Take the heat when it happens I'm May and then just stand back and watch them eat themselves like 2 starving rats
Labour will be in tatters in Wales after May
Not according to Mic 20%
Not tatters with AV not great, plainly bad but not tatters
The allegations against Peter Murrell include embezzling cash from the SNP to purchase a motorhome, a Jaguar and a VW Golf. Who drove the Jaguar, and who drove the Golf?
Asking for a friend.
Some marriages must be much more incurious than my own. If a high five-figure campervan appeared on my drive, the missus would be very vigorously quizzing me on how the effing eff I had funded that...
I can't help thinking the wifely first words would be "Who is she?". And the convo went something like this
NS: "Who is she? WHO DID YOU BUY THE CAMPERVAN FOR?" PM: "um...it's for you, love of my life! Honest!" NS: "Oh, Peter, that's so sweet! PM: "Thank you" (sotto voce on the phone) "Yes, she's seen it: look I'll buy you *another* one...."
Are campervans a romantic gesture I was unaware of? An equivalent of flowers and chocolate?
Have you not got a campervan for your beloved for tomorrow?!? Oh my God, you are going to be in so much trouble.
Roses are red. Violets are blue. The Valentine campervan in our drive Is for me and you.
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
I'd rather take my chances with Reform-ICE-Nazis than vote for a Tory party set on leaving the ECHR.
Reform are also support leaving the ECHR but regardless of what you think the Worth Valley by election is key evidence Tory candidates and councillors in Tory held seats and wards can win Labour and LD tactical votes to beat Reform
A Reform Tory Alliance would be a golden get out card for any new Labour Leader in Wales and the UK
It would be an utter shit show, in Wales and the UK
It would enforce the view that there is no room for 2 right wing parties, popularity for both would implode within 18 months.
A newly elected Labour leader late in 2026 would have a golden period of improved economy, NHS, crime, closer EU links that 65% want.
Go to the Country in Autumn 2027.
Reduced majority but still overall control, LD and Green more seats than Tories
Farage smashed and resigned as he's not hanging round 2032
Take the heat when it happens I'm May and then just stand back and watch them eat themselves like 2 starving rats
Labour will be in tatters in Wales after May
Not according to Mic 20%
Not tatters with AV not great, plainly bad but not tatters
Theres been a few Reform X posters trumpeting a Ref gain in Worth Valley. However..... The MP (Robbie Moore) and Tory HQ have just posted Tory Hold.......
From Bradford's site:
Paul Golding Conservative 1815 52% Andrew Judson Reform 917 26% Peter Kates Labour 425 12% Josie McMaster Green 245 7% Kay Kirkham LD 83 2% Sabine Ebert-Forbes Ind 29 1%
I am not convinced I believe that. You wouldn't get this "never a Tory" voting Reform-lite, even to oust the fascists.
Well I am sorry but mathematically there is no other explanation. The Reform 26% vote from nowhere almost all came from the Tories but the Labour vote down 20% and the LD vote down 2% and tactically voting Tory meant the overall Tory voteshare declined only 4% and ensured the Tories comfortably won
Mathematically, there are plenty of other explanations, such as switches to and from the non-voting pools. At presumably low turnout you can get these % changes from relatively few previous non-voters turning out for Reform and a chunk of former labour voters sitting on their hands.
Cold roast lamb - slightly pink - is magnificent. It’s so good it barely needs any tarting up. Shove chunks of it in a fresh buttered bap or roll, with sea salt and cracked black pepper. Mmmmm. If you insist add a dab of mint sauce or mild pepper sauce
The Reform vote is not going to subside. Why? Because we’ve now let in sufficient unvetted young men from patriarchal, misogynistic, primitive Muslim societies the rate of sexual offences is going to surge
So the new policy question will be How do we kick them out
Only Reform look remotely capable of addressing that (and I doubt they have the backbone to see it through)
I'm sure they'd like to do some ethnic cleansing if they were capable of it but they will be too disorganised, stupid and shit. See their performance in local government. Idiotic DOGE stuff that did nothing followed by Council Tax rises.
That's why I'd rather have a Fukker government than a tory one. Malevolence directed at the least fortunate is at the core of both parties but the tories are slightly more capable of exercising it.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Ukrainian forces outperformed two NATO battalions during a single day of training exercises.
The article refers to drills held in Estonia last year, involving roughly 16,000 troops from 12 NATO countries. In one simulated scenario, a British brigade and an Estonian division attacked Ukrainian units. The report says the Ukrainians achieved such a decisive result that the opposing force was no longer considered able to continue effective combat operations within the exercise.
