Might we see a joint ticket where one has got the looks and the other has got the brains?
Stick Carns in . Did he ever do one of those charity calendars ? His brutish rugged good looks and I used to be a marine so won’t take any crap might work .
It’s a lot better than I used to be cabin crew for EasyJet Streeting ! Burnham no I don’t use eye liner and didn’t fail miserably in two previous leadership attempts . Rayner , for the love of God stop shopping at Primark get yourself down to Chanel , enough with those puffy shoulders . Poor Miliband , the sex appeal of I don’t know what !
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
There's a cartoon with project management PERT chart, lots of activities flowing into a central box and lots of good outcomes flowing from the central box. The central box itself is just Here a miracle occurs. The caption is older guy saying to younger, 'I think we need a little more detail here.'
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yep, so that they wipe out the deficit and start repaying the debt mountains at a meaningful pace. If they could only do that then the bond markets would indeed fall in line. Always happy to lend to people who don't actually need it, as you will know.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yet there's no surer way to be unpopular that to extract it via taxes or debt (–> higher interest rates)
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
That’s utter nonsense.
The Labour left wish list is something like double that.
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
But still... never read Hamlet?
Priorities, dear boy, priorities.
In fairness your reading knocks mine into a cocked hat but I did pick up Empire of the Deep: The Rise and Fall of the British Navy in Waterstones at the weekend - hoping it's going to be interesting and educational.
What can the Greens say now that Polanski has been caught out . Reform given Farages dodgy donations really should stay quiet . So that leaves the Tories and Lib Dem’s who can make political capital out of it .
I still think it’s very risky for Labour to try and replace Starmer with Rayner until her tax issue has been resolved.
Why it’s taking so long to resolve is hard to understand.
Because HMRC’s investigations move at the pace of a geriatric snail with mobility issues.
The idea that HMRC can do anything complex in a time frame of less than a decade is unheard of.
And Rayner can’t get special treatment
Well, thats what happens when you cut the pen-pushers.
18 months ago I took my pension under the Mcloud remedy, and am due several thousands in income tax refund but 18 months on they still haven't recalculated my contributions. I am not allowed to calculate them myself it seems.
Different if it is other way round. They penalised me , added interest etc as I supposedly ahd not paid some outstanding calculation, which they had not told me about. Had to appeal and they removed it in end, but they still take interest every day.
Streeting in and out of no 10 in just a few minutes....
Maybe Starmer told him he hasnt followed the full and proper procedure to have a meeting and thus it never crossed his desk that a meeting had been arranged.
Wes is still looking for Opportunities. He is obviously worried about Jack The Lad Burnham. Starmer, meanwhile looks to tough it out; "I'm Not Scared", he declares.
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
Concentrate on Thief of time. I've read it 6 or 7 times and still find new jokes. Peak Pratchett.
What can the Greens say now that Polanski has been caught out . Reform given Farages dodgy donations really should stay quiet . So that leaves the Tories and Lib Dem’s who can make political capital out of it .
I still think it’s very risky for Labour to try and replace Starmer with Rayner until her tax issue has been resolved.
Why it’s taking so long to resolve is hard to understand.
Because HMRC’s investigations move at the pace of a geriatric snail with mobility issues.
The idea that HMRC can do anything complex in a time frame of less than a decade is unheard of.
And Rayner can’t get special treatment
Well, thats what happens when you cut the pen-pushers.
18 months ago I took my pension under the Mcloud remedy, and am due several thousands in income tax refund but 18 months on they still haven't recalculated my contributions. I am not allowed to calculate them myself it seems.
Different if it is other way round. They penalised me , added interest etc as I supposedly ahd not paid some outstanding calculation, which they had not told me about. Had to appeal and they removed it in end, but they still take interest every day.
Funnily enough, I have always found HMRC fair and reasonably prompt. But I've probably been very lucky.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
I reckon we could turn the royal family into an actual legit reality TV show, enable voting them out (premium lines etc), syndication, action figures, themed stays in the royal premises, maybe auction off positions in the royal family after people get voted off (Saudi minor royal interest?).
