Depending on how this plays out with the King's brother and the kings obvious frailty on occasions, is this not a time for a tactical abdicstion, if and when charges are made.
A new broom, a new generation, a new King and Queen and one's who can talk about the misdeamoneurs with greater conviction.
That just means its a common law offence, meaning not one defined in legislation, so Parliament has not set a maximum penalty for it. The offence is due to be replaced by some statutory gubbins this Parliament sometime.
Wouldn't his first line of defence be that he wasn't in public office? He wasn't paid to be Trade Envoy, for example.
From Wikipedia:
"Case law has established a broad definition of "public office holder" for this purpose that does not depend on the person holding a formal "office" as such, nor on being paid out of the public purse, though a government employee is more likely to be found to fall into the definition."
That just means its a common law offence, meaning not one defined in legislation, so Parliament has not set a maximum penalty for it. The offence is due to be replaced by some statutory gubbins this Parliament sometime.
It’s just depressing how brutally the UK is divided. A division mirrored on PB
There is one way to unite the country, some kind of grand project we can all get behind. To that end I propose
THE LEONDAMUS MEMORIAL PARK
It should occupy the largely unnecessary green spaces that at present form Regent’s Park. Instead of the silly football fields and zoo, there would be a 8000 metre high statue of me, made from Cornish granite, serpentine, emeralds, and inexplicably radioactive Portland stone, surrounded by various pavilions inscribed with jewels spelling out some of my most famous neologisms from PB like “baxtered”, “skyr tolmakersson”, “rogerdamus”, “gaylording ponceyboots”, “eadric”, “farmy farm” and “only one photo a day”
Various stalls would be erected season by season offering fruit ices and gummy bears with profits going to my own charity, inspired by Save the Children, which we all know as “save the really hot ones”
We tried the national monument wheeze with the Millennium Dome and all we got out of that was Lord Mandelson.
Odd thing about the Millennium Dome. For all the criticism and the ghastliness of the 1999 NYE party, my wife went there to the exhibition and really enjoyed it. And it then became a successful venue.
I agree with her. The Dome was fantastic. I went there about 4 times during 2000. The media didn't like it because on 31st December 1999 they were left out in the cold by a fire alert at Stratford tube station. It's a long story.
Have to say I went twice and thought it was marvellous and a real triumph.
Breaking news. An unnamed man in his 60s has been arrested on the Sandringham Estate on suspicion of misconduct in public office. Wonder who that might be? Intriguing.🧐
The usual silence on ethnicity, I see. They just never learn.
That just means its a common law offence, meaning not one defined in legislation, so Parliament has not set a maximum penalty for it. The offence is due to be replaced by some statutory gubbins this Parliament sometime.
Excellent service and widely respected by successive Tory Governments
Let's cut the bullshit of a few mysoginst old duffers who have tried to smear her. If the Right Wing media attack her there will be hundreds of positive quotes from previous Tory Ministers she's worked for.
Not concerned by the bullying allegations? Of course not, she's on your side and that kind of thing only matters when your opponents do it, right?
No one has been concerned by bullying allegations for 10 years
Who the feck has she worked for on that time.
Oh the Daily fucking Mail... Its OK for a bully to work for May, Boris, Truss Sunak no problem, give her a chance.
The minute Starmer appoints her... Oh let's spread some fucking shit
Total hypocricicy
Which Tory will be the attack bitch
Pritti Patel PMSL
I'd have more respect for you if you owned it. You went nuts last week about a Tory who had allegations made sitting next to Badenoch, now you don't care about allegations.
Never change.
Romeo has been vetted and passed for senior roles under Tory PMs and passed.
She was vetted in 2024 for this role and past.
Bullying Allegations were made ALLEGATIONS
Patel was found GUILTY
No Tory PM has the backbone to remove her despite her GUILT
You just carry on digging that hole of complete hypocrisy.
Who mentioned Patel? You were wibbling about a male Tory MP last week.
Breaking news. An unnamed man in his 60s has been arrested on the Sandringham Estate on suspicion of misconduct in public office. Wonder who that might be? Intriguing.🧐
The usual silence on ethnicity, I see. They just never learn.
"German-Greek" would identify him a bit too easily.
That just means its a common law offence, meaning not one defined in legislation, so Parliament has not set a maximum penalty for it. The offence is due to be replaced by some statutory gubbins this Parliament sometime.
Wouldn't his first line of defence be that he wasn't in public office? He wasn't paid to be Trade Envoy, for example.
From Wikipedia:
"Case law has established a broad definition of "public office holder" for this purpose that does not depend on the person holding a formal "office" as such, nor on being paid out of the public purse, though a government employee is more likely to be found to fall into the definition."
Surely it will turn around being in receipt of restricted information as a result of having a role in the public domain? There must be at least an implied duty not to release that information?
Morning all. The Standard has a piece up digging muvh too deeply and earnestly into the London subsample of this polling suggesting Reform will get shut out (they weirdly seem to suggest zero Reform seats at a GE in London) Not suggesting we take that at face value but it mentions areas like Bexley snd Bromley swinging behind the Tories to stop Reform. We have a good test of that theory coming up........
As far as Bromley goes, Reform narrowly took Bromley Common at near the height of their popularity in July and the bottom of the Tories and there is 32% Lab LD to 'squeeze' (if we follow the Standard). Bromley will be, i think, a good test of the Tory firewall
Sub samples? I was told off for using a sub sample of England VI and a weighted vote of 2000 yet the Standard is probably playing guesswork with much smaller numbers.
On other sites, there are all sorts of analyses and predictions about London right down to Ward level. In truth, no one, except those very close to a particular area, knows for sure and that's the fascination. I can make some informed predictions on Newham but I could very easily be wrong.
A lot will depend on the candidates and the extent to which, for example, Reform fields full slates or whether in their weaker areas, both the Labour and Conservative parties will struggle to find candidates.
500 odd. So, yes, much smaller numbers It is indeed fascinating. The by elections since last May at least give us the kernel of an idea
In Newham, we've had another huge Newham Independents win in Plaistow South with NIP and Reform getting 65% of the vote from nothing. Labour lost two thirds of their vote as did the Conservatives and LDs while the Greens lost half their vote.
Now, I don't think that will happen in the Borough in May but for Reform to poll 16% in a strongly Muslim Ward makes me wonder what they could achieve in the areas with smaller Muslim populations.
I'm sure the only reason more royals haven't been arrested over the years is because the establishment was better able to cover things up back in the day. The one who was Jack the Ripper for starters.
Interesting polling. In all but two of the match ups (Lib Dems vs Labour or the Greens) the more left wing option is ahead.
Yes, very interesting polling. Reform lose every contest, with the implication they have the plurality of unpopularity as well as, from current general polling, the plurality of popularity.
So ensuring they don't form a government should be easy.
There is one central problem, and another secondary problem, and the next election may well turn on its resolution: Firstly identifying the party in each relevant seat that can beat Reform in a world where Labour unusually hold all the seats that are most likely to change hands, but are now unloved.
(Cumbria, apart from Farron's seat is my example but is typical: 2024: all Labour. 2019: all Tory. Projected 2029: all Reform. Which party is the tactical vote?)
The secondary problem is how to know if voting Tory is in fact a vote for a Reform + Tory government or not.
Indeed and this is the big question for Badenoch going forward. Whatever her public criticisms of Reform before an election, do we still think IF the numbers work for a Reform minority Government, she will offer Confidence & Supply to Farage? I suspect this is something she has been pondering - I would if I were her.
Publicly, it will be all about maximising the Conservative vote but as we know what leaders say before the votes are cast and what they do once they are counted aren't always the same.
Davey faces a similar dilemma - would he support a minority second term Labour Government with Confidence & Supply?
Both Badenoch and Davey could come out before the election and say they will neither support a Reform minority nor a Labour minority but the charge then will be, as it would have for Clegg in 2010, to have been to cause chaos in the name of self indulgence.
The test would then be whether either or both would vote down a Reform or Labour Queen's Speech and trigger a second election - I suspect they'd get little thanks from the public for that.
