Data reveal there is really only one safe seat for Burnham Greater Manchester mayor would have to secure Bootle seat to guarantee a path back to Parliament ... Mr Burnham is believed to have held talks with Labour MPs from four different constituencies: Warrington North, St Helens South, Manchester Rusholme and Bootle. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/a261674509fe00a5
Part 1a: Get the nominations of 20% of Labour MPs (81 MPs)
Part 1b: Get the nominations of i) 5% of constituency Labour Parties (CLPs), or at least three affiliates if those affiliates total 5%
Part 2a: Hold election. It's preferential voting (instant-runoff voting, so mark them 1,2,3 and go thru rounds until somebody gets 50%+1)
Part 2b: Count votes
Part 3: Announce results and winner at special conference
It'll be fun if Starmer wins and they all convene for a special conference where he goes, "hi I'm still here"
Lewis Goodall was speculating along those lines on LBC yesterday, and suggested that if it came down to Starmer v Streeting, it’s quite likely Starmer would win, such is the lack of enthusiasm of soft left MPs for having Streeting
Data reveal there is really only one safe seat for Burnham Greater Manchester mayor would have to secure Bootle seat to guarantee a path back to Parliament ... Mr Burnham is believed to have held talks with Labour MPs from four different constituencies: Warrington North, St Helens South, Manchester Rusholme and Bootle. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/a261674509fe00a5
That’s quite the business delegation that Trump’s taking with him to China. The consequences of this week for a global trade reset are somewhat more consequential than the machinations of Westminster.
1. Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX CEO 2. Jensen Huang, Nvidia CEO 3. Tim Cook, Apple CEO 4. Larry Fink, BlackRock CEO 5. Stephen Schwarzman, Blackstone CEO 6. Kelly Ortberg, Boeing CEO 7. Brian Sikes, Cargill CEO 8. Jane Fraser, Citigroup CEO 9. Larry Culp, General Electric CEO 10. David Solomon, Goldman Sachs CEO 11. Sanjay Mehrotra, Micron CEO 12. Cristiano Amon, Qualcomm CEO
Data reveal there is really only one safe seat for Burnham Greater Manchester mayor would have to secure Bootle seat to guarantee a path back to Parliament ... Mr Burnham is believed to have held talks with Labour MPs from four different constituencies: Warrington North, St Helens South, Manchester Rusholme and Bootle. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/a261674509fe00a5
Gift link so no paywall.
And this is the saviour of Labour?
Can only get elected in one seat?
Hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahha.
Heh.
If we are to believe MRP projections that take no account of a Burnham bounce or, for that matter, anti-Burnham tactical voting, then yes. But if that were the case we could do away with elections altogether.
I'm not an admirer of Mason, but he's gone up in my estimation.
In the name of public service, and as ex-economics editor of BBC Newsnight, I offer to do a zoom call, tonight, with any Labour MP who wants to understand why bond markets do not "fall into line" with governments. https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054229532404519082
A straightforward thread.
From that thread:-
But the Budget Responsibility Act 2024 was a mistake. The problem is the OBR: it does not believe investment drives growth...this red circle shows where ultimate fiscal policymaking power in Britain lies. It's a joke. If you something to "fall into line" choose that... https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054235709465125099
I'm not an admirer of Mason, but he's gone up in my estimation.
In the name of public service, and as ex-economics editor of BBC Newsnight, I offer to do a zoom call, tonight, with any Labour MP who wants to understand why bond markets do not "fall into line" with governments. https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054229532404519082
A straightforward thread.
From that thread:-
But the Budget Responsibility Act 2024 was a mistake. The problem is the OBR: it does not believe investment drives growth...this red circle shows where ultimate fiscal policymaking power in Britain lies. It's a joke. If you something to "fall into line" choose that... https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054235709465125099
I don’t often agree with Mason on much, but he’s correct in his central point that the only borrowing the government is going to get away with, is for actual capital and infrastructure investment.
Not for “The NHS”, public sector pay rises, welfare, or any of the pet projects of the backbenchers. It needs to be roads, railways, nuclear power stations…
Oh, and at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, the single biggest focus of government needs to be on getting down energy prices. Energy prices and housing if picking two.
That’s quite the business delegation that Trump’s taking with him to China. The consequences of this week for a global trade reset are somewhat more consequential than the machinations of Westminster.
1. Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX CEO 2. Jensen Huang, Nvidia CEO 3. Tim Cook, Apple CEO 4. Larry Fink, BlackRock CEO 5. Stephen Schwarzman, Blackstone CEO 6. Kelly Ortberg, Boeing CEO 7. Brian Sikes, Cargill CEO 8. Jane Fraser, Citigroup CEO 9. Larry Culp, General Electric CEO 10. David Solomon, Goldman Sachs CEO 11. Sanjay Mehrotra, Micron CEO 12. Cristiano Amon, Qualcomm CEO
That’s quite the business delegation that Trump’s taking with him to China. The consequences of this week for a global trade reset are somewhat more consequential than the machinations of Westminster.
1. Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX CEO 2. Jensen Huang, Nvidia CEO 3. Tim Cook, Apple CEO 4. Larry Fink, BlackRock CEO 5. Stephen Schwarzman, Blackstone CEO 6. Kelly Ortberg, Boeing CEO 7. Brian Sikes, Cargill CEO 8. Jane Fraser, Citigroup CEO 9. Larry Culp, General Electric CEO 10. David Solomon, Goldman Sachs CEO 11. Sanjay Mehrotra, Micron CEO 12. Cristiano Amon, Qualcomm CEO
Plus many others, apparently!
I am a Tesla shareholder.
I'm happiest when Elon Musk is working on Tesla.
How does this benefit me?
Well he’s unlikely to be in China for SpaceX reasons, so it’s likely he’s going to be announcing a massive new Tesla car factory there, and/or supply chain (minerals, batteries etc.) deals out of Chinese companies. Sounds good for the shareholders.
That’s quite the business delegation that Trump’s taking with him to China. The consequences of this week for a global trade reset are somewhat more consequential than the machinations of Westminster.
1. Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX CEO 2. Jensen Huang, Nvidia CEO 3. Tim Cook, Apple CEO 4. Larry Fink, BlackRock CEO 5. Stephen Schwarzman, Blackstone CEO 6. Kelly Ortberg, Boeing CEO 7. Brian Sikes, Cargill CEO 8. Jane Fraser, Citigroup CEO 9. Larry Culp, General Electric CEO 10. David Solomon, Goldman Sachs CEO 11. Sanjay Mehrotra, Micron CEO 12. Cristiano Amon, Qualcomm CEO
Plus many others, apparently!
I am a Tesla shareholder.
I'm happiest when Elon Musk is working on Tesla.
How does this benefit me?
Well he’s unlikely to be in China for SpaceX reasons, so it’s likely he’s going to be announcing a massive new Tesla car factory there, and/or supply chain (minerals, batteries etc.) deals out of Chinese companies. Sounds good for the shareholders.
For what it's worth, I feel similarly when CEOs go to Davos.