The episode is being cited by some observers as evidence that the United States and NATO are operating with a major experience gap compared with Ukraine, and that they may not fully grasp the scale of it yet. The argument is that it could take years for Western forces to accumulate the same hard-earned lessons Ukraine has gathered under real combat conditions.
At the same time, the same observers point to Europe’s close cooperation with Ukraine as a strategic advantage, saying European countries are likely to keep supporting Ukraine with equipment and expand joint training, including more direct training alongside Ukrainian troops going forward. https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/2022300045345722397
This seems… unsurprising? You get good at doing something by doing it. The Ukrainians are fighting a real war. It does not surprise me that they are much better at doing it than armies that have seen minimal action. I’m sure were we to be unfortunate enough to be in the same situation, our armed forces would rapidly gain the same experience.
But, yes, we should be supporting Ukraine because that’s the right thing to do, but while we’re already doing that, let’s make sure that we can learn from their experience. I think this is even more true in tech. Let’s not spend money on buying tech. Give that money to Ukraine and ask them in 6 months what worked.
Plenty of Western armies got battle experience in Afghanistan.
A very different conflict. Flashbanging mud huts full of women and kids in the Pamir is very different to dodging FPVs on a snowy cabbage patch. We also had complete air dominance over the 'Stan (you're welcome).
The Wall Street Journal reported that Ukrainian forces outperformed two NATO battalions during a single day of training exercises.
The article refers to drills held in Estonia last year, involving roughly 16,000 troops from 12 NATO countries. In one simulated scenario, a British brigade and an Estonian division attacked Ukrainian units. The report says the Ukrainians achieved such a decisive result that the opposing force was no longer considered able to continue effective combat operations within the exercise.
The episode is being cited by some observers as evidence that the United States and NATO are operating with a major experience gap compared with Ukraine, and that they may not fully grasp the scale of it yet. The argument is that it could take years for Western forces to accumulate the same hard-earned lessons Ukraine has gathered under real combat conditions.
At the same time, the same observers point to Europe’s close cooperation with Ukraine as a strategic advantage, saying European countries are likely to keep supporting Ukraine with equipment and expand joint training, including more direct training alongside Ukrainian troops going forward. https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/2022300045345722397
Transitive logic would imply that Russian forces are likely to outperform NATO forces, given that the Ukrainians haven't swept Russia out of Ukraine.
The further implication is that the argument that, "Russia won't attack NATO because they can't even win against Ukraine," doesn't hold any water if Ukraine are stronger than NATO.
Hang on: there's also the question of physical numbers.
It wouldn't be a brigade against a brigade, as in the case of the exercise in Estonia.
Via @Moreincommon_, 30 Jan - 10 Feb. Changes w/ 18 Jun - 3 Jul.
Unlikely, the Tories have also leaked heavily to Reform since 2021
Although there is not the visible enthusiasm in Wales for Reform that I saw in central and coastal Lincolnshire yesterday, they are still popular. That poll is a warning to Plaid to crush Labour or risk a fascist- conservative coalition.
Most likely Wales will be a Plaid and Labour government but Reform most seats on that poll
I am not concerned Plaid will want to be associated with labour
Then on the MiC Poll Wales will get a Reform FM and Reform minority government
I am not interested in your constant misreading of polling as shown today in Worth
Objection your honour. When it comes to readfing polls HYUFD is uniquely objective
Kemi Badenoch at the Welsh conservative conference
Who would believe that Angela Rayner and I ended up on the same side, but we do agree we want to replace that weak man with a strong woman !!!!!
I've been keen to see the hapless Starmer fall on his sword. Nonetheless the more one hears from Badenoch the more one warms to the hapless Starmer.
LOL. I've never had a dog and am too decrepit now to deal with one, but when I heard that the government might start pressuring us all to get rid of our dogs I had a sudden yearning to get one (or more).
Comments
Under UK law, sitting in the middle lane when lane 1 is clear is usually treated as careless driving, also known as driving without due care and attention under Section 3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.
The Highway Code is not law by itself, but it does reflect legal duties. Rule 264 says:
You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear.
That “should” means it is advisory guidance. But ignoring it without good reason can be used as evidence of careless driving.
In 2013 the police were given powers to issue on-the-spot fixed penalties for careless driving, and “middle lane hogging” was specifically cited as an example. So if you’re cruising along in lane 2 with lane 1 empty, no overtaking happening, and no obvious reason, an officer can pull you and issue:
£100 fine
3 penalty points
Or in more serious cases, report you to court.
Now the nuance, because nuance is everything:
It is not automatically an offence simply to be in lane 2. It becomes an offence if your positioning is unreasonable or falls below the standard of a competent and careful driver.