Yes. Largely agree. It seems to me the Tories may find themselves in a unique situation, for which the name is Zugzwang. As things stand we know that no other significant party will touch Reform with a bargepole. The 'left of centre' grouping (Lab, LD, G, PC, SNP) has an unambiguous nature.
Obvs the Tories may or may not deal with Reform. Some will only vote for them if they will, some (including me) will only vote for them if the won't. The remaining group who don't care either way exists but isn't a lots of seats winning sized group.
Only three courses are open to them, and it isn't possible to opt out, as one of the courses is doing and saying nothing:
Yes we would. No we won't. Do and say nothing/ambiguity/we decide after the election/we are going to win it doesn't arise. These are identical.
Each course, as things stand now, is damaging.
Yes and the LDs, who have had much more experience of this, called it "equidistance" and that policy served them well until 2010. If, of course, Reform or Labour win an outright majority, it won't matter and both Badenoch and Davey will probably and quietly breathe a sigh of relief.
The other "hope" for Badenoch is Restore Britain - if, pace Referendum in 1997, Lowe's party has the funds to put up a candidate in every seat, they will likely draw 2-4% away from Reform which could make all the difference.
Should we start saying "Vote Lowe, Get Starmer" ?
One of the things about Reform is that there seems to be a lot of money behind them, and they're spending it in rather different ways to the other parties - these glitzy set-piece events, like the latest one for the shadow cabinet announcement, are quite different to the normal pace of British politics. I'd expect that sort of thing would serve to swamp the efforts of small parties on their fringe, and create a bandwagon effect during a general election campaign.
One thing that the Tories (and all the other parties too) need to be planning for is how to not be drowned out by Reform during a general election campaign.
For fear of triggering MoonRabbit and her pointed helmet.
‘ UPDATE: Poland's Prime Minister Donald Tusk urges Polish citizens to leave Iran "immediately ... and do not go to this country under any circumstances".’
Depending on how this plays out with the King's brother and the kings obvious frailty on occasions, is this not a time for a tactical abdicstion, if and when charges are made.
A new broom, a new generation, a new King and Queen and one's who can talk about the misdeamoneurs with greater conviction.
Depending on how this plays out with the King's brother and the kings obvious frailty on occasions, is this not a time for a tactical abdicstion, if and when charges are made.
A new broom, a new generation, a new King and Queen and one's who can talk about the misdeamoneurs with greater conviction.
Needs a betting market
Abdicstion in 2027??
Seriously, is this a new word? Abdication is what you are grasping for. And the answer is no - like his mother the King believes in service unto death and will handover only with his last breath.
Depending on how this plays out with the King's brother and the kings obvious frailty on occasions, is this not a time for a tactical abdicstion, if and when charges are made.
A new broom, a new generation, a new King and Queen and one's who can talk about the misdeamoneurs with greater conviction.
Interesting polling. In all but two of the match ups (Lib Dems vs Labour or the Greens) the more left wing option is ahead.
Yes, very interesting polling. Reform lose every contest, with the implication they have the plurality of unpopularity as well as, from current general polling, the plurality of popularity.
So ensuring they don't form a government should be easy.
There is one central problem, and another secondary problem, and the next election may well turn on its resolution: Firstly identifying the party in each relevant seat that can beat Reform in a world where Labour unusually hold all the seats that are most likely to change hands, but are now unloved.
(Cumbria, apart from Farron's seat is my example but is typical: 2024: all Labour. 2019: all Tory. Projected 2029: all Reform. Which party is the tactical vote?)
The secondary problem is how to know if voting Tory is in fact a vote for a Reform + Tory government or not.
Indeed and this is the big question for Badenoch going forward. Whatever her public criticisms of Reform before an election, do we still think IF the numbers work for a Reform minority Government, she will offer Confidence & Supply to Farage? I suspect this is something she has been pondering - I would if I were her.
Publicly, it will be all about maximising the Conservative vote but as we know what leaders say before the votes are cast and what they do once they are counted aren't always the same.
Davey faces a similar dilemma - would he support a minority second term Labour Government with Confidence & Supply?
Both Badenoch and Davey could come out before the election and say they will neither support a Reform minority nor a Labour minority but the charge then will be, as it would have for Clegg in 2010, to have been to cause chaos in the name of self indulgence.
The test would then be whether either or both would vote down a Reform or Labour Queen's Speech and trigger a second election - I suspect they'd get little thanks from the public for that.
I think we will see semi-official unpublicised verbal agreements to lay off certain constituencies, as we did between Lab and Lib in 1997.
I'm not sure which parties would be involved though - perhaps the Greens as their realistic target seats will be few and far between most likely.
Greens came second in 40 seats in 2024
That looks like a good basis for a negotiation - a decent number of targets to ask another party to leave alone, or to agree to leave alone.
I call it for 5-10 Green seats in 2029 !
Why would they even need to do it formally. They don’t compete against each other pretty much. Lib Dem’s and Greens are both very limited in terms of resources. They will simply focus on seats they can win.
Why would the Lib Dem’s even campaign in a seat like Huddersfield irrespective ? They’d never win.
Interesting polling. In all but two of the match ups (Lib Dems vs Labour or the Greens) the more left wing option is ahead.
Yes, very interesting polling. Reform lose every contest, with the implication they have the plurality of unpopularity as well as, from current general polling, the plurality of popularity.
So ensuring they don't form a government should be easy.
There is one central problem, and another secondary problem, and the next election may well turn on its resolution: Firstly identifying the party in each relevant seat that can beat Reform in a world where Labour unusually hold all the seats that are most likely to change hands, but are now unloved.
(Cumbria, apart from Farron's seat is my example but is typical: 2024: all Labour. 2019: all Tory. Projected 2029: all Reform. Which party is the tactical vote?)
The secondary problem is how to know if voting Tory is in fact a vote for a Reform + Tory government or not.
Indeed and this is the big question for Badenoch going forward. Whatever her public criticisms of Reform before an election, do we still think IF the numbers work for a Reform minority Government, she will offer Confidence & Supply to Farage? I suspect this is something she has been pondering - I would if I were her.
Publicly, it will be all about maximising the Conservative vote but as we know what leaders say before the votes are cast and what they do once they are counted aren't always the same.
Davey faces a similar dilemma - would he support a minority second term Labour Government with Confidence & Supply?
Both Badenoch and Davey could come out before the election and say they will neither support a Reform minority nor a Labour minority but the charge then will be, as it would have for Clegg in 2010, to have been to cause chaos in the name of self indulgence.
The test would then be whether either or both would vote down a Reform or Labour Queen's Speech and trigger a second election - I suspect they'd get little thanks from the public for that.
Yes. Largely agree. It seems to me the Tories may find themselves in a unique situation, for which the name is Zugzwang. As things stand we know that no other significant party will touch Reform with a bargepole. The 'left of centre' grouping (Lab, LD, G, PC, SNP) has an unambiguous nature.
Obvs the Tories may or may not deal with Reform. Some will only vote for them if they will, some (including me) will only vote for them if the won't. The remaining group who don't care either way exists but isn't a lots of seats winning sized group.
Only three courses are open to them, and it isn't possible to opt out, as one of the courses is doing and saying nothing:
Yes we would. No we won't. Do and say nothing/ambiguity/we decide after the election/we are going to win it doesn't arise. These are identical.
Each course, as things stand now, is damaging.
Yes and the LDs, who have had much more experience of this, called it "equidistance" and that policy served them well until 2010. If, of course, Reform or Labour win an outright majority, it won't matter and both Badenoch and Davey will probably and quietly breathe a sigh of relief.
The other "hope" for Badenoch is Restore Britain - if, pace Referendum in 1997, Lowe's party has the funds to put up a candidate in every seat, they will likely draw 2-4% away from Reform which could make all the difference.
Should we start saying "Vote Lowe, Get Starmer" ?
One of the things about Reform is that there seems to be a lot of money behind them, and they're spending it in rather different ways to the other parties - these glitzy set-piece events, like the latest one for the shadow cabinet announcement, are quite different to the normal pace of British politics. I'd expect that sort of thing would serve to swamp the efforts of small parties on their fringe, and create a bandwagon effect during a general election campaign.