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
Concentrate on Thief of time. I've read it 6 or 7 times and still find new jokes. Peak Pratchett.
Never really been able to get into Pratchett, though I'd like to. Where should I start?
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yet there's no surer way to be unpopular that to extract it via taxes or debt (–> higher interest rates)
It was more along the lines of getting a bonus like North Sea Oil.
Streeting in and out of no 10 in just a few minutes....
"Good morning Prime Minister."
"Fuck-off!"
"No, you fuck-off!"
Morning Wes
Morning Sir Keir
So, I've asked you here as I want no more scandals about which I knew nothing but really should have asked some questions... Did you torch that pet shop?
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yet there's no surer way to be unpopular that to extract it via taxes or debt (–> higher interest rates)
It was more along the lines of getting a bonus like North Sea Oil.
The Micawber strategy - something's bound to turn up
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
Concentrate on Thief of time. I've read it 6 or 7 times and still find new jokes. Peak Pratchett.
Never really been able to get into Pratchett, though I'd like to. Where should I start?
Guards, Guards Then continue with the City Watch series.
or Wyrd Sister And continue with the Witches/Granny Weatherwax series.
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
Concentrate on Thief of time. I've read it 6 or 7 times and still find new jokes. Peak Pratchett.
I'm really enjoying it, but deliberately taking it slowly.
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
But still... never read Hamlet?
Priorities, dear boy, priorities.
In fairness your reading knocks mine into a cocked hat but I did pick up Empire of the Deep: The Rise and Fall of the British Navy in Waterstones at the weekend - hoping it's going to be interesting and educational.
If it makes you feel any better, I do have the Complete Works of Shakespeare. Got most of the way through the comedies.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Streeting in and out of no 10 in just a few minutes....
Maybe Starmer told him he hasnt followed the full and proper procedure to have a meeting and thus it never crossed his desk that a meeting had been arranged.
He will take full responsibility and sack the person in charge of preparing the Meeting Request Forms.
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.
There is a fair bit about English electoral practice around 1850s/1860s in Trollope's 'Palliser' sequence of six novels. (Leon recently declared his contempt and hatred for Trollope, so he comes with an outstanding recommendation.) But in addition to how elections worked in the pre-secret ballot days the six novels offer weeks of unalloyed delight, only slightly falling off at the very end.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yet there's no surer way to be unpopular that to extract it via taxes or debt (–> higher interest rates)
Slap a one-off 25% windfall tax on the UK's 500 richest people. That would net £200bn straight away.
One thing that has become noticable in the last few days is the paucity of talent on the back benches benches. I'm not talking about leadership hopefuls either. There have been MPs claiming their 15 minutes who you wouldn't employ as a receptionist at Halfords. How were they able to get past selection panels? Polanski's latest from the world of plumbing is a rare exception.
If thr King's Speech contains the phrase "at pace" then whoever wrote it needs shooting.
The preferred cliche is now "at speed". (It still means slowly, or never.)
Top three current bugbears: “Agentic” “Compute” “At Scale”
All of which are meaningless buzzwords designed to confuse outgroups.
Agentic is just Biztalk for the AI era...
We're doing a lot of work in this area. Buzzword bingo. But it is a real thing, and novel, so new words and ways of talking about it are emerging. Still bloody annoying though
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yet there's no surer way to be unpopular that to extract it via taxes or debt (–> higher interest rates)
Slap a one-off 25% windfall tax on the UK's 500 richest people. That would net £200bn straight away.
What a brilliant way to engineer a massive rebound of Dubai’s economy!
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.
There is a fair bit about English electoral practice around 1850s/1860s in Trollope's 'Palliser' sequence of six novels. (Leon recently declared his contempt and hatred for Trollope, so he comes with an outstanding recommendation.) But in addition to how elections worked in the pre-secret ballot days the six novels offer weeks of unalloyed delight, only slightly falling off at the very end.