Legitimate reasons to be in lane 2:
Overtaking
Lane 1 full of HGVs spaced awkwardly
Junction traffic merging
Avoiding obstructions
Short-term positioning before overtaking
Illegitimate reason:
“I prefer this lane”
“Lane 1 feels slow”
“It’s the vibe”
Enforcement is inconsistent. Plenty of drivers do it. But if a traffic officer feels you’re impeding flow or creating unnecessary risk, they can absolutely act on it.
So in summary:
Not a specific standalone offence called “middle lane hogging”
Usually prosecuted as careless driving
Yes, you can get points for it
No, you are not required to glue yourself to lane 1 at all times like a motorway barnacle
Drive left unless overtaking. It’s not complicated. Humans just make it complicated.
For example, I've sometimes delayed pulling back over to lane 1 when approaching a slip lane merging from a junction. That's a sensible, and temporary, exception to the should.
The article refers to drills held in Estonia last year, involving roughly 16,000 troops from 12 NATO countries. In one simulated scenario, a British brigade and an Estonian division attacked Ukrainian units. The report says the Ukrainians achieved such a decisive result that the opposing force was no longer considered able to continue effective combat operations within the exercise.
The episode is being cited by some observers as evidence that the United States and NATO are operating with a major experience gap compared with Ukraine, and that they may not fully grasp the scale of it yet. The argument is that it could take years for Western forces to accumulate the same hard-earned lessons Ukraine has gathered under real combat conditions.
At the same time, the same observers point to Europe’s close cooperation with Ukraine as a strategic advantage, saying European countries are likely to keep supporting Ukraine with equipment and expand joint training, including more direct training alongside Ukrainian troops going forward.
https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/2022300045345722397
They gave him a tiny window and he couldn't see it so time to look for a new leader. Despite his name he doesn't have an instinctive lefty bone in his body
Not sure I worry about the name of which right wing party takes me to the stadium to meet my maker.
Latvia - where Canada have taken the lead - doesn't seem to feature.
If we want to stop a Farage majority on 30% of the vote then everyone else has to hold their noses and vote for the most likely winner.
Big Jobby had a short about one of those recently.
So vote for the least worst.
That's what I'd have done.
NASA Study: Non-biologic Processes Don’t Fully Explain Mars Organics
In a new study, researchers say that non-biological sources they considered could not fully account for the abundance of organic compounds in a sample collected on Mars by NASA’s Curiosity rover.
https://science.nasa.gov/blogs/science-news/2026/02/06/nasa-study-non-biologic-processes-dont-fully-explain-mars-organics/
(From last week.)
He can't even work with his own MP's let alone anyone else's.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/rDK_PMXDY8w
I don't see many PB faithful voting Labour over Reform in a LabRef marginal. I believe they would take their chances with anything but Labour.
https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article6911d2bd0580923d0998cf47/was-wenn-russland-uns-angreift-so-bereitet-sich-die-bundeswehr-auf-den-kriegsfall-vor.html
NS: "Who is she? WHO DID YOU BUY THE CAMPERVAN FOR?"
PM: "um...it's for you, love of my life! Honest!"
NS: "Oh, Peter, that's so sweet!
PM: "Thank you" (sotto voce on the phone) "Yes, she's seen it: look I'll buy you *another* one...."
It would continue to be bloody cold with a dead body somewhere.
The hot chilli sauce still,rocks.
In 1975 my uncle and aunt came to stay and fancied a Chinese. My dad had to drive to Alcester Lanes End in his Austin 1300 before he found one. I think they have several takeaways at Station Road shops now and certainly at Drakes Cross.
https://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/news/croydon-news/gunman-tells-judge-suck-your-530949
A chap shoots some people, deliberately, *16* times
“… was cleared of attempted murder but unanimously found guilty of two counts of wounding with intent and possession of a firearm following a trial in January.”
Call be judgemental, but I tend to think it’s attempted murder when you shoot people 10 times. Maybe even less.
A friend was advising on a potential takeover of an insolvent company based in East Anglia, it had a small technical office in the outskirts of London but also a long and expensive lease on a flat in Mayfair used by the Managing Director. The client asked why and it was suggested they address the query to the MD's wife.
Yvette Cooper prescribed Palestine Action and the High Court declares that unlawful but subject to appeal
No government is going to accept a decision that compromises it's ruling without making the appeal
I would expect the government to lose, but until the decision is made in accordance with legal process then the ban remains in place
Just imagine if that bumbling tw@t Johnson won a by election and became PM.
Didn’t you live there for a while? I want to make the most of my short time there. Any travel advice welcome - as much as I can do in one week
Xie Xie!!
Quality Roadman energy
😂😂😂😂
I know today's poll gives Reform a lead but I am not convinced
Bloated BBC to make hundreds and millions of pounds of cuts.