Him wasting his time on a trip to make an announcement doesn't sell any more cars.
That’s quite the business delegation that Trump’s taking with him to China. The consequences of this week for a global trade reset are somewhat more consequential than the machinations of Westminster.
1. Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX CEO 2. Jensen Huang, Nvidia CEO 3. Tim Cook, Apple CEO 4. Larry Fink, BlackRock CEO 5. Stephen Schwarzman, Blackstone CEO 6. Kelly Ortberg, Boeing CEO 7. Brian Sikes, Cargill CEO 8. Jane Fraser, Citigroup CEO 9. Larry Culp, General Electric CEO 10. David Solomon, Goldman Sachs CEO 11. Sanjay Mehrotra, Micron CEO 12. Cristiano Amon, Qualcomm CEO
Plus many others, apparently!
I am a Tesla shareholder.
I'm happiest when Elon Musk is working on Tesla.
How does this benefit me?
Well he’s unlikely to be in China for SpaceX reasons, so it’s likely he’s going to be announcing a massive new Tesla car factory there, and/or supply chain (minerals, batteries etc.) deals out of Chinese companies. Sounds good for the shareholders.
For what it's worth, I feel similarly when CEOs go to Davos.
Him wasting his time on a trip to make an announcement doesn't sell any more cars.
Perhaps he would be better off being in the factory talking to the engineers about efficiencies and new designs; but if the government asks you to go as part of a massive trade delegation, you’re going to go!
At that level you have to do the “CEO” stuff sometimes, Elon of all people will be mostly bored out of his mind on a trip like this. Jensen Huang and Tim Cook will also be likely bored witless, the bankers and investors perhaps less so.
Nine in 10 UK millionaires are proud to live in Britain and three-quarters would be willing to pay more tax to ensure public assets get the funding they need, according to research.
Despite widely reported concerns that the wealthy are choosing to leave the country owing to higher taxes, the survey found millionaires were much more concerned about medical workers moving away than wealthy people emigrating.
Behr in the Guardian: Removing Keir Starmer is a remedy to the condition of having Keir Starmer as leader. Nothing else. It isn’t a diagnosis of what the country has been lacking or a destination it should be reaching. Anyone imagining they could replace the incumbent should have the confidence to express those things now. Make the case for a contest by displaying a credible alternative. Otherwise, the only prize of succession is to become the new face of the same old problem.
That’s quite the business delegation that Trump’s taking with him to China. The consequences of this week for a global trade reset are somewhat more consequential than the machinations of Westminster.
1. Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX CEO 2. Jensen Huang, Nvidia CEO 3. Tim Cook, Apple CEO 4. Larry Fink, BlackRock CEO 5. Stephen Schwarzman, Blackstone CEO 6. Kelly Ortberg, Boeing CEO 7. Brian Sikes, Cargill CEO 8. Jane Fraser, Citigroup CEO 9. Larry Culp, General Electric CEO 10. David Solomon, Goldman Sachs CEO 11. Sanjay Mehrotra, Micron CEO 12. Cristiano Amon, Qualcomm CEO
Plus many others, apparently!
I am a Tesla shareholder.
I'm happiest when Elon Musk is working on Tesla.
How does this benefit me?
Well he’s unlikely to be in China for SpaceX reasons, so it’s likely he’s going to be announcing a massive new Tesla car factory there, and/or supply chain (minerals, batteries etc.) deals out of Chinese companies. Sounds good for the shareholders.
For what it's worth, I feel similarly when CEOs go to Davos.
Him wasting his time on a trip to make an announcement doesn't sell any more cars.
Perhaps he would be better off being in the factory talking to the engineers about efficiencies and new designs; but if the government asks you to go as part of a massive trade delegation, you’re going to go!
At that level you have to do the “CEO” stuff sometimes, Elon of all people will be mostly bored out of his mind on a trip like this. Jensen Huang and Tim Cook will also be likely bored witless, the bankers and investors perhaps less so.
If the Cybertruck is anything to go by, I would suggest it's better for @rcs1000 if Musky Baby is kept as far away from all of that as possible.
Nine in 10 UK millionaires are proud to live in Britain and three-quarters would be willing to pay more tax to ensure public assets get the funding they need, according to research.
Despite widely reported concerns that the wealthy are choosing to leave the country owing to higher taxes, the survey found millionaires were much more concerned about medical workers moving away than wealthy people emigrating.
Where’s that from ?
A pro wealth tax lobby group like the opaquely funded ‘Patriotic Millionaires’
There’s nothing stopping them contributing more if they want and, of course, millionaires could simply be people,with a decent sized Home Counties house and DC pension pot.
Meanwhile
‘ NEW: Majority of voters fear a new PM would pursue a more left-wing economic agenda.
Nearly two thirds (64 per cent) say they would prefer the government to tax less, spend less and reduce borrowing, even if it meant that investment in public services declined.’
I'm not an admirer of Mason, but he's gone up in my estimation.
In the name of public service, and as ex-economics editor of BBC Newsnight, I offer to do a zoom call, tonight, with any Labour MP who wants to understand why bond markets do not "fall into line" with governments. https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054229532404519082
A straightforward thread.
From that thread:-
But the Budget Responsibility Act 2024 was a mistake. The problem is the OBR: it does not believe investment drives growth...this red circle shows where ultimate fiscal policymaking power in Britain lies. It's a joke. If you something to "fall into line" choose that... https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054235709465125099
I don’t often agree with Mason on much, but he’s correct in his central point that the only borrowing the government is going to get away with, is for actual capital and infrastructure investment.
Not for “The NHS”, public sector pay rises, welfare, or any of the pet projects of the backbenchers. It needs to be roads, railways, nuclear power stations…
Oh, and at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, the single biggest focus of government needs to be on getting down energy prices. Energy prices and housing if picking two.
But they won’t do either via supply side reforms. It will be subsidies.
That’s quite the business delegation that Trump’s taking with him to China. The consequences of this week for a global trade reset are somewhat more consequential than the machinations of Westminster.
1. Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX CEO 2. Jensen Huang, Nvidia CEO 3. Tim Cook, Apple CEO 4. Larry Fink, BlackRock CEO 5. Stephen Schwarzman, Blackstone CEO 6. Kelly Ortberg, Boeing CEO 7. Brian Sikes, Cargill CEO 8. Jane Fraser, Citigroup CEO 9. Larry Culp, General Electric CEO 10. David Solomon, Goldman Sachs CEO 11. Sanjay Mehrotra, Micron CEO 12. Cristiano Amon, Qualcomm CEO
Plus many others, apparently!
I am a Tesla shareholder.
I'm happiest when Elon Musk is working on Tesla.
How does this benefit me?
Well he’s unlikely to be in China for SpaceX reasons, so it’s likely he’s going to be announcing a massive new Tesla car factory there, and/or supply chain (minerals, batteries etc.) deals out of Chinese companies. Sounds good for the shareholders.
For what it's worth, I feel similarly when CEOs go to Davos.
Him wasting his time on a trip to make an announcement doesn't sell any more cars.