One thing that the Tories (and all the other parties too) need to be planning for is how to not be drowned out by Reform during a general election campaign.
They will need to regularly remind the broadcast media that all parties will be entitled to equal coverage during the general election campaign.
“[Romeo] goes to parties and looks like she’s enjoying herself, in contrast with the vast majority of permanent secretaries I’ve known,” said one Whitehall insider."
Depending on how this plays out with the King's brother and the kings obvious frailty on occasions, is this not a time for a tactical abdicstion, if and when charges are made.
A new broom, a new generation, a new King and Queen and one's who can talk about the misdeamoneurs with greater conviction.
Needs a betting market
Abdicstion in 2027??
Seriously, is this a new word? Abdication is what you are grasping for. And the answer is no - like his mother the King believes in service unto death and will handover only with his last breath.
For pragmatic reasons it's best this all happens under Charles anyway. I wonder if they'll be a market for 'annus horribilis' in this years Christmas Speech?
Watching this media 'fest' goodness only knows what happens if and when Mandelson is also arrested
I suspect it will struggle to find airtime TBH. Nothing can compete with the arrest of the King's brother. I suspect this is a lucky break for Starmer, even if it does suggest a Mandy nicking is also incoming.
It's also an airtime challenge, as the story is unmissable but actually there is nothing of substance you can say.
Royal correspondents are masters at the art of talking at length while saying nothing of substance.
For all the opprobrium the original user of the term got, she was right.
Dan Hodges misses the point (has this ever happened before?) which is that after criticism of the ‘boys club’, Starmer has cynically replaced the hairy sex with the fairer sex as Cabinet Secretary and joint Chiefs of Staff – Antonia, Jill and Vidhya.
Depending on how this plays out with the King's brother and the kings obvious frailty on occasions, is this not a time for a tactical abdicstion, if and when charges are made.
A new broom, a new generation, a new King and Queen and one's who can talk about the misdeamoneurs with greater conviction.
Needs a betting market
Abdicstion in 2027??
Seriously, is this a new word? Abdication is what you are grasping for. And the answer is no - like his mother the King believes in service unto death and will handover only with his last breath.
For pragmatic reasons it's best this all happens under Charles anyway. I wonder if they'll be a market for 'annus horribilis' in this years Christmas Speech?
Interesting polling. In all but two of the match ups (Lib Dems vs Labour or the Greens) the more left wing option is ahead.
Yes, very interesting polling. Reform lose every contest, with the implication they have the plurality of unpopularity as well as, from current general polling, the plurality of popularity.
So ensuring they don't form a government should be easy.
There is one central problem, and another secondary problem, and the next election may well turn on its resolution: Firstly identifying the party in each relevant seat that can beat Reform in a world where Labour unusually hold all the seats that are most likely to change hands, but are now unloved.
(Cumbria, apart from Farron's seat is my example but is typical: 2024: all Labour. 2019: all Tory. Projected 2029: all Reform. Which party is the tactical vote?)
The secondary problem is how to know if voting Tory is in fact a vote for a Reform + Tory government or not.
Indeed and this is the big question for Badenoch going forward. Whatever her public criticisms of Reform before an election, do we still think IF the numbers work for a Reform minority Government, she will offer Confidence & Supply to Farage? I suspect this is something she has been pondering - I would if I were her.
Publicly, it will be all about maximising the Conservative vote but as we know what leaders say before the votes are cast and what they do once they are counted aren't always the same.
Davey faces a similar dilemma - would he support a minority second term Labour Government with Confidence & Supply?
Both Badenoch and Davey could come out before the election and say they will neither support a Reform minority nor a Labour minority but the charge then will be, as it would have for Clegg in 2010, to have been to cause chaos in the name of self indulgence.
The test would then be whether either or both would vote down a Reform or Labour Queen's Speech and trigger a second election - I suspect they'd get little thanks from the public for that.
Yes. Largely agree. It seems to me the Tories may find themselves in a unique situation, for which the name is Zugzwang. As things stand we know that no other significant party will touch Reform with a bargepole. The 'left of centre' grouping (Lab, LD, G, PC, SNP) has an unambiguous nature.
Obvs the Tories may or may not deal with Reform. Some will only vote for them if they will, some (including me) will only vote for them if the won't. The remaining group who don't care either way exists but isn't a lots of seats winning sized group.
Only three courses are open to them, and it isn't possible to opt out, as one of the courses is doing and saying nothing:
Yes we would. No we won't. Do and say nothing/ambiguity/we decide after the election/we are going to win it doesn't arise. These are identical.
Each course, as things stand now, is damaging.
Yes and the LDs, who have had much more experience of this, called it "equidistance" and that policy served them well until 2010. If, of course, Reform or Labour win an outright majority, it won't matter and both Badenoch and Davey will probably and quietly breathe a sigh of relief.
The other "hope" for Badenoch is Restore Britain - if, pace Referendum in 1997, Lowe's party has the funds to put up a candidate in every seat, they will likely draw 2-4% away from Reform which could make all the difference.
Should we start saying "Vote Lowe, Get Starmer" ?
One of the things about Reform is that there seems to be a lot of money behind them, and they're spending it in rather different ways to the other parties - these glitzy set-piece events, like the latest one for the shadow cabinet announcement, are quite different to the normal pace of British politics. I'd expect that sort of thing would serve to swamp the efforts of small parties on their fringe, and create a bandwagon effect during a general election campaign.
One thing that the Tories (and all the other parties too) need to be planning for is how to not be drowned out by Reform during a general election campaign.
They will need to regularly remind the broadcast media that all parties will be entitled to equal coverage during the general election campaign.
Broadcast media will be significantly less important by 2029 than it was in 2024 or 2019. It's probably one of the reasons they're going after social media.
Watching this media 'fest' goodness only knows what happens if and when Mandelson is also arrested
I suspect it will struggle to find airtime TBH. Nothing can compete with the arrest of the King's brother. I suspect this is a lucky break for Starmer, even if it does suggest a Mandy nicking is also incoming.
It's also an airtime challenge, as the story is unmissable but actually there is nothing of substance you can say.
Royal correspondents are masters at the art of talking at length while saying nothing of substance.
“[Romeo] goes to parties and looks like she’s enjoying herself, in contrast with the vast majority of permanent secretaries I’ve known,” said one Whitehall insider."
Guardian
That's not necessarily a good thing. Many bothans died to bring you this insight.
Interesting polling. In all but two of the match ups (Lib Dems vs Labour or the Greens) the more left wing option is ahead.
Yes, very interesting polling. Reform lose every contest, with the implication they have the plurality of unpopularity as well as, from current general polling, the plurality of popularity.
So ensuring they don't form a government should be easy.
There is one central problem, and another secondary problem, and the next election may well turn on its resolution: Firstly identifying the party in each relevant seat that can beat Reform in a world where Labour unusually hold all the seats that are most likely to change hands, but are now unloved.
(Cumbria, apart from Farron's seat is my example but is typical: 2024: all Labour. 2019: all Tory. Projected 2029: all Reform. Which party is the tactical vote?)
The secondary problem is how to know if voting Tory is in fact a vote for a Reform + Tory government or not.
Indeed and this is the big question for Badenoch going forward. Whatever her public criticisms of Reform before an election, do we still think IF the numbers work for a Reform minority Government, she will offer Confidence & Supply to Farage? I suspect this is something she has been pondering - I would if I were her.
Publicly, it will be all about maximising the Conservative vote but as we know what leaders say before the votes are cast and what they do once they are counted aren't always the same.
Davey faces a similar dilemma - would he support a minority second term Labour Government with Confidence & Supply?
Both Badenoch and Davey could come out before the election and say they will neither support a Reform minority nor a Labour minority but the charge then will be, as it would have for Clegg in 2010, to have been to cause chaos in the name of self indulgence.
The test would then be whether either or both would vote down a Reform or Labour Queen's Speech and trigger a second election - I suspect they'd get little thanks from the public for that.
I think we will see semi-official unpublicised verbal agreements to lay off certain constituencies, as we did between Lab and Lib in 1997.
I'm not sure which parties would be involved though - perhaps the Greens as their realistic target seats will be few and far between most likely.