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
Concentrate on Thief of time. I've read it 6 or 7 times and still find new jokes. Peak Pratchett.
I'm really enjoying it, but deliberately taking it slowly.
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
But still... never read Hamlet?
Priorities, dear boy, priorities.
In fairness your reading knocks mine into a cocked hat but I did pick up Empire of the Deep: The Rise and Fall of the British Navy in Waterstones at the weekend - hoping it's going to be interesting and educational.
If it makes you feel any better, I do have the Complete Works of Shakespeare. Got most of the way through the comedies.
My comment was tongue in cheek. I am in awe of your reading range tbf.
Anyway, enough of this banter, I am off to Citizens Advice to do battle with the DWP - who make HMRC look like paragons of efficiency.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yet there's no surer way to be unpopular that to extract it via taxes or debt (–> higher interest rates)
Slap a one-off 25% windfall tax on the UK's 500 richest people. That would net £200bn straight away.
What a brilliant way to engineer a massive rebound of Dubai’s economy!
Yeah, I'd love to see these super-rich get their country estates through customs.
Regarding the impact of these people on any economy, how much of their average £3bn (each!) wealth do you think the top 350 richest people pump into the economy each year?
This cant go on. You cant have a situation where you cant talk to half your cabinet because dont want to hear what they have to say, while also being too weak to be able to sack them.
What can the Greens say now that Polanski has been caught out . Reform given Farages dodgy donations really should stay quiet . So that leaves the Tories and Lib Dem’s who can make political capital out of it .
I still think it’s very risky for Labour to try and replace Starmer with Rayner until her tax issue has been resolved.
Why it’s taking so long to resolve is hard to understand.
Ironic that PB Tories expect Labour plots to come to fruition in minutes or days and if not state they've fluffed it when the typical 'efficient' Tory despatch involved countless months of speculation and claims about the fullness of Graham Brady's sack.
Surely you appreciate that Graham Brady’s Sack is a dignified part of the constitution and should be handled with care?
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
Victor Meldrew?
More like Santa Claus. There are a large number of fiscally delusional voters. The rise of Reform just confirms it.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yet there's no surer way to be unpopular that to extract it via taxes or debt (–> higher interest rates)
Slap a one-off 25% windfall tax on the UK's 500 richest people. That would net £200bn straight away.
It’s per year.
So even if they don’t leave before your windfall tax and meekly bring all their assets onshore to be taxed, they won’t be there for year 2.
So now you have a capital flight of Argentinian proportions, the deficit. And probably a small problem with the next bond auction.
Because if you expropriating one bunch, everyone will figure they are next.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yet there's no surer way to be unpopular that to extract it via taxes or debt (–> higher interest rates)
Slap a one-off 25% windfall tax on the UK's 500 richest people. That would net £200bn straight away.
It’s per year.
So even if they don’t leave before your windfall tax and meekly bring all their assets onshore to be taxed, they won’t be there for year 2.
So now you have a capital flight of Argentinian proportions, the deficit. And probably a small problem with the next bond auction.
Because if you expropriating one bunch, everyone will figure they are next.
They could always try targetting some actual growth 🤞
What can the Greens say now that Polanski has been caught out . Reform given Farages dodgy donations really should stay quiet . So that leaves the Tories and Lib Dem’s who can make political capital out of it .
I still think it’s very risky for Labour to try and replace Starmer with Rayner until her tax issue has been resolved.
Why it’s taking so long to resolve is hard to understand.
The whole Raymer thing that people forget is what really sunk her wasnt the tax issue, there was a bit of sympathy for it, until it was revealed she tried to throw lawyers under the bus by telling a load of lies and of course they had receipts to sbow she was a liar.
Up to a point. It depends on a technical reading of a message that would escape most normal people.
The bit that says “take legal advice”? What does that mean?