18Dec2019: first candidature announced (Emily Thornburry)
08Jan2020: first candidate to get nominations from sufficient MPs (Keir Starmer)
15Feb2020: first hustings between the three who got sufficient MP and CLP/affiliate noms (Starmer, Long-Bailey, Nandy)
24Feb2020: first membership forms received and hence first membership votes cast
02Apr2020: voting closes
04Apr2020: winner announced
Time from beginning to end: three months seventeen days.
This all seems very slow bearing in mind basically everyone is going to be voting online. Presumably the NEC could do it faster if they wanted?
The Labour Party NEC would take 3 months to decide if they wanted coffee or tea.
They’d take three months to decide which union would represent those making the coffee or tea, three months more hiring them, then make their decision on what drink to have, then finally get around to the election of the committee to explore the possibility of setting the rules to elect those who will govern the creation of the process to elect a new leader.
NEW: A group of Labour MPs and general secretaries of Labour-affiliated trade unions are launching a new political initiative called Socialism26
They have the following immediate demands: – New Deal for Working People in full – Recognise the genocide in Gaza, support rebuilding efforts, introduce sanctions – WASPI compensation – Drop jury trials policy, lift restrictions on the right to protest, stop changes to indefinite leave to remain – Measures to cut energy bills
The founders are: Unison's Andrea Egan FBU's Steve Wright CWU's Dave Ward TSSA's Maryam Eslamdoust + Neil Duncan-Jordan Chris Hinchliff Cat Eccles Terry Jermy Peter Lamb Brian Leishman Simon Opher Richard Quigley Lee Barron Lorraine Beavers Chris Bloore Steve Witherden
Also backed by lots of Socialist Campaign Group MPs‘
What is the process for Reform to change its leader, out of interest?
Good morning
The first thing would be for labour to stop handing them many more votes by stopping their civil war, replace Starmer, and start governing the country because as long as Farage is riding high the question doesn't exist
I was surprised just how well reform did last week especially in Wales where labour won just 9 out of 96 seats, a result so astonishing that it seems labour are in for many years in the Welsh wilderness
It is hard to see beyond a right government in 2029 and PM Farage, sadly, is becoming a real possibility
18Dec2019: first candidature announced (Emily Thornburry)
08Jan2020: first candidate to get nominations from sufficient MPs (Keir Starmer)
15Feb2020: first hustings between the three who got sufficient MP and CLP/affiliate noms (Starmer, Long-Bailey, Nandy)
24Feb2020: first membership forms received and hence first membership votes cast
02Apr2020: voting closes
04Apr2020: winner announced
Time from beginning to end: three months seventeen days.
This all seems very slow bearing in mind basically everyone is going to be voting online. Presumably the NEC could do it faster if they wanted?
The Labour Party NEC would take 3 months to decide if they wanted coffee or tea.
They’d take three months to decide which union would represent those making the coffee or tea, three months more hiring them, then make their decision on what drink to have, then finally get around to the election of the committee to explore the possibility of setting the rules to elect those who will govern the creation of the process to elect a new leader.
I'm not an admirer of Mason, but he's gone up in my estimation.
In the name of public service, and as ex-economics editor of BBC Newsnight, I offer to do a zoom call, tonight, with any Labour MP who wants to understand why bond markets do not "fall into line" with governments. https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054229532404519082
A straightforward thread.
From that thread:-
But the Budget Responsibility Act 2024 was a mistake. The problem is the OBR: it does not believe investment drives growth...this red circle shows where ultimate fiscal policymaking power in Britain lies. It's a joke. If you something to "fall into line" choose that... https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054235709465125099
I don’t often agree with Mason on much, but he’s correct in his central point that the only borrowing the government is going to get away with, is for actual capital and infrastructure investment.
Not for “The NHS”, public sector pay rises, welfare, or any of the pet projects of the backbenchers. It needs to be roads, railways, nuclear power stations…
Oh, and at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, the single biggest focus of government needs to be on getting down energy prices. Energy prices and housing if picking two.
We live in a knowledge economy, with biggest growing industry being AI. You risk being several decades out of date if you think of investment only in terms of building things like roads, railways and nuclear power stations. Hiring some staff in the NHS to improve the implementation of AI developments, for example, would be a worthwhile investment.
No confidence motions 6.28.A motion of no confidence in the Party Leader may be proposed in two ways: 6.28.1. by 50 Members of the Parliamentary Party or 50% of the Members of the Parliamentary Party (whichever is greater), writing to the Chairman and requesting a motion of no confidence. For the avoidance of doubt, clause 6.28.1 is only applicable in the event that the Parliamentary Party consists of more than 100 MPs; or 6.28.2. by 50% of all Members in Good Standing writing to the Chairman requesting a motion of no confidence. In either case such a request shall only be valid for 60 days from the day of receipt, after that time the Chairman shall disregard such requests.
No confidence motions 6.28.A motion of no confidence in the Party Leader may be proposed in two ways: 6.28.1. by 50 Members of the Parliamentary Party or 50% of the Members of the Parliamentary Party (whichever is greater), writing to the Chairman and requesting a motion of no confidence. For the avoidance of doubt, clause 6.28.1 is only applicable in the event that the Parliamentary Party consists of more than 100 MPs; or 6.28.2. by 50% of all Members in Good Standing writing to the Chairman requesting a motion of no confidence. In either case such a request shall only be valid for 60 days from the day of receipt, after that time the Chairman shall disregard such requests.
6.28.1 is terribly written. It only applies if they have >100 MPs, in which case the clause on 50 Members is unnecessary, as 50% of the Members will always be greater.
NEW: A group of Labour MPs and general secretaries of Labour-affiliated trade unions are launching a new political initiative called Socialism26
They have the following immediate demands: – New Deal for Working People in full – Recognise the genocide in Gaza, support rebuilding efforts, introduce sanctions – WASPI compensation – Drop jury trials policy, lift restrictions on the right to protest, stop changes to indefinite leave to remain – Measures to cut energy bills
The founders are: Unison's Andrea Egan FBU's Steve Wright CWU's Dave Ward TSSA's Maryam Eslamdoust + Neil Duncan-Jordan Chris Hinchliff Cat Eccles Terry Jermy Peter Lamb Brian Leishman Simon Opher Richard Quigley Lee Barron Lorraine Beavers Chris Bloore Steve Witherden
Also backed by lots of Socialist Campaign Group MPs‘
That’s quite the business delegation that Trump’s taking with him to China. The consequences of this week for a global trade reset are somewhat more consequential than the machinations of Westminster.
1. Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX CEO 2. Jensen Huang, Nvidia CEO 3. Tim Cook, Apple CEO 4. Larry Fink, BlackRock CEO 5. Stephen Schwarzman, Blackstone CEO 6. Kelly Ortberg, Boeing CEO 7. Brian Sikes, Cargill CEO 8. Jane Fraser, Citigroup CEO 9. Larry Culp, General Electric CEO 10. David Solomon, Goldman Sachs CEO 11. Sanjay Mehrotra, Micron CEO 12. Cristiano Amon, Qualcomm CEO
Plus many others, apparently!