Greens came second in 40 seats in 2024
I can see the Greens getting 40+ seats in 2029 with Polanski and tactical voting. LDs 80+ SNP/Plaid 50+ NI 18 Let's say 190 seats leaving 435 for the Tories. Lab and Reform. IF Reform gets a majority (325+) it leaves <110 for the Lab plus Tories, so probably neither would be the official opposition. LDs would be the official opposition. Big IF. This isn't going to happen.
It's going to be a hung parliament isn't it? Minority Labour with C&S from LDs. Davey will be categorical that LDs will not give C&S to Reform or CON, and ambiguous about LAB.
Interesting polling. In all but two of the match ups (Lib Dems vs Labour or the Greens) the more left wing option is ahead.
Yes, very interesting polling. Reform lose every contest, with the implication they have the plurality of unpopularity as well as, from current general polling, the plurality of popularity.
So ensuring they don't form a government should be easy.
There is one central problem, and another secondary problem, and the next election may well turn on its resolution: Firstly identifying the party in each relevant seat that can beat Reform in a world where Labour unusually hold all the seats that are most likely to change hands, but are now unloved.
(Cumbria, apart from Farron's seat is my example but is typical: 2024: all Labour. 2019: all Tory. Projected 2029: all Reform. Which party is the tactical vote?)
The secondary problem is how to know if voting Tory is in fact a vote for a Reform + Tory government or not.
Indeed and this is the big question for Badenoch going forward. Whatever her public criticisms of Reform before an election, do we still think IF the numbers work for a Reform minority Government, she will offer Confidence & Supply to Farage? I suspect this is something she has been pondering - I would if I were her.
Publicly, it will be all about maximising the Conservative vote but as we know what leaders say before the votes are cast and what they do once they are counted aren't always the same.
Davey faces a similar dilemma - would he support a minority second term Labour Government with Confidence & Supply?
Both Badenoch and Davey could come out before the election and say they will neither support a Reform minority nor a Labour minority but the charge then will be, as it would have for Clegg in 2010, to have been to cause chaos in the name of self indulgence.
The test would then be whether either or both would vote down a Reform or Labour Queen's Speech and trigger a second election - I suspect they'd get little thanks from the public for that.
I think we will see semi-official unpublicised verbal agreements to lay off certain constituencies, as we did between Lab and Lib in 1997.
I'm not sure which parties would be involved though - perhaps the Greens as their realistic target seats will be few and far between most likely.
Greens came second in 40 seats in 2024
That looks like a good basis for a negotiation - a decent number of targets to ask another party to leave alone, or to agree to leave alone.
I call it for 5-10 Green seats in 2029 !
Why would they even need to do it formally. They don’t compete against each other pretty much. Lib Dem’s and Greens are both very limited in terms of resources. They will simply focus on seats they can win.
Why would the Lib Dem’s even campaign in a seat like Huddersfield irrespective ? They’d never win.
Assuming you understand how politics and campaigning actually work, they won't.
It will be a name on the ballot paper and that will be true of most candidates in most seats. At most, parties with no chance might campaign in Wards where they have councillors or Wards they are looking to win in future elections but most won't even do that.
Will the Conservatives, LDs or Reform campaign in East Ham? No.
In the majority of seats, you will get two parties actively campaigning - in some (more than usual), there will be three. There might even be a few places where four parties are working but they will be the exception.
That also depends on money and resources - ground level campaigning is labour intensive (no pun intended) and costly.
That just means its a common law offence, meaning not one defined in legislation, so Parliament has not set a maximum penalty for it. The offence is due to be replaced by some statutory gubbins this Parliament sometime.
Wouldn't his first line of defence be that he wasn't in public office? He wasn't paid to be Trade Envoy, for example.
From Wikipedia:
"Case law has established a broad definition of "public office holder" for this purpose that does not depend on the person holding a formal "office" as such, nor on being paid out of the public purse, though a government employee is more likely to be found to fall into the definition."
Surely it will turn around being in receipt of restricted information as a result of having a role in the public domain? There must be at least an implied duty not to release that information?
Market sensitive information
Insider dealing
Who it went to and who they passed it too.
Mandy, Andy, Epstein may be in far greater shit for that than any sexual deviancy.
Depending on how this plays out with the King's brother and the kings obvious frailty on occasions, is this not a time for a tactical abdicstion, if and when charges are made.
A new broom, a new generation, a new King and Queen and one's who can talk about the misdeamoneurs with greater conviction.
Needs a betting market
Abdicstion in 2027??
Seriously, is this a new word? Abdication is what you are grasping for. And the answer is no - like his mother the King believes in service unto death and will handover only with his last breath.
For pragmatic reasons it's best this all happens under Charles anyway. I wonder if they'll be a market for 'annus horribilis' in this years Christmas Speech?
Horrible arse anyway, which Charles will present as him only having found out about Andrew M-W.
‘Imagine my surprise when information was put before me..’
For all the opprobrium the original user of the term got, she was right.
She (Jo Moore) wasn't insofar as we're still talking about her personal "bad news" nearly a quarter of a century later.
I don't think anyone ever argued with the broad point that it's better to drop bad news when there's a lot of other stuff going on than on a quiet news day. They criticise the callousness, on a day when everyone else was utterly horrified by the scale of the human tragedy unfolding, that she immediately thought about the comms angle for the DTI or whatever it was at the time. It seemed pretty inhumane.
It’s just depressing how brutally the UK is divided. A division mirrored on PB
There is one way to unite the country, some kind of grand project we can all get behind. To that end I propose
THE LEONDAMUS MEMORIAL PARK
It should occupy the largely unnecessary green spaces that at present form Regent’s Park. Instead of the silly football fields and zoo, there would be a 8000 metre high statue of me, made from Cornish granite, serpentine, emeralds, and inexplicably radioactive Portland stone, surrounded by various pavilions inscribed with jewels spelling out some of my most famous neologisms from PB like “baxtered”, “skyr tolmakersson”, “rogerdamus”, “gaylording ponceyboots”, “eadric”, “farmy farm” and “only one photo a day”
Various stalls would be erected season by season offering fruit ices and gummy bears with profits going to my own charity, inspired by Save the Children, which we all know as “save the really hot ones”
We tried the national monument wheeze with the Millennium Dome and all we got out of that was Lord Mandelson.
Odd thing about the Millennium Dome. For all the criticism and the ghastliness of the 1999 NYE party, my wife went there to the exhibition and really enjoyed it. And it then became a successful venue.
I agree with her. The Dome was fantastic. I went there about 4 times during 2000. The media didn't like it because on 31st December 1999 they were left out in the cold by a fire alert at Stratford tube station. It's a long story.
Have to say I went twice and thought it was marvellous and a real triumph.
I only went once but I did enjoy it.
Ditto. Although most of the enjoyment was because I took my Mum, who was getting old and of reduced mobility, so they gave her a buggy to get around. This was her first experience of such. She loved it. Zooming around, terrifying pedestrians.
“[Romeo] goes to parties and looks like she’s enjoying herself, in contrast with the vast majority of permanent secretaries I’ve known,” said one Whitehall insider."
Interesting polling. In all but two of the match ups (Lib Dems vs Labour or the Greens) the more left wing option is ahead.
Yes, very interesting polling. Reform lose every contest, with the implication they have the plurality of unpopularity as well as, from current general polling, the plurality of popularity.
So ensuring they don't form a government should be easy.
There is one central problem, and another secondary problem, and the next election may well turn on its resolution: Firstly identifying the party in each relevant seat that can beat Reform in a world where Labour unusually hold all the seats that are most likely to change hands, but are now unloved.
(Cumbria, apart from Farron's seat is my example but is typical: 2024: all Labour. 2019: all Tory. Projected 2029: all Reform. Which party is the tactical vote?)
The secondary problem is how to know if voting Tory is in fact a vote for a Reform + Tory government or not.
Indeed and this is the big question for Badenoch going forward. Whatever her public criticisms of Reform before an election, do we still think IF the numbers work for a Reform minority Government, she will offer Confidence & Supply to Farage? I suspect this is something she has been pondering - I would if I were her.
Publicly, it will be all about maximising the Conservative vote but as we know what leaders say before the votes are cast and what they do once they are counted aren't always the same.