This cant go on. You cant have a situation where you cant talk to half your cabinet because dont want to hear what they have to say, while also being too weak to be able to sack them.
Mr Bond Market will be along shortly, to irritably tap his fingers...
Starmer if he wants to keep his job has to devote his remaining time to reclaiming our place at the very centre of Europe. Ride roughshod through all Labour doubters if there are any.
It'll put him on a collision course with Farage in a contest that he's certain to win. He needs to do exactly what the the government did in 2016 but in reverse.
Put his best brains on the job and be single minded. Get everything right that Cameron's mob got wrong accompanied by a huge advertising campaign.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yep, so that they wipe out the deficit and start repaying the debt mountains at a meaningful pace. If they could only do that then the bond markets would indeed fall in line. Always happy to lend to people who don't actually need it, as you will know.
I don't know if DavidL reads sassenach law reports, but this one is a stage in an interesting process, likely to be protracted, of testing the extent to which a KC can tell the jury that the judge is an idiot who has got the law wrong and should be ignored by a right minded jury, before someone stops the fun; and if there are sanctions, who has the right to order and run the process.
To be read in parallel with R v Farooqi, 2013, which is a classic text on barristers telling judges to get stuffed, and should be the basis of a stage play.
Starmer if he wants to keep his job has to devote his remaining time to reclaiming our place at the very centre of Europe. Ride roughshod through all Labour doubters if there are any.
It'll put him on a collision course with Farage in a contest that he's certain to win. He needs to do exactly what the the government did in 2016 but in reverse.
Put his best brains on the job and be single minded. Get everything right that Cameron's mob got wrong accompanied by a huge advertising campaign.
You are just putting Farage into no 10 if you think that is the way forward
Starmer if he wants to keep his job has to devote his remaining time to reclaiming our place at the very centre of Europe. Ride roughshod through all Labour doubters if there are any.
It'll put him on a collision course with Farage in a contest that he's certain to win. He needs to do exactly what the the government did in 2016 but in reverse.
Put his best brains on the job and be single minded. Get everything right that Cameron's mob got wrong accompanied by a huge advertising campaign.
Starmer is incapable of doing anything radical. We saw that on Monday. If he was suddenly going to start pulling rabbits out of hats, he had the opportunity to do so. He cannot.
This cant go on. You cant have a situation where you cant talk to half your cabinet because dont want to hear what they have to say, while also being too weak to be able to sack them.
Mr Bond Market will be along shortly, to irritably tap his fingers...
Well, as Burnham said last year and his outrider said yesterday, effectively screw them. They cannot tell what to do.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yet there's no surer way to be unpopular that to extract it via taxes or debt (–> higher interest rates)
Slap a one-off 25% windfall tax on the UK's 500 richest people. That would net £200bn straight away.
It’s per year.
So even if they don’t leave before your windfall tax and meekly bring all their assets onshore to be taxed, they won’t be there for year 2.
So now you have a capital flight of Argentinian proportions, the deficit. And probably a small problem with the next bond auction.
Because if you expropriating one bunch, everyone will figure they are next.
I wasn't being 100% serious to be truthful.
However... we're fucked. Neoliberalism isn't working we need to try something different.
History shows that ''efficiency savings' and 'getting more people off benefits' are about as plausible as setting up golden egg geese farms, so do please let me know your solution.
Starmer if he wants to keep his job has to devote his remaining time to reclaiming our place at the very centre of Europe. Ride roughshod through all Labour doubters if there are any.
It'll put him on a collision course with Farage in a contest that he's certain to win. He needs to do exactly what the the government did in 2016 but in reverse.
Put his best brains on the job and be single minded. Get everything right that Cameron's mob got wrong accompanied by a huge advertising campaign.
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
Concentrate on Thief of time. I've read it 6 or 7 times and still find new jokes. Peak Pratchett.
I'm really enjoying it, but deliberately taking it slowly.
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
But still... never read Hamlet?
Priorities, dear boy, priorities.