I am a Tesla shareholder.
I'm happiest when Elon Musk is working on Tesla.
How does this benefit me?
Doesn’t Tesla make more money from subsidies than selling cars?
No confidence motions 6.28.A motion of no confidence in the Party Leader may be proposed in two ways: 6.28.1. by 50 Members of the Parliamentary Party or 50% of the Members of the Parliamentary Party (whichever is greater), writing to the Chairman and requesting a motion of no confidence. For the avoidance of doubt, clause 6.28.1 is only applicable in the event that the Parliamentary Party consists of more than 100 MPs; or 6.28.2. by 50% of all Members in Good Standing writing to the Chairman requesting a motion of no confidence. In either case such a request shall only be valid for 60 days from the day of receipt, after that time the Chairman shall disregard such requests.
6.28.1 is terribly written. It only applies if they have >100 MPs, in which case the clause on 50 Members is unnecessary, as 50% of the Members will always be greater.
If only they had someone who knew how to cut inefficiency and red tape.
🔥 Russia: Izmailovo Kremlin, a tourist attraction located 9 km from the real Kremlin in Moscow has burned down. 3,000m² on fire - 0.75 acres.
Doesn’t look like the Ukranians this one, just a lack of fire safety and probably too much vodka.
If it’s not an attack, then it’ll be something like a large motor on a ride that had been sitting idle all winter covered in grease, decided it didn’t want to wake up properly from hibernation.
I'm not an admirer of Mason, but he's gone up in my estimation.
In the name of public service, and as ex-economics editor of BBC Newsnight, I offer to do a zoom call, tonight, with any Labour MP who wants to understand why bond markets do not "fall into line" with governments. https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054229532404519082
A straightforward thread.
From that thread:-
But the Budget Responsibility Act 2024 was a mistake. The problem is the OBR: it does not believe investment drives growth...this red circle shows where ultimate fiscal policymaking power in Britain lies. It's a joke. If you something to "fall into line" choose that... https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054235709465125099
I don’t often agree with Mason on much, but he’s correct in his central point that the only borrowing the government is going to get away with, is for actual capital and infrastructure investment.
Not for “The NHS”, public sector pay rises, welfare, or any of the pet projects of the backbenchers. It needs to be roads, railways, nuclear power stations…
Oh, and at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, the single biggest focus of government needs to be on getting down energy prices. Energy prices and housing if picking two.
We live in a knowledge economy, with biggest growing industry being AI. You risk being several decades out of date if you think of investment only in terms of building things like roads, railways and nuclear power stations. Hiring some staff in the NHS to improve the implementation of AI developments, for example, would be a worthwhile investment.
I'm sure the markets will be with you on that one.....
NEW: A group of Labour MPs and general secretaries of Labour-affiliated trade unions are launching a new political initiative called Socialism26
They have the following immediate demands: – New Deal for Working People in full – Recognise the genocide in Gaza, support rebuilding efforts, introduce sanctions – WASPI compensation – Drop jury trials policy, lift restrictions on the right to protest, stop changes to indefinite leave to remain – Measures to cut energy bills
The founders are: Unison's Andrea Egan FBU's Steve Wright CWU's Dave Ward TSSA's Maryam Eslamdoust + Neil Duncan-Jordan Chris Hinchliff Cat Eccles Terry Jermy Peter Lamb Brian Leishman Simon Opher Richard Quigley Lee Barron Lorraine Beavers Chris Bloore Steve Witherden
Also backed by lots of Socialist Campaign Group MPs‘
NEW: A group of Labour MPs and general secretaries of Labour-affiliated trade unions are launching a new political initiative called Socialism26
They have the following immediate demands: – New Deal for Working People in full – Recognise the genocide in Gaza, support rebuilding efforts, introduce sanctions – WASPI compensation – Drop jury trials policy, lift restrictions on the right to protest, stop changes to indefinite leave to remain – Measures to cut energy bills
The founders are: Unison's Andrea Egan FBU's Steve Wright CWU's Dave Ward TSSA's Maryam Eslamdoust + Neil Duncan-Jordan Chris Hinchliff Cat Eccles Terry Jermy Peter Lamb Brian Leishman Simon Opher Richard Quigley Lee Barron Lorraine Beavers Chris Bloore Steve Witherden
Also backed by lots of Socialist Campaign Group MPs‘
So the IOW west MP comes out as a hard core lefty? That’s not going to go down well in his home patch
Hidden in there is this - “stop changes to ILR”
It looks innocuous. In fact it is calamitous. Mahmoud plans to change the rules on ILR so we don’t become liable for an enormous benefits bill for the Boriswave. It’s been estimated this will be hundreds of billions - which every British tax payer will have to pony up
If these changes don’t go through, we move much much closer to bankruptcy
The only reason that’s in there is so lefty morons can virtue signal. They are going to ruin us. These are the same people who think you can tell the bond markets to “get into line”
I'm not an admirer of Mason, but he's gone up in my estimation.
In the name of public service, and as ex-economics editor of BBC Newsnight, I offer to do a zoom call, tonight, with any Labour MP who wants to understand why bond markets do not "fall into line" with governments. https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054229532404519082
A straightforward thread.
From that thread:-
But the Budget Responsibility Act 2024 was a mistake. The problem is the OBR: it does not believe investment drives growth...this red circle shows where ultimate fiscal policymaking power in Britain lies. It's a joke. If you something to "fall into line" choose that... https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054235709465125099
I don’t often agree with Mason on much, but he’s correct in his central point that the only borrowing the government is going to get away with, is for actual capital and infrastructure investment.
Not for “The NHS”, public sector pay rises, welfare, or any of the pet projects of the backbenchers. It needs to be roads, railways, nuclear power stations…
Oh, and at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, the single biggest focus of government needs to be on getting down energy prices. Energy prices and housing if picking two.
We live in a knowledge economy, with biggest growing industry being AI. You risk being several decades out of date if you think of investment only in terms of building things like roads, railways and nuclear power stations. Hiring some staff in the NHS to improve the implementation of AI developments, for example, would be a worthwhile investment.
That’s current spending, not “investment”.
It may be a good use of resources but it’s not investment
I was listening to an interesting perspective on Starmer and I think this is spot on . It’s from yesterday’s News Agents .
“It's the fact that he was the sticking plaster to the party. He got the party into a position where it was elected because anyone could paint what they thought he might represent on top of him. He glued it together.
He held it together. And as soon as the Starmer plasters ripped off, what you actually see is under the stone all the various directions the Labour Party could now pull in.”
I’m told govt whips believe: 1. Wes Streeting will make his move on Thursday, to avoid clashing with King’s Speech; 2. Andy Burnham doesn’t have MP ready to quit; 3. Besides 87 MPs who’ve publicly called for Sir Keir Starmer to go, same number privately want him to step down.
Brave.
I suspect Wes Streeting's forces are about as strong as Felix Steiner's.
I'm not an admirer of Mason, but he's gone up in my estimation.