Davey faces a similar dilemma - would he support a minority second term Labour Government with Confidence & Supply?
Both Badenoch and Davey could come out before the election and say they will neither support a Reform minority nor a Labour minority but the charge then will be, as it would have for Clegg in 2010, to have been to cause chaos in the name of self indulgence.
The test would then be whether either or both would vote down a Reform or Labour Queen's Speech and trigger a second election - I suspect they'd get little thanks from the public for that.
Yes. Largely agree. It seems to me the Tories may find themselves in a unique situation, for which the name is Zugzwang. As things stand we know that no other significant party will touch Reform with a bargepole. The 'left of centre' grouping (Lab, LD, G, PC, SNP) has an unambiguous nature.
Obvs the Tories may or may not deal with Reform. Some will only vote for them if they will, some (including me) will only vote for them if the won't. The remaining group who don't care either way exists but isn't a lots of seats winning sized group.
Only three courses are open to them, and it isn't possible to opt out, as one of the courses is doing and saying nothing:
Yes we would. No we won't. Do and say nothing/ambiguity/we decide after the election/we are going to win it doesn't arise. These are identical.
Each course, as things stand now, is damaging.
Yes and the LDs, who have had much more experience of this, called it "equidistance" and that policy served them well until 2010. If, of course, Reform or Labour win an outright majority, it won't matter and both Badenoch and Davey will probably and quietly breathe a sigh of relief.
The other "hope" for Badenoch is Restore Britain - if, pace Referendum in 1997, Lowe's party has the funds to put up a candidate in every seat, they will likely draw 2-4% away from Reform which could make all the difference.
Should we start saying "Vote Lowe, Get Starmer" ?
One of the things about Reform is that there seems to be a lot of money behind them, and they're spending it in rather different ways to the other parties - these glitzy set-piece events, like the latest one for the shadow cabinet announcement, are quite different to the normal pace of British politics. I'd expect that sort of thing would serve to swamp the efforts of small parties on their fringe, and create a bandwagon effect during a general election campaign.
One thing that the Tories (and all the other parties too) need to be planning for is how to not be drowned out by Reform during a general election campaign.
I imagine Farage will mimic Trump in this, as in much else. Big rallies, baseball caps, and outrageous statements, designed to dominate the news cycle, and give an impression of momentum.
For fear of triggering MoonRabbit and her pointed helmet.
‘ UPDATE: Poland's Prime Minister Donald Tusk urges Polish citizens to leave Iran "immediately ... and do not go to this country under any circumstances".’
No it’s your pointy bonnet. I’m not wearing one. 😠
You guys attribute an achievable mission, that leave things better, to these performative bouts of bullying.
Netanyahu campaign to erase Hamas, after all the horror unleashed on a civilian populace, was that a success or not? Ditto you ignoring Syria, Trumps friends ISIS/deash slaughtering the Kurds? Afghanistan? Wake up. None of it ends as you promise us it will.
I ask you - what are you doing. You answer - we going to achieve something good, part of the “better” agenda. It’s as glib and clueless as that. Time after time.
You are [non mental health slur, but cutting slur of some sort quite rightly deserved]
Interesting polling. In all but two of the match ups (Lib Dems vs Labour or the Greens) the more left wing option is ahead.
Yes, very interesting polling. Reform lose every contest, with the implication they have the plurality of unpopularity as well as, from current general polling, the plurality of popularity.
So ensuring they don't form a government should be easy.
There is one central problem, and another secondary problem, and the next election may well turn on its resolution: Firstly identifying the party in each relevant seat that can beat Reform in a world where Labour unusually hold all the seats that are most likely to change hands, but are now unloved.
(Cumbria, apart from Farron's seat is my example but is typical: 2024: all Labour. 2019: all Tory. Projected 2029: all Reform. Which party is the tactical vote?)
The secondary problem is how to know if voting Tory is in fact a vote for a Reform + Tory government or not.
Indeed and this is the big question for Badenoch going forward. Whatever her public criticisms of Reform before an election, do we still think IF the numbers work for a Reform minority Government, she will offer Confidence & Supply to Farage? I suspect this is something she has been pondering - I would if I were her.
Publicly, it will be all about maximising the Conservative vote but as we know what leaders say before the votes are cast and what they do once they are counted aren't always the same.
Davey faces a similar dilemma - would he support a minority second term Labour Government with Confidence & Supply?
Both Badenoch and Davey could come out before the election and say they will neither support a Reform minority nor a Labour minority but the charge then will be, as it would have for Clegg in 2010, to have been to cause chaos in the name of self indulgence.
The test would then be whether either or both would vote down a Reform or Labour Queen's Speech and trigger a second election - I suspect they'd get little thanks from the public for that.
Yes. Largely agree. It seems to me the Tories may find themselves in a unique situation, for which the name is Zugzwang. As things stand we know that no other significant party will touch Reform with a bargepole. The 'left of centre' grouping (Lab, LD, G, PC, SNP) has an unambiguous nature.
Obvs the Tories may or may not deal with Reform. Some will only vote for them if they will, some (including me) will only vote for them if the won't. The remaining group who don't care either way exists but isn't a lots of seats winning sized group.
Only three courses are open to them, and it isn't possible to opt out, as one of the courses is doing and saying nothing:
Yes we would. No we won't. Do and say nothing/ambiguity/we decide after the election/we are going to win it doesn't arise. These are identical.
Each course, as things stand now, is damaging.
Yes and the LDs, who have had much more experience of this, called it "equidistance" and that policy served them well until 2010. If, of course, Reform or Labour win an outright majority, it won't matter and both Badenoch and Davey will probably and quietly breathe a sigh of relief.
The other "hope" for Badenoch is Restore Britain - if, pace Referendum in 1997, Lowe's party has the funds to put up a candidate in every seat, they will likely draw 2-4% away from Reform which could make all the difference.
Should we start saying "Vote Lowe, Get Starmer" ?
One of the things about Reform is that there seems to be a lot of money behind them, and they're spending it in rather different ways to the other parties - these glitzy set-piece events, like the latest one for the shadow cabinet announcement, are quite different to the normal pace of British politics. I'd expect that sort of thing would serve to swamp the efforts of small parties on their fringe, and create a bandwagon effect during a general election campaign.
One thing that the Tories (and all the other parties too) need to be planning for is how to not be drowned out by Reform during a general election campaign.
I imagine Farage will mimic Trump in this, as in much else. Big rallies, baseball caps, and outrageous statements, designed to dominate the news cycle, and give an impression of momentum.
Yes. And it will be little comfort for the other parties if broadcasters fulfill their obligation for equal coverage by giving those parties coverage for their response to Faragist statements, rather than on their own policies or campaigning.
I don't think the media or the other parties are ready for a Presidential Farage campaign.
Depending on how this plays out with the King's brother and the kings obvious frailty on occasions, is this not a time for a tactical abdicstion, if and when charges are made.
A new broom, a new generation, a new King and Queen and one's who can talk about the misdeamoneurs with greater conviction.
Needs a betting market
Abdicstion in 2027??
Seriously, is this a new word? Abdication is what you are grasping for. And the answer is no - like his mother the King believes in service unto death and will handover only with his last breath.
For pragmatic reasons it's best this all happens under Charles anyway. I wonder if they'll be a market for 'annus horribilis' in this years Christmas Speech?
Horrible arse anyway, which Charles will present as him only having found out about Andrew M-W.
‘Imagine my surprise when information was put before me..’
"Imagine my surprise when I discovered what somebody I grew up with and have known closely for his entire life was really like."
For all the opprobrium the original user of the term got, she was right.
Dan Hodges misses the point (has this ever happened before?) which is that after criticism of the ‘boys club’, Starmer has cynically replaced the hairy sex with the fairer sex as Cabinet Secretary and joint Chiefs of Staff – Antonia, Jill and Vidhya.
He also very conveniently fails to point out that Romeo called out Dominic Raab for bulling civil service staff in 2022.
“[Romeo] goes to parties and looks like she’s enjoying herself, in contrast with the vast majority of permanent secretaries I’ve known,” said one Whitehall insider."