In fairness your reading knocks mine into a cocked hat but I did pick up Empire of the Deep: The Rise and Fall of the British Navy in Waterstones at the weekend - hoping it's going to be interesting and educational.
If it makes you feel any better, I do have the Complete Works of Shakespeare. Got most of the way through the comedies.
My comment was tongue in cheek. I am in awe of your reading range tbf.
Anyway, enough of this banter, I am off to Citizens Advice to do battle with the DWP - who make HMRC look like paragons of efficiency.
Good luck. Hopefully you don't have to go Li Kui on them.
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
Concentrate on Thief of time. I've read it 6 or 7 times and still find new jokes. Peak Pratchett.
I'm really enjoying it, but deliberately taking it slowly.
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
But still... never read Hamlet?
Priorities, dear boy, priorities.
In fairness your reading knocks mine into a cocked hat but I did pick up Empire of the Deep: The Rise and Fall of the British Navy in Waterstones at the weekend - hoping it's going to be interesting and educational.
If it makes you feel any better, I do have the Complete Works of Shakespeare. Got most of the way through the comedies.
My comment was tongue in cheek. I am in awe of your reading range tbf.
Anyway, enough of this banter, I am off to Citizens Advice to do battle with the DWP - who make HMRC look like paragons of efficiency.
Good luck. Hopefully you don't have to go Li Kui on them.
Where's the emoji for 'that went right over my head'?
Ironic that PB Tories expect Labour plots to come to fruition in minutes or days and if not state they've fluffed it when the typical 'efficient' Tory despatch involved countless months of speculation and claims about the fullness of Graham Brady's sack.
Surely you appreciate that Graham Brady’s Sack is a dignified part of the constitution and should be handled with care?
The Lab MPs have decision to make re Starmer: back, sack, or crack
This cant go on. You cant have a situation where you cant talk to half your cabinet because dont want to hear what they have to say, while also being too weak to be able to sack them.
Mr Bond Market will be along shortly, to irritably tap his fingers...
Well, as Burnham said last year and his outrider said yesterday, effectively screw them. They cannot tell what to do.
That will end well.
When debt-to-GDP is knocking on the door of 100% and rising more than 4% per year, the government works for the bond markets and not the other way around.
50% prob Tomorrow, Streeting will announce he is standing. If so, Rayner will also stand to keep the seat warm for Burnham's return to the Commons (that's the deal) Starmer will also contest. Winner will be Rayner, 50%; Starmer 40%; Streeting 10%.
50% prob. No-one will stand until Burnham is back in the Commons and stands. Only Starmer stands against him. Winner will be Burnham 90%: Starmer 10%.
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
Concentrate on Thief of time. I've read it 6 or 7 times and still find new jokes. Peak Pratchett.
I'm really enjoying it, but deliberately taking it slowly.
Ha, I've yet to read that. But I did play through a Hamlet-themed area in a wonderful MUD called FatalDimensions almost 30 years ago...
You should, it got me hooked on Shakespeare.
My to-read pile is already indicative of someone with a problem. I'm partway through Leo VI's Taktika, and then have books on Egyptian, Greek, and Japanese history lined up. I'm halfway into book 1 of 5 of The Marshes of Mount Liang. And 90 pages into Thief of Time, after which I have over half a dozen fiction books ready to go (including re-acquainting myself with Timothy Zahn's excellent Thrawn trilogy in the Star Wars EU, that Kennedy idiotically threw into a bonfire).
But still... never read Hamlet?
Priorities, dear boy, priorities.
In fairness your reading knocks mine into a cocked hat but I did pick up Empire of the Deep: The Rise and Fall of the British Navy in Waterstones at the weekend - hoping it's going to be interesting and educational.
If it makes you feel any better, I do have the Complete Works of Shakespeare. Got most of the way through the comedies.
My comment was tongue in cheek. I am in awe of your reading range tbf.
Anyway, enough of this banter, I am off to Citizens Advice to do battle with the DWP - who make HMRC look like paragons of efficiency.