In the name of public service, and as ex-economics editor of BBC Newsnight, I offer to do a zoom call, tonight, with any Labour MP who wants to understand why bond markets do not "fall into line" with governments. https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054229532404519082
A straightforward thread.
From that thread:-
But the Budget Responsibility Act 2024 was a mistake. The problem is the OBR: it does not believe investment drives growth...this red circle shows where ultimate fiscal policymaking power in Britain lies. It's a joke. If you something to "fall into line" choose that... https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054235709465125099
I don’t often agree with Mason on much, but he’s correct in his central point that the only borrowing the government is going to get away with, is for actual capital and infrastructure investment.
Not for “The NHS”, public sector pay rises, welfare, or any of the pet projects of the backbenchers. It needs to be roads, railways, nuclear power stations…
Oh, and at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, the single biggest focus of government needs to be on getting down energy prices. Energy prices and housing if picking two.
We live in a knowledge economy, with biggest growing industry being AI. You risk being several decades out of date if you think of investment only in terms of building things like roads, railways and nuclear power stations. Hiring some staff in the NHS to improve the implementation of AI developments, for example, would be a worthwhile investment.
That’s current spending, not “investment”.
It may be a good use of resources but it’s not investment
If someone writes a blueprint for how a hospital can adopt AI in its radiology department, that document would be regarded as a thing that’s been produced for the future, just like a power station. It can count as investment under government spending rules.
🔥 Russia: Izmailovo Kremlin, a tourist attraction located 9 km from the real Kremlin in Moscow has burned down. 3,000m² on fire - 0.75 acres.
Doesn’t look like the Ukranians this one, just a lack of fire safety and probably too much vodka.
If it’s not an attack, then it’ll be something like a large motor on a ride that had been sitting idle all winter covered in grease, decided it didn’t want to wake up properly from hibernation.
Going to add to the genral sense of misery for Russians though, regardless of the cause.
And another 1.130 Russian troops not reporting for duty today to secure the Ukrainian Disneyland either. 51 artillery/MLRS not joining them either.
I'm not an admirer of Mason, but he's gone up in my estimation.
In the name of public service, and as ex-economics editor of BBC Newsnight, I offer to do a zoom call, tonight, with any Labour MP who wants to understand why bond markets do not "fall into line" with governments. https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054229532404519082
A straightforward thread.
From that thread:-
But the Budget Responsibility Act 2024 was a mistake. The problem is the OBR: it does not believe investment drives growth...this red circle shows where ultimate fiscal policymaking power in Britain lies. It's a joke. If you something to "fall into line" choose that... https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054235709465125099
I don’t often agree with Mason on much, but he’s correct in his central point that the only borrowing the government is going to get away with, is for actual capital and infrastructure investment.
Not for “The NHS”, public sector pay rises, welfare, or any of the pet projects of the backbenchers. It needs to be roads, railways, nuclear power stations…
Oh, and at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, the single biggest focus of government needs to be on getting down energy prices. Energy prices and housing if picking two.
We live in a knowledge economy, with biggest growing industry being AI. You risk being several decades out of date if you think of investment only in terms of building things like roads, railways and nuclear power stations. Hiring some staff in the NHS to improve the implementation of AI developments, for example, would be a worthwhile investment.
That’s current spending, not “investment”.
It may be a good use of resources but it’s not investment
If someone writes a blueprint for how a hospital can adopt AI in its radiology department, that document would be regarded as a thing that’s been produced for the future, just like a power station. It can count as investment under government spending rules.
Government spending rules were changed by brown and have created the farce that we are in.
Investment is capex. It really is as simple as that. There are very strict rules about the capitalisation of r&d (which is the closest to what you are describing).
Is what's happened over the last 24 hours really telling us that if Burnham can get back into parliament he'll be elected Labour leader by a landslide? (And that if he can't Miliband will be in with a good chance?)
I’m told govt whips believe: 1. Wes Streeting will make his move on Thursday, to avoid clashing with King’s Speech; 2. Andy Burnham doesn’t have MP ready to quit; 3. Besides 87 MPs who’ve publicly called for Sir Keir Starmer to go, same number privately want him to step down.
Brave.
I suspect Wes Streeting's forces are about as strong as Felix Steiner's.
Tomorrow the House will be debating the Kings speech proposals all day - that’s a *bold* day to be challenging the PM
I’m told govt whips believe: 1. Wes Streeting will make his move on Thursday, to avoid clashing with King’s Speech; 2. Andy Burnham doesn’t have MP ready to quit; 3. Besides 87 MPs who’ve publicly called for Sir Keir Starmer to go, same number privately want him to step down.
Brave.
I suspect Wes Streeting's forces are about as strong as Felix Steiner's.
Tomorrow the House will be debating the Kings speech proposals all day - that’s a *bold* day to be challenging the PM
A powerful speech in opposition to the King’s Speech… wrong priorities for Britain…
Hmmm… that might require Streeting to have an alternative vision…
I was listening to an interesting perspective on Starmer and I think this is spot on . It’s from yesterday’s News Agents .
“It's the fact that he was the sticking plaster to the party. He got the party into a position where it was elected because anyone could paint what they thought he might represent on top of him. He glued it together.
He held it together. And as soon as the Starmer plasters ripped off, what you actually see is under the stone all the various directions the Labour Party could now pull in.”
Behr makes essentially the same point in his Guardian opinion piece - Starmer reassured voters that he had neutered Labour’s more radical instincts and became the vessel onto which every voter could project their hopes and dreams - hence why people feel so let down now:
In opposition, it was the single word “change”. That was easy to initiate but hard to substantiate. Any credit available to the incoming prime minister by virtue of his not being a Tory expired on the threshold of No 10. From day one, most of Fleet Street treated the Labour government not as a legitimate manifestation of democratic preference, but as the accidental side-effect of voters’ haste to be rid of the Conservatives. Every scandal and mistake degraded the sense of difference from the old regime. Starmer had been an empty receptacle in which voters placed their hopes of renewal. Without momentum in any direction, he then became the repository for all the cumulative resentment of politicians who promise everything and deliver nothing.
I was listening to an interesting perspective on Starmer and I think this is spot on . It’s from yesterday’s News Agents .
“It's the fact that he was the sticking plaster to the party. He got the party into a position where it was elected because anyone could paint what they thought he might represent on top of him. He glued it together.
He held it together. And as soon as the Starmer plasters ripped off, what you actually see is under the stone all the various directions the Labour Party could now pull in.”
Behr makes essentially the same point in his Guardian opinion piece - Starmer reassured voters that he had neutered Labour’s more radical instincts and became the vessel onto which every voter could project their hopes and dreams - hence why people feel so let down now:
In opposition, it was the single word “change”. That was easy to initiate but hard to substantiate. Any credit available to the incoming prime minister by virtue of his not being a Tory expired on the threshold of No 10. From day one, most of Fleet Street treated the Labour government not as a legitimate manifestation of democratic preference, but as the accidental side-effect of voters’ haste to be rid of the Conservatives. Every scandal and mistake degraded the sense of difference from the old regime. Starmer had been an empty receptacle in which voters placed their hopes of renewal. Without momentum in any direction, he then became the repository for all the cumulative resentment of politicians who promise everything and deliver nothing.