The bad news it will probably be stuff people like, to get sympathy for the license fee, and not the bloated and overpaid back office staff.
https://x.com/bbcnews/status/2022007468600025259?s=61
There is chatter of Ukrainian breakthroughs in bits of the front over the last couple of days. FWIW.
A few months ago Russians had their commanders sitting in the rear watching drone feeds in real time. With commanders from many battalions across multiple brigades and maybe even divisions all in a room together collaborating. Planning Iskander strikes, airstrikes, etc.
Now discord is banned so sharing the video feeds is really hard.
Now starlink is gone so having internet near the front is difficult/impossible
Now telegram is gone, so side chats, relationships, archived communications, etc are all gone
Russian kill chain will go from 1-2 minutes to 20 minutes or 100+ minutes
https://x.com/AndrewPerpetua/status/2022293892582805971
The issue with a next day kebab is less that it will be cold, and more that you will be sober
It would be an utter shit show, in Wales and the UK
It would enforce the view that there is no room for 2 right wing parties, popularity for both would implode within 18 months.
A newly elected Labour leader late in 2026 would have a golden period of improved economy, NHS, crime, closer EU links that 65% want.
Go to the Country in Autumn 2027.
Reduced majority but still overall control, LD and Green more seats than Tories
Farage smashed and resigned as he's not hanging round 2032
Take the heat when it happens I'm May and then just stand back and watch them eat themselves like 2 starving rats
1) Provide more toilet facilities
2) Sell less alcohol
I'm perplexed as to how "anti-pee" paint results in the urinator being covered in their own urine or how this resolves the issue.
The RFU needs to decide whether the additional concert revenue and better relations with residents is more important to it than the drinks revenue / cost-saving on toilet facilities.
I think there are usually rather fewer actual switchers in elections that the vote shares imply, because very often the driving force is differential turnout.
If the typical Labour voters in the seat woke up yesterday, decided that the seat was a lost cause, it was raining and miserable, and they'd rather Starmer got a bit of a message that the think he's a dud, they probably didn't toddle off to the polls and vote Tory or Reform. They probably just didn't bother.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Ref vote is mainly a mixture of former Tories and former non-voters (that's essentially their coalition).
The Tory vote may well have declined in absolute numbers (because some have drifted to Ref), and increased as percentage, if there was lower turnout because Lab voters stayed away. I'd imagine that the remaining Tory vote is amongst the section of the population most likely to vote, and knowing that the seat was probably winnable they were also probably quite motivated to turn out.
The raw percentages have some value, but I think they hide as much of the real story as they reveal.
But, yes, we should be supporting Ukraine because that’s the right thing to do, but while we’re already doing that, let’s make sure that we can learn from their experience. I think this is even more true in tech. Let’s not spend money on buying tech. Give that money to Ukraine and ask them in 6 months what worked.
For those who think they have sometime hallucinated it, here is the Lamb Kebab song:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoTgqTk2U1Y
Who would believe that Angela Rayner and I ended up on the same side, but we do agree we want to replace that weak man with a strong woman !!!!!
I can understand having to pay the f***-off, scumbags poverty wages when Kuennsberg and Mason need proper incentives to stay.
Previously, Russia had been using small numbers of Starlink terminals, bought in 3rd countries.
Simply blocking all non-official terminals in Ukraine wasn’t an option because so many terminals in the Ukrainian army are unofficial and unregistered. There was great reluctance to register such terminals -any were personal purchases, and front line units worried about registration meaning that the terminals might be taken/reasigned.
Also many civilians rely on Starlink. Cutting them off would be really unpopular.
What happened was that Russian military usage jumped, and Ukraine finally established a white list. Any terminal not on the white list is blocked.
Vicky Young should have got the job over Mason in the first place
Sack Mason and Laura, she can always get a job counting postal votes for the Tories
So the new policy question will be How do we kick them out
Only Reform look remotely capable of addressing that (and I doubt they have the backbone to see it through)
Not tatters with AV not great, plainly bad but not tatters
Violets are blue.
The Valentine campervan in our drive
Is for me and you.
Cold roast lamb - slightly pink - is magnificent. It’s so good it barely needs any tarting up. Shove chunks of it in a fresh buttered bap or roll, with sea salt and cracked black pepper. Mmmmm. If you insist add a dab of mint sauce or mild pepper sauce
But honestly it’s better on its own. Yum
That's why I'd rather have a Fukker government than a tory one. Malevolence directed at the least fortunate is at the core of both parties but the tories are slightly more capable of exercising it.
It wouldn't be a brigade against a brigade, as in the case of the exercise in Estonia.