Guardian
Sounds like a good appointment. Who goes to parties and doesn't enjoy themselves?
The BBC reckons there's no precedent for the arrest, but go back 500 years or so and they were sticking each other in the Tower of London all the time.
If only they had banged up another Prince in the Tower...
No, he was one of the best guitarists of all time, and his Super Bowl show in the Purple Rain will be remembered for decades.
Depending on how this plays out with the King's brother and the kings obvious frailty on occasions, is this not a time for a tactical abdicstion, if and when charges are made.
A new broom, a new generation, a new King and Queen and one's who can talk about the misdeamoneurs with greater conviction.
Needs a betting market
Abdicstion in 2027??
Seriously, is this a new word? Abdication is what you are grasping for. And the answer is no - like his mother the King believes in service unto death and will handover only with his last breath.
For pragmatic reasons it's best this all happens under Charles anyway. I wonder if they'll be a market for 'annus horribilis' in this years Christmas Speech?
Horrible arse anyway, which Charles will present as him only having found out about Andrew M-W.
‘Imagine my surprise when information was put before me..’
"Imagine my surprise when I discovered what somebody I grew up with and have known closely for his entire life was really like."
The scuttlebutt is that the £1.5m Charles put into the £12m Giuffre buy-off was in return for QEII giving her blessing for Camilla being allowed the title queen once Truss performed regicide. All reassuringly transactional.
“[Romeo] goes to parties and looks like she’s enjoying herself, in contrast with the vast majority of permanent secretaries I’ve known,” said one Whitehall insider."
Guardian
Sounds like a good appointment. Who goes to parties and doesn't enjoy themselves?
This story might be important when it comes to the Artist Formerly Known As Prince. We should also recall the financial and political links between the Rowland family and the Tory Party. Jonathan’s father Spotty is said to have been the key donor to the Tories during the years they had a chancellor with a penchant for parties on Russian yachts.
This story is uncomfortable for the whole British establishment pretty much. Sunlight is a disinfectant, let the sun shine.
I think that, wherever this ends up, we are likely going to get to a position where Charles will broadcast a statement directly on this.
It feels that written statements aren’t going to really cut it anymore. I think he’ll need to talk about it openly to lance the boil, a bit like the Queen and Diana.
I think that, wherever this ends up, we are likely going to get to a position where Charles will broadcast a statement directly on this.
It feels that written statements aren’t going to really cut it anymore. I think he’ll need to talk about it openly to lance the boil, a bit like the Queen and Diana.
“[Romeo] goes to parties and looks like she’s enjoying herself, in contrast with the vast majority of permanent secretaries I’ve known,” said one Whitehall insider."
Guardian
Sounds like a good appointment. Who goes to parties and doesn't enjoy themselves?
I usually dread them and when I go I have a great time.
Her enjoying parties is hardly a hanging offence. Good for her.
Interesting polling. In all but two of the match ups (Lib Dems vs Labour or the Greens) the more left wing option is ahead.
Yes, very interesting polling. Reform lose every contest, with the implication they have the plurality of unpopularity as well as, from current general polling, the plurality of popularity.
So ensuring they don't form a government should be easy.
There is one central problem, and another secondary problem, and the next election may well turn on its resolution: Firstly identifying the party in each relevant seat that can beat Reform in a world where Labour unusually hold all the seats that are most likely to change hands, but are now unloved.
(Cumbria, apart from Farron's seat is my example but is typical: 2024: all Labour. 2019: all Tory. Projected 2029: all Reform. Which party is the tactical vote?)
The secondary problem is how to know if voting Tory is in fact a vote for a Reform + Tory government or not.
Indeed and this is the big question for Badenoch going forward. Whatever her public criticisms of Reform before an election, do we still think IF the numbers work for a Reform minority Government, she will offer Confidence & Supply to Farage? I suspect this is something she has been pondering - I would if I were her.
Publicly, it will be all about maximising the Conservative vote but as we know what leaders say before the votes are cast and what they do once they are counted aren't always the same.
Davey faces a similar dilemma - would he support a minority second term Labour Government with Confidence & Supply?
Both Badenoch and Davey could come out before the election and say they will neither support a Reform minority nor a Labour minority but the charge then will be, as it would have for Clegg in 2010, to have been to cause chaos in the name of self indulgence.
The test would then be whether either or both would vote down a Reform or Labour Queen's Speech and trigger a second election - I suspect they'd get little thanks from the public for that.
Yes. Largely agree. It seems to me the Tories may find themselves in a unique situation, for which the name is Zugzwang. As things stand we know that no other significant party will touch Reform with a bargepole. The 'left of centre' grouping (Lab, LD, G, PC, SNP) has an unambiguous nature.
Obvs the Tories may or may not deal with Reform. Some will only vote for them if they will, some (including me) will only vote for them if the won't. The remaining group who don't care either way exists but isn't a lots of seats winning sized group.
Only three courses are open to them, and it isn't possible to opt out, as one of the courses is doing and saying nothing:
Yes we would. No we won't. Do and say nothing/ambiguity/we decide after the election/we are going to win it doesn't arise. These are identical.
Each course, as things stand now, is damaging.
Yes and the LDs, who have had much more experience of this, called it "equidistance" and that policy served them well until 2010. If, of course, Reform or Labour win an outright majority, it won't matter and both Badenoch and Davey will probably and quietly breathe a sigh of relief.
The other "hope" for Badenoch is Restore Britain - if, pace Referendum in 1997, Lowe's party has the funds to put up a candidate in every seat, they will likely draw 2-4% away from Reform which could make all the difference.
Should we start saying "Vote Lowe, Get Starmer" ?
One of the things about Reform is that there seems to be a lot of money behind them, and they're spending it in rather different ways to the other parties - these glitzy set-piece events, like the latest one for the shadow cabinet announcement, are quite different to the normal pace of British politics. I'd expect that sort of thing would serve to swamp the efforts of small parties on their fringe, and create a bandwagon effect during a general election campaign.
One thing that the Tories (and all the other parties too) need to be planning for is how to not be drowned out by Reform during a general election campaign.
I imagine Farage will mimic Trump in this, as in much else. Big rallies, baseball caps, and outrageous statements, designed to dominate the news cycle, and give an impression of momentum.
If Farage starts up with some ghastly gin'n'jag version of The Weave that will be my trigger to unplug and take up beekeeping.
"Semper eadem" is a Latin phrase translating to "Always the same". It was the personal motto of Queen Elizabeth I. It was used to signify constancy, stability, and unwavering resolve in her actions and reign...
“[Romeo] goes to parties and looks like she’s enjoying herself, in contrast with the vast majority of permanent secretaries I’ve known,” said one Whitehall insider."
Guardian
Sounds like a good appointment. Who goes to parties and doesn't enjoy themselves?
I usually dread them and when I go I have a great time.
Her enjoying parties is hardly a hanging offence. Good for her.
Rather depends on the party, doesn’t it?
As it happens there is stuff in the news about people who liked the wrong kind of parties.
They are BPC Registered Director of the company is Prafal Nargund who ran for Lab vs Corbyn in Izzy North
As an aside, what amazed me was the number of companies that are BPC registered. I thought we were talking about 6-10 at most but there are currently 38 listed on the BPC website
Surprises me as, from what I can see, the damned thing looks like it's covered in potholes.
Famously, it has several abandoned mobile homes and cars, and with flags and flagpoles. I'm surprised Emily Thornberry hasn't gone off on one about it.
Interesting polling. In all but two of the match ups (Lib Dems vs Labour or the Greens) the more left wing option is ahead.
Yes, very interesting polling. Reform lose every contest, with the implication they have the plurality of unpopularity as well as, from current general polling, the plurality of popularity.
So ensuring they don't form a government should be easy.
There is one central problem, and another secondary problem, and the next election may well turn on its resolution: Firstly identifying the party in each relevant seat that can beat Reform in a world where Labour unusually hold all the seats that are most likely to change hands, but are now unloved.
(Cumbria, apart from Farron's seat is my example but is typical: 2024: all Labour. 2019: all Tory. Projected 2029: all Reform. Which party is the tactical vote?)