I'm not an admirer of Mason, but he's gone up in my estimation.
In the name of public service, and as ex-economics editor of BBC Newsnight, I offer to do a zoom call, tonight, with any Labour MP who wants to understand why bond markets do not "fall into line" with governments. https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054229532404519082
A straightforward thread.
From that thread:-
But the Budget Responsibility Act 2024 was a mistake. The problem is the OBR: it does not believe investment drives growth...this red circle shows where ultimate fiscal policymaking power in Britain lies. It's a joke. If you something to "fall into line" choose that... https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054235709465125099
I don’t often agree with Mason on much, but he’s correct in his central point that the only borrowing the government is going to get away with, is for actual capital and infrastructure investment.
Not for “The NHS”, public sector pay rises, welfare, or any of the pet projects of the backbenchers. It needs to be roads, railways, nuclear power stations…
Oh, and at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, the single biggest focus of government needs to be on getting down energy prices. Energy prices and housing if picking two.
We live in a knowledge economy, with biggest growing industry being AI. You risk being several decades out of date if you think of investment only in terms of building things like roads, railways and nuclear power stations. Hiring some staff in the NHS to improve the implementation of AI developments, for example, would be a worthwhile investment.
That’s current spending, not “investment”.
It may be a good use of resources but it’s not investment
If someone writes a blueprint for how a hospital can adopt AI in its radiology department, that document would be regarded as a thing that’s been produced for the future, just like a power station. It can count as investment under government spending rules.
Which is exactly why the gilt rates keep ticking up, because the government is borrowing north of £100bn a year and not actually investing it by market rules - because government redefined “investment” to widen its scope to pet projects.
I’m told govt whips believe: 1. Wes Streeting will make his move on Thursday, to avoid clashing with King’s Speech; 2. Andy Burnham doesn’t have MP ready to quit; 3. Besides 87 MPs who’ve publicly called for Sir Keir Starmer to go, same number privately want him to step down.
Brave.
I suspect Wes Streeting's forces are about as strong as Felix Steiner's.
It looks like Streeting may precipitate a contest, and Starmer will not stand down, but there is room for a further candidate. I think this is what Rayner was getting at yesterday, that she will stand or back another candidate from the soft left.
I think it’s pretty clear now that the Labour Party will implode if Starmer goes .
The warring factions seem hell bent on a period of self indulgence and in fighting . This really isn’t a good look given what’s coming down the road for the economy .
No more chaos under Starmer looks pretty pathetic now . There are some that think simply changing leader but keeping the same policies will do , others want wholesale changes . It’s a total mess .
Whatever people think of Brexit when Johnson came in it was to unblock the road jam . So the change of leadership was probably more warranted . The public might have been more forgiving in this respect .
It’s really the fiasco surrounding Liz Truss that proved fatal for the party . Sunak who in all respects was a decent PM handed a terrible legacy . And we saw how that turned out .
Off topic, but it is about an election we can learn something from: On August 1, 1831, he cast his first ballot. The polls were in the home of James Camron where [Abraham] Lincoln was boarding and getting acquainted with Camron's 11 daughters who teased him about his long legs and arms and heard him admit he "wasn't much to look at." Voting by word of mouth, each voter spoke to the election judges his candidates' names. A judge then called out the voter's name and his candidates, clerks recording the names "on poll sheets." Lincoln voted for a Henry Clay Whig for Congress--and against Joseph Duncan, then a Jackson man serving in Congress. He stayed around the polls most of the day talking cheerily, telling stories, making friends and getting acquainted with the names and faces of nearly all the men in the New Salem neighborhood. (From chapter 2 of Carl Sandburg's one volume biography, Abraham Lincoln.)
I'd like to see a similar description of voting practices in the UK, about the same time.
NEW: A group of Labour MPs and general secretaries of Labour-affiliated trade unions are launching a new political initiative called Socialism26
They have the following immediate demands: – New Deal for Working People in full – Recognise the genocide in Gaza, support rebuilding efforts, introduce sanctions – WASPI compensation – Drop jury trials policy, lift restrictions on the right to protest, stop changes to indefinite leave to remain – Measures to cut energy bills
The founders are: Unison's Andrea Egan FBU's Steve Wright CWU's Dave Ward TSSA's Maryam Eslamdoust + Neil Duncan-Jordan Chris Hinchliff Cat Eccles Terry Jermy Peter Lamb Brian Leishman Simon Opher Richard Quigley Lee Barron Lorraine Beavers Chris Bloore Steve Witherden
Also backed by lots of Socialist Campaign Group MPs‘
I’m told govt whips believe: 1. Wes Streeting will make his move on Thursday, to avoid clashing with King’s Speech; 2. Andy Burnham doesn’t have MP ready to quit; 3. Besides 87 MPs who’ve publicly called for Sir Keir Starmer to go, same number privately want him to step down.
Brave.
I suspect Wes Streeting's forces are about as strong as Felix Steiner's.
Tomorrow the House will be debating the Kings speech proposals all day - that’s a *bold* day to be challenging the PM
A powerful speech in opposition to the King’s Speech… wrong priorities for Britain…
Hmmm… that might require Streeting to have an alternative vision…
Labour won’t vote down its own kings speech - they’ll all be defending it, so you’d expect it to be a day for some unity. How Streeting makes a speech backing all of Starmer’s proposals and then goes out onto the lawn to tell reporters about his agenda for changing everything remains to be seen….
I'm not an admirer of Mason, but he's gone up in my estimation.
In the name of public service, and as ex-economics editor of BBC Newsnight, I offer to do a zoom call, tonight, with any Labour MP who wants to understand why bond markets do not "fall into line" with governments. https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054229532404519082
A straightforward thread.
From that thread:-
But the Budget Responsibility Act 2024 was a mistake. The problem is the OBR: it does not believe investment drives growth...this red circle shows where ultimate fiscal policymaking power in Britain lies. It's a joke. If you something to "fall into line" choose that... https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054235709465125099
I don’t often agree with Mason on much, but he’s correct in his central point that the only borrowing the government is going to get away with, is for actual capital and infrastructure investment.
Not for “The NHS”, public sector pay rises, welfare, or any of the pet projects of the backbenchers. It needs to be roads, railways, nuclear power stations…
Oh, and at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, the single biggest focus of government needs to be on getting down energy prices. Energy prices and housing if picking two.
Obviously you have to be very careful about this, but a healthy, happy, educated working-age population is probably the most important thing for the economy, even more so than physical infrastructure.
I’m not suggesting we borrow to fund that, but if spending was directed more at public health interventions, mental health, colleges, re-training etc then I think this would go some way to bring borrowing costs down.
(And roads aren’t necessarily a great investment- those parts of the country with the most per capita have the weakest output. Improving public transport within TTWA, density zoning etc is almost certainly going to deliver more. Energy is unequivocally the best though, and the easiest to crack given solar and batteries)
Is what's happened over the last 24 hours really telling us that if Burnham can get back into parliament he'll be elected Labour leader by a landslide? (And that if he can't Miliband will be in with a good chance?)
Burnham has disappeared up his own arsehole.
It won't go down well with the British public, and nor will his "Madchester" act.
NEW: A group of Labour MPs and general secretaries of Labour-affiliated trade unions are launching a new political initiative called Socialism26
They have the following immediate demands: – New Deal for Working People in full – Recognise the genocide in Gaza, support rebuilding efforts, introduce sanctions – WASPI compensation – Drop jury trials policy, lift restrictions on the right to protest, stop changes to indefinite leave to remain – Measures to cut energy bills
The founders are: Unison's Andrea Egan FBU's Steve Wright CWU's Dave Ward TSSA's Maryam Eslamdoust + Neil Duncan-Jordan Chris Hinchliff Cat Eccles Terry Jermy Peter Lamb Brian Leishman Simon Opher Richard Quigley Lee Barron Lorraine Beavers Chris Bloore Steve Witherden
Also backed by lots of Socialist Campaign Group MPs‘
That will be fun for the new PM. Assuming they can get Starmer out of Downing Street by then.
Perhaps these leftist groups are founded by some government/MI5 mole, in the style of GBH (for older PB’ers), to make it nice and easy to compile a list of parliamentarians and activists to keep an eye on….?
I’m told govt whips believe: 1. Wes Streeting will make his move on Thursday, to avoid clashing with King’s Speech; 2. Andy Burnham doesn’t have MP ready to quit; 3. Besides 87 MPs who’ve publicly called for Sir Keir Starmer to go, same number privately want him to step down.
Brave.
I suspect Wes Streeting's forces are about as strong as Felix Steiner's.
Tomorrow the House will be debating the Kings speech proposals all day - that’s a *bold* day to be challenging the PM
My reading is he's trying to keep the flame alive.
NEW: A group of Labour MPs and general secretaries of Labour-affiliated trade unions are launching a new political initiative called Socialism26
They have the following immediate demands: – New Deal for Working People in full – Recognise the genocide in Gaza, support rebuilding efforts, introduce sanctions – WASPI compensation – Drop jury trials policy, lift restrictions on the right to protest, stop changes to indefinite leave to remain – Measures to cut energy bills
The founders are: Unison's Andrea Egan FBU's Steve Wright CWU's Dave Ward TSSA's Maryam Eslamdoust + Neil Duncan-Jordan Chris Hinchliff Cat Eccles Terry Jermy Peter Lamb Brian Leishman Simon Opher Richard Quigley Lee Barron Lorraine Beavers Chris Bloore Steve Witherden
Also backed by lots of Socialist Campaign Group MPs‘
I'm not an admirer of Mason, but he's gone up in my estimation.
In the name of public service, and as ex-economics editor of BBC Newsnight, I offer to do a zoom call, tonight, with any Labour MP who wants to understand why bond markets do not "fall into line" with governments. https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054229532404519082
A straightforward thread.
From that thread:-
But the Budget Responsibility Act 2024 was a mistake. The problem is the OBR: it does not believe investment drives growth...this red circle shows where ultimate fiscal policymaking power in Britain lies. It's a joke. If you something to "fall into line" choose that... https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054235709465125099
I don’t often agree with Mason on much, but he’s correct in his central point that the only borrowing the government is going to get away with, is for actual capital and infrastructure investment.
Not for “The NHS”, public sector pay rises, welfare, or any of the pet projects of the backbenchers. It needs to be roads, railways, nuclear power stations…
Oh, and at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, the single biggest focus of government needs to be on getting down energy prices. Energy prices and housing if picking two.
Obviously you have to be very careful about this, but a healthy, happy, educated working-age population is probably the most important thing for the economy, even more so than physical infrastructure.
I’m not suggesting we borrow to fund that, but if spending was directed more at public health interventions, mental health, colleges, re-training etc then I think this would go some way to bring borrowing costs down.
(And roads aren’t necessarily a great investment- those parts of the country with the most per capita have the weakest output. Improving public transport within TTWA, density zoning etc is almost certainly going to deliver more. Energy is unequivocally the best though, and the easiest to crack given solar and batteries)
Don’t disagree about government showing an interest in wellbeing, but the immediate problem is fiscal. Government is borrowing a ten-figure sum annually to fund current expenditure and the markets are fed up with the situation.
Borrowing for actual capital investment is would be okay, but borrowing for current expenditure is why 10y gilts at over 5%.
Comments
Labour are useless at this, the Tories would have knocked him on the head yesterday.
Probably a quiet day coming on the regicide front, with the actual king in town for the State Opening…
Greater Manchester mayor would have to secure Bootle seat to guarantee a path back to Parliament
...
Mr Burnham is believed to have held talks with Labour MPs from four different constituencies: Warrington North, St Helens South, Manchester Rusholme and Bootle.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/a261674509fe00a5
Gift link so no paywall.
Can only get elected in one seat?
Hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahha.
Heh.
https://x.com/rapidresponse47/status/2054398839256150417
1. Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX CEO
2. Jensen Huang, Nvidia CEO
3. Tim Cook, Apple CEO
4. Larry Fink, BlackRock CEO
5. Stephen Schwarzman, Blackstone CEO
6. Kelly Ortberg, Boeing CEO
7. Brian Sikes, Cargill CEO
8. Jane Fraser, Citigroup CEO
9. Larry Culp, General Electric CEO
10. David Solomon, Goldman Sachs CEO
11. Sanjay Mehrotra, Micron CEO
12. Cristiano Amon, Qualcomm CEO
Plus many others, apparently!
But the Budget Responsibility Act 2024 was a mistake. The problem is the OBR: it does not believe investment drives growth...this red circle shows where ultimate fiscal policymaking power in Britain lies. It's a joke. If you something to "fall into line" choose that...
https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/2054235709465125099
Not for “The NHS”, public sector pay rises, welfare, or any of the pet projects of the backbenchers. It needs to be roads, railways, nuclear power stations…
Oh, and at the risk of sounding like a stuck record, the single biggest focus of government needs to be on getting down energy prices. Energy prices and housing if picking two.
I'm happiest when Elon Musk is working on Tesla.
How does this benefit me?
Him wasting his time on a trip to make an announcement doesn't sell any more cars.
At that level you have to do the “CEO” stuff sometimes, Elon of all people will be mostly bored out of his mind on a trip like this. Jensen Huang and Tim Cook will also be likely bored witless, the bankers and investors perhaps less so.
Despite widely reported concerns that the wealthy are choosing to leave the country owing to higher taxes, the survey found millionaires were much more concerned about medical workers moving away than wealthy people emigrating.
A pro wealth tax lobby group like the opaquely funded ‘Patriotic Millionaires’
There’s nothing stopping them contributing more if they want and, of course, millionaires could simply be people,with a decent sized Home Counties house and DC pension pot.
Meanwhile
‘ NEW: Majority of voters fear a new PM would pursue a more left-wing economic agenda.