The secondary problem is how to know if voting Tory is in fact a vote for a Reform + Tory government or not.
Indeed and this is the big question for Badenoch going forward. Whatever her public criticisms of Reform before an election, do we still think IF the numbers work for a Reform minority Government, she will offer Confidence & Supply to Farage? I suspect this is something she has been pondering - I would if I were her.
Publicly, it will be all about maximising the Conservative vote but as we know what leaders say before the votes are cast and what they do once they are counted aren't always the same.
Davey faces a similar dilemma - would he support a minority second term Labour Government with Confidence & Supply?
Both Badenoch and Davey could come out before the election and say they will neither support a Reform minority nor a Labour minority but the charge then will be, as it would have for Clegg in 2010, to have been to cause chaos in the name of self indulgence.
The test would then be whether either or both would vote down a Reform or Labour Queen's Speech and trigger a second election - I suspect they'd get little thanks from the public for that.
I think we will see semi-official unpublicised verbal agreements to lay off certain constituencies, as we did between Lab and Lib in 1997.
I'm not sure which parties would be involved though - perhaps the Greens as their realistic target seats will be few and far between most likely.
Greens came second in 40 seats in 2024
That looks like a good basis for a negotiation - a decent number of targets to ask another party to leave alone, or to agree to leave alone.
I call it for 5-10 Green seats in 2029 !
Greens are already totally ignoring Labour and attacking Reform in Manchester. Trusting voters to do their thing.
G&D will have an influence. I also think we should have half an eye on the small c conservatives. I would be crafting our message that way.
Plus Nostalgia is a strong narrative. It’s all Reform have got and they are doing okay. Their non-racists are sitting there waiting to be plucked. The WWC tends socially liberal despite their rep.
10 to 15
——
I expect the next by-election will be used to test the effectiveness of a direct attack on Labour. It would be a good to know. I’m not comfortable with it but it needs to be done.
Kier has definitely started the Labour attack on the Greens so I’m coming to expect quite a nasty campaign in 29.
That just means its a common law offence, meaning not one defined in legislation, so Parliament has not set a maximum penalty for it. The offence is due to be replaced by some statutory gubbins this Parliament sometime.
Wouldn't his first line of defence be that he wasn't in public office? He wasn't paid to be Trade Envoy, for example.
Holding an office does not require payment, unlike being an employee, which by definition is someone who works under a contract of employment. An officer is simply a person appointed or elected to some position of responsibility or authority in an organisation. Doesn't necessarily have to be paid.
This story might be important when it comes to the Artist Formerly Known As Prince. We should also recall the financial and political links between the Rowland family and the Tory Party. Jonathan’s father Spotty is said to have been the key donor to the Tories during the years they had a chancellor with a penchant for parties on Russian yachts.
This story is uncomfortable for the whole British establishment pretty much. Sunlight is a disinfectant, let the sun shine.
Still confident Arsenal will cruise to the title by a 9 point margin?
That just means its a common law offence, meaning not one defined in legislation, so Parliament has not set a maximum penalty for it. The offence is due to be replaced by some statutory gubbins this Parliament sometime.
Wouldn't his first line of defence be that he wasn't in public office? He wasn't paid to be Trade Envoy, for example.
Holding an office does not require payment, unlike being an employee, which by definition is someone who works under a contract of employment. An officer is simply a person appointed or elected to some position of responsibility or authority in an organisation. Doesn't necessarily have to be paid.
It would be an interesting argument, to claim that being a Royal Prince is not a public office.
This story might be important when it comes to the Artist Formerly Known As Prince. We should also recall the financial and political links between the Rowland family and the Tory Party. Jonathan’s father Spotty is said to have been the key donor to the Tories during the years they had a chancellor with a penchant for parties on Russian yachts.
This story is uncomfortable for the whole British establishment pretty much. Sunlight is a disinfectant, let the sun shine.
Still confident Arsenal will cruise to the title by a 9 point margin?
I think today is actually a very good one for our country. As the King and the Prime Minister have both said, nobody is above the law. Could the same thing be said about the United States, for instance?
That just means its a common law offence, meaning not one defined in legislation, so Parliament has not set a maximum penalty for it. The offence is due to be replaced by some statutory gubbins this Parliament sometime.
Wouldn't his first line of defence be that he wasn't in public office? He wasn't paid to be Trade Envoy, for example.
Holding an office does not require payment, unlike being an employee, which by definition is someone who works under a contract of employment. An officer is simply a person appointed or elected to some position of responsibility or authority in an organisation. Doesn't necessarily have to be paid.
It would be an interesting argument, to claim that being a Royal Prince is not a public office.
It's his role as Trade Envoy which is the public office in question and the reason why he had access to privilege information in the first place.
They are BPC Registered Director of the company is Prafal Nargund who ran for Lab vs Corbyn in Izzy North
As an aside, what amazed me was the number of companies that are BPC registered. I thought we were talking about 6-10 at most but there are currently 38 listed on the BPC website
Yep. I think we have 13 currently putting out VI polls, 15 since the GE but Whitestone and WeThink havent for ages. Plus Beaufort Research in Wales and Norstat in Scotland And Ashcroft amongst 'non BPC'
That just means its a common law offence, meaning not one defined in legislation, so Parliament has not set a maximum penalty for it. The offence is due to be replaced by some statutory gubbins this Parliament sometime.
Wouldn't his first line of defence be that he wasn't in public office? He wasn't paid to be Trade Envoy, for example.
Holding an office does not require payment, unlike being an employee, which by definition is someone who works under a contract of employment. An officer is simply a person appointed or elected to some position of responsibility or authority in an organisation. Doesn't necessarily have to be paid.
It would be an interesting argument, to claim that being a Royal Prince is not a public office.
More likely trade envoy was the office in this case. I think the CPS/DPP must be pretty sure of their ground there.
I think today is actually a very good one for our country. As the King and the Prime Minister have both said, nobody is above the law. Could the same thing be said about the United States, for instance?
Mostly, but Trump vs United States disestablished that principle - A president has absolute immunity for acts committed as president. OTOH Marbury vs Madison wrote the court the power of judicial review out of whole cloth.
So Marbury effectively made the court the top power as it is THEY who interpret the constitution, but 221 years late Trump vs USA definitely gave a fair chunk of power back to the president.
They are BPC Registered Director of the company is Prafal Nargund who ran for Lab vs Corbyn in Izzy North
As an aside, what amazed me was the number of companies that are BPC registered. I thought we were talking about 6-10 at most but there are currently 38 listed on the BPC website
Yep. I think we have 13 currently putting out VI polls, 15 since the GE but Whitestone and WeThink havent for ages. Plus Beaufort Research in Wales and Norstat in Scotland And Ashcroft amongst 'non BPC'
Talking of Beaufort, their latest Welsh Omnibus incl senedd and westminster VI is due out today (they are very small sample though - about 500 to 600 for VI usually)
“[Romeo] goes to parties and looks like she’s enjoying herself, in contrast with the vast majority of permanent secretaries I’ve known,” said one Whitehall insider."
Guardian
Sounds like a good appointment. Who goes to parties and doesn't enjoy themselves?
I usually dread them and when I go I have a great time.
Her enjoying parties is hardly a hanging offence. Good for her.
Rather depends on the party, doesn’t it?
As it happens there is stuff in the news about people who liked the wrong kind of parties.
I never get invited to those sort of parties anyway.
“[Romeo] goes to parties and looks like she’s enjoying herself, in contrast with the vast majority of permanent secretaries I’ve known,” said one Whitehall insider."
Guardian
Sounds like a good appointment. Who goes to parties and doesn't enjoy themselves?
Everyone who went to Your Party.
Funniest political party of recent times was definitely Change UK, or The Independent Group For Change - who desparately wanted to maintain the status quo and not change anything at all.
I think today is actually a very good one for our country. As the King and the Prime Minister have both said, nobody is above the law. Could the same thing be said about the United States, for instance?
Strictly speaking no-one is above the law except for Charles.
That just means its a common law offence, meaning not one defined in legislation, so Parliament has not set a maximum penalty for it. The offence is due to be replaced by some statutory gubbins this Parliament sometime.
Wouldn't his first line of defence be that he wasn't in public office? He wasn't paid to be Trade Envoy, for example.
Holding an office does not require payment, unlike being an employee, which by definition is someone who works under a contract of employment. An officer is simply a person appointed or elected to some position of responsibility or authority in an organisation. Doesn't necessarily have to be paid.
It would be an interesting argument, to claim that being a Royal Prince is not a public office.
“[Romeo] goes to parties and looks like she’s enjoying herself, in contrast with the vast majority of permanent secretaries I’ve known,” said one Whitehall insider."
Guardian
Sounds like a good appointment. Who goes to parties and doesn't enjoy themselves?
Everyone who went to Your Party.
Funniest political party of recent times was definitely Change UK, or The Independent Group For Change - who desparately wanted to maintain the status quo and not change anything at all.
I'd forgotten them! Bless them, they gave us all a good laugh at the time. Whatever happened to Chuka Umnuna? Probably some management consultant now.
I think today is actually a very good one for our country. As the King and the Prime Minister have both said, nobody is above the law. Could the same thing be said about the United States, for instance?
I doubt anyone could have predicted that the first arrest after the release of the Epstein files is the king's brother and 8th in line
This is not just a sensational domestic story but across the globe
You wonder how many commonwealth countries will move to become republics
It is a lesson to the US that no matter how high your office, UK law enforcement will act when required
I think today is actually a very good one for our country. As the King and the Prime Minister have both said, nobody is above the law. Could the same thing be said about the United States, for instance?
Strictly speaking no-one is above the law except for Charles.
Is that the case? Didn't an earlier Charles disestablish that particular principle here ?
Comments
A new broom, a new generation, a new King and Queen and one's who can talk about the misdeamoneurs with greater conviction.
Needs a betting market
Abdicstion in 2027??
"Case law has established a broad definition of "public office holder" for this purpose that does not depend on the person holding a formal "office" as such, nor on being paid out of the public purse, though a government employee is more likely to be found to fall into the definition."
Although there is so much potential for insider trading under the Trump regime and nobody bats an eyelid, perhaps not.
Now, I don't think that will happen in the Borough in May but for Reform to poll 16% in a strongly Muslim Ward makes me wonder what they could achieve in the areas with smaller Muslim populations.
Fascinating (as someone once said).
"Good evening New York City. Hello Madison Square Garden. Our home town."
https://youtu.be/4btgZseIXrA?t=655
One thing that the Tories (and all the other parties too) need to be planning for is how to not be drowned out by Reform during a general election campaign.
‘ UPDATE: Poland's Prime Minister Donald Tusk urges Polish citizens to leave Iran "immediately ... and do not go to this country under any circumstances".’
https://x.com/ajenews/status/2024421110515691934?s=61
@DPJHodges
·
12m
A suspiciously good day to bury concerns about this appointment.
https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/2024440216493105163
Why would the Lib Dem’s even campaign in a seat like Huddersfield irrespective ? They’d never win.
The Sketch Show- Police Birthday Song Sketch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0on0wxcS7A
Guardian
Not sure if they are BPC accredited yet but their opening offering is:
Reform: 28% (+13)
Labour: 21% (-14)
Conservative: 20% (-4)
Green: 12% (+5)
Liberal Democrats: 12% (-1)
Not wildly out of line with other pollsters in truth (changes are from the 2024 GE, fieldwork was 13/2 to 16/2).
I assume this is the organisation concerned:
https://www.goodgrowthfoundation.co.uk/
It was a close Finnish...
https://www.scotsman.com/news/uk-news/mandelson-partner-in-citizenship-row-2511536
Sadly I cannot locate a larger one.
One has to ask why Mr Hodges has turned a blind eye to her for a decade?
Prisoner cell block HRH.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwYhFuRDkQc
LDs 80+
SNP/Plaid 50+
NI 18
Let's say 190 seats leaving 435 for the Tories. Lab and Reform.
IF Reform gets a majority (325+) it leaves <110 for the Lab plus Tories, so probably neither would be the official opposition. LDs would be the official opposition. Big IF. This isn't going to happen.
It's going to be a hung parliament isn't it?
Minority Labour with C&S from LDs.
Davey will be categorical that LDs will not give C&S to Reform or CON, and ambiguous about LAB.
It will be a name on the ballot paper and that will be true of most candidates in most seats. At most, parties with no chance might campaign in Wards where they have councillors or Wards they are looking to win in future elections but most won't even do that.
Will the Conservatives, LDs or Reform campaign in East Ham? No.
In the majority of seats, you will get two parties actively campaigning - in some (more than usual), there will be three. There might even be a few places where four parties are working but they will be the exception.
That also depends on money and resources - ground level campaigning is labour intensive (no pun intended) and costly.
Insider dealing
Who it went to and who they passed it too.
Mandy, Andy, Epstein may be in far greater shit for that than any sexual deviancy.
‘Imagine my surprise when information was put before me..’
I don't think anyone ever argued with the broad point that it's better to drop bad news when there's a lot of other stuff going on than on a quiet news day. They criticise the callousness, on a day when everyone else was utterly horrified by the scale of the human tragedy unfolding, that she immediately thought about the comms angle for the DTI or whatever it was at the time. It seemed pretty inhumane.
https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10173899352245046&set=a.66733705045
You guys attribute an achievable mission, that leave things better, to these performative bouts of bullying.
Netanyahu campaign to erase Hamas, after all the horror unleashed on a civilian populace, was that a success or not? Ditto you ignoring Syria, Trumps friends ISIS/deash slaughtering the Kurds? Afghanistan? Wake up. None of it ends as you promise us it will.
I ask you - what are you doing.
You answer - we going to achieve something good, part of the “better” agenda.
It’s as glib and clueless as that. Time after time.
You are [non mental health slur, but cutting slur of some sort quite rightly deserved]
I don't think the media or the other parties are ready for a Presidential Farage campaign.
Much to the chagrin of The Daily Mail
Director of the company is Prafal Nargund who ran for Lab vs Corbyn in Izzy North
Will return 'asap' (never)
This story might be important when it comes to the Artist Formerly Known As Prince. We should also recall the financial and political links between the Rowland family and the Tory Party. Jonathan’s father Spotty is said to have been the key donor to the Tories during the years they had a chancellor with a penchant for parties on Russian yachts.
This story is uncomfortable for the whole British establishment pretty much. Sunlight is a disinfectant, let the sun shine.
It feels that written statements aren’t going to really cut it anymore. I think he’ll need to talk about it openly to lance the boil, a bit like the Queen and Diana.
https://x.com/montie/status/2024427345046548888?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
A pleasing consensus in the replies.
Her enjoying parties is hardly a hanging offence. Good for her.
...and today you have learned something
As it happens there is stuff in the news about people who liked the wrong kind of parties.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/feb/12/antonia-romeo-and-tipped-next-cabinet-secretary
Greens are already totally ignoring Labour and attacking Reform in Manchester. Trusting voters to do their thing.
G&D will have an influence. I also think we should have half an eye on the small c conservatives. I would be crafting our message that way.
Plus
Nostalgia is a strong narrative. It’s all Reform have got and they are doing okay. Their non-racists are sitting there waiting to be plucked. The WWC tends socially liberal despite their rep.
10 to 15
——
I expect the next by-election will be used to test the effectiveness of a direct attack on Labour. It would be a good to know. I’m not comfortable with it but it needs to be done.
Kier has definitely started the Labour attack on the Greens so I’m coming to expect quite a nasty campaign in 29.
Not saying which season, mind!
Plus Beaufort Research in Wales and Norstat in Scotland
And Ashcroft amongst 'non BPC'
OTOH Marbury vs Madison wrote the court the power of judicial review out of whole cloth.
So Marbury effectively made the court the top power as it is THEY who interpret the constitution, but 221 years late Trump vs USA definitely gave a fair chunk of power back to the president.
https://x.com/jacklopresti/status/2024445377521357202
Im sure Rupert is gagging for their 12 remaining UK voters and single councillor
This is not just a sensational domestic story but across the globe
You wonder how many commonwealth countries will move to become republics
It is a lesson to the US that no matter how high your office, UK law enforcement will act when required