Nearly two thirds (64 per cent) say they would prefer the government to tax less, spend less and reduce borrowing, even if it meant that investment in public services declined.’
https://x.com/christianjmay/status/2054120593763500528?s=61
Always
Bottle
Ousting
Useless
Rulers
‘
NEW: A group of Labour MPs and general secretaries of Labour-affiliated trade unions are launching a new political initiative called Socialism26
They have the following immediate demands:
– New Deal for Working People in full
– Recognise the genocide in Gaza, support rebuilding efforts, introduce sanctions
– WASPI compensation
– Drop jury trials policy, lift restrictions on the right to protest, stop changes to indefinite leave to remain
– Measures to cut energy bills
The founders are:
Unison's Andrea Egan
FBU's Steve Wright
CWU's Dave Ward
TSSA's Maryam Eslamdoust
+
Neil Duncan-Jordan
Chris Hinchliff
Cat Eccles
Terry Jermy
Peter Lamb
Brian Leishman
Simon Opher
Richard Quigley
Lee Barron
Lorraine Beavers
Chris Bloore
Steve Witherden
Also backed by lots of Socialist Campaign Group MPs‘
https://x.com/siennamarla/status/2054242447669047391?s=61
The first thing would be for labour to stop handing them many more votes by stopping their civil war, replace Starmer, and start governing the country because as long as Farage is riding high the question doesn't exist
I was surprised just how well reform did last week especially in Wales where labour won just 9 out of 96 seats, a result so astonishing that it seems labour are in for many years in the Welsh wilderness
It is hard to see beyond a right government in 2029 and PM Farage, sadly, is becoming a real possibility
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DTT6cV9E219/
https://reformuk.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Reform_UK_Constitution.pdf
No confidence motions
6.28.A motion of no confidence in the Party Leader may be proposed in two ways:
6.28.1. by 50 Members of the Parliamentary Party or 50% of the Members of the
Parliamentary Party (whichever is greater), writing to the Chairman and requesting a
motion of no confidence. For the avoidance of doubt, clause 6.28.1 is only applicable
in the event that the Parliamentary Party consists of more than 100 MPs; or
6.28.2. by 50% of all Members in Good Standing writing to the Chairman requesting a
motion of no confidence.
In either case such a request shall only be valid for 60 days from the day of receipt, after
that time the Chairman shall disregard such requests.
🔥 Russia: Izmailovo Kremlin, a tourist attraction located 9 km from the real Kremlin in Moscow has burned down. 3,000m² on fire - 0.75 acres.
https://www.itv.com/news/central/2026-05-12/man-who-faked-being-severely-disabled-to-avoid-child-sex-charges-is-jailed
If it’s not an attack, then it’ll be something like a large motor on a ride that had been sitting idle all winter covered in grease, decided it didn’t want to wake up properly from hibernation.
The Football League will be hoping that Hull win the play off, and then they can impose a points deduction on Southampton for next season.
It looks innocuous. In fact it is calamitous. Mahmoud plans to change the rules on ILR so we don’t become liable for an enormous benefits bill for the Boriswave. It’s been estimated this will be hundreds of billions - which every British tax payer will have to pony up
If these changes don’t go through, we move much much closer to bankruptcy
The only reason that’s in there is so lefty morons can virtue signal. They are going to ruin us. These are the same people who think you can tell the bond markets to “get into line”
It may be a good use of resources but it’s not investment
https://www.latintimes.com/us-citizen-asks-political-asylum-mallorca-citing-fear-trump-597180
“It's the fact that he was the sticking plaster to the party. He got the party into a position where it was elected because anyone could paint what they thought he might represent on top of him. He glued it together.
He held it together. And as soon as the Starmer plasters ripped off, what you actually see is under the stone all the various directions the Labour Party could now pull in.”
From The News Agents: Starmer refuses to go: Crazy? Or courageous?, 12 May 2026
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-news-agents/id1640878689?i=1000767428951&r=404
I suspect Wes Streeting's forces are about as strong as Felix Steiner's.
And another 1.130 Russian troops not reporting for duty today to secure the Ukrainian Disneyland either. 51 artillery/MLRS not joining them either.
Investment is capex. It really is as simple as that. There are very strict rules about the capitalisation of r&d (which is the closest to what you are describing).
https://bsky.app/profile/thetnholler.bsky.social/post/3mloiqwjazs2y
Hmmm… that might require Streeting to have an alternative vision…
In opposition, it was the single word “change”. That was easy to initiate but hard to substantiate. Any credit available to the incoming prime minister by virtue of his not being a Tory expired on the threshold of No 10. From day one, most of Fleet Street treated the Labour government not as a legitimate manifestation of democratic preference, but as the accidental side-effect of voters’ haste to be rid of the Conservatives. Every scandal and mistake degraded the sense of difference from the old regime. Starmer had been an empty receptacle in which voters placed their hopes of renewal. Without momentum in any direction, he then became the repository for all the cumulative resentment of politicians who promise everything and deliver nothing.
In opposition, it was the single word “change”. That was easy to initiate but hard to substantiate. Any credit available to the incoming prime minister by virtue of his not being a Tory expired on the threshold of No 10. From day one, most of Fleet Street treated the Labour government not as a legitimate manifestation of democratic preference, but as the accidental side-effect of voters’ haste to be rid of the Conservatives. Every scandal and mistake degraded the sense of difference from the old regime. Starmer had been an empty receptacle in which voters placed their hopes of renewal. Without momentum in any direction, he then became the repository for all the cumulative resentment of politicians who promise everything and deliver nothing.
NEW THREAD
The warring factions seem hell bent on a period of self indulgence and in fighting . This really isn’t a good look given what’s coming down the road for the economy .
No more chaos under Starmer looks pretty pathetic now . There are some that think simply changing leader but keeping the same policies will do , others want wholesale changes . It’s a total mess .
Whatever people think of Brexit when Johnson came in it was to unblock the road jam . So the change of leadership was probably more warranted . The public might have been more forgiving in this respect .
It’s really the fiasco surrounding Liz Truss that proved fatal for the party . Sunak who in all respects was a decent PM handed a terrible legacy . And we saw how that turned out .
Coningsby is set in the early 1830s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coningsby_(novel)
That will be fun for the new PM. Assuming they can get Starmer out of Downing Street by then.
A fellow Labour Party member once described Wes Streeting to me as Zippy from Rainbow if he'd been radicalized by Mumsnet.
which is a very specific set of references but also disturbingly accurate.
I’m not suggesting we borrow to fund that, but if spending was directed more at public health interventions, mental health, colleges, re-training etc then I think this would go some way to bring borrowing costs down.
(And roads aren’t necessarily a great investment- those parts of the country with the most per capita have the weakest output. Improving public transport within TTWA, density zoning etc is almost certainly going to deliver more. Energy is unequivocally the best though, and the easiest to crack given solar and batteries)
It won't go down well with the British public, and nor will his "Madchester" act.
He's not ready to move.
No wonder our gilt rates are now sky high.
Borrowing for actual capital investment is would be okay, but borrowing for current expenditure is why 10y gilts at over 5%.