Good luck. Hopefully you don't have to go Li Kui on them.
Where's the emoji for 'that went right over my head'?
He's essentially a bloodthirsty violent lunatic axe murderer.
Ironic that PB Tories expect Labour plots to come to fruition in minutes or days and if not state they've fluffed it when the typical 'efficient' Tory despatch involved countless months of speculation and claims about the fullness of Graham Brady's sack.
Surely you appreciate that Graham Brady’s Sack is a dignified part of the constitution and should be handled with care?
The Lab MPs have decision to make re Starmer: back, sack, or crack
If this was to carry on too much longer we will all be on the crack.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yet there's no surer way to be unpopular that to extract it via taxes or debt (–> higher interest rates)
Slap a one-off 25% windfall tax on the UK's 500 richest people. That would net £200bn straight away.
It’s per year.
So even if they don’t leave before your windfall tax and meekly bring all their assets onshore to be taxed, they won’t be there for year 2.
So now you have a capital flight of Argentinian proportions, the deficit. And probably a small problem with the next bond auction.
Because if you expropriating one bunch, everyone will figure they are next.
They could always try targetting some actual growth 🤞
Targeting growth is like “I will start a targeted gym and sport program every day. Within 4 years I will be doing 2000m on a rowing erg in 6 minutes*”
Lots of people say that. The number who do that is somewhat smaller
*if you did that, you would recruited for the UK Olympic rowing team.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
This illustrates the problem. British firms being flogged off to foreigners so that future profits, dividends and taxes (and even government subsidies) are sent abroad rather than supporting our economy. And all nodded through by an Establishment that can't tell the difference between genuine foreign investment and asset stripping.
50% prob Tomorrow, Streeting will announce he is standing. If so, Rayner will also stand to keep the seat warm for Burnham's return to the Commons (that's the deal) Starmer will also contest. Winner will be Rayner, 50%; Starmer 40%; Streeting 10%.
50% prob. No-one will stand until Burnham is back in the Commons and stands. Only Starmer stands against him. Winner will be Burnham 90%: Starmer 10%.
The other 25% is Starmer staying until next election when next PM includes Farage, Badenoch as well as the above three.
I don’t see Rayner getting to be PM and then handing it over to Burnham . That would look ridiculous to the public and I don’t believe any politician is that altruistic.
50% prob Tomorrow, Streeting will announce he is standing. If so, Rayner will also stand to keep the seat warm for Burnham's return to the Commons (that's the deal) Starmer will also contest. Winner will be Rayner, 50%; Starmer 40%; Streeting 10%.
50% prob. No-one will stand until Burnham is back in the Commons and stands. Only Starmer stands against him. Winner will be Burnham 90%: Starmer 10%.
Starmer if he wants to keep his job has to devote his remaining time to reclaiming our place at the very centre of Europe. Ride roughshod through all Labour doubters if there are any.
It'll put him on a collision course with Farage in a contest that he's certain to win. He needs to do exactly what the the government did in 2016 but in reverse.
Put his best brains on the job and be single minded. Get everything right that Cameron's mob got wrong accompanied by a huge advertising campaign.
Starmer if he wants to keep his job has to devote his remaining time to reclaiming our place at the very centre of Europe. Ride roughshod through all Labour doubters if there are any.
It'll put him on a collision course with Farage in a contest that he's certain to win. He needs to do exactly what the the government did in 2016 but in reverse.
Put his best brains on the job and be single minded. Get everything right that Cameron's mob got wrong accompanied by a huge advertising campaign.
Bit early to be hitting the sauce, Roger.
He’s wishcasting being the recipient of a huge ad buy…
Starmer if he wants to keep his job has to devote his remaining time to reclaiming our place at the very centre of Europe. Ride roughshod through all Labour doubters if there are any.
It'll put him on a collision course with Farage in a contest that he's certain to win. He needs to do exactly what the the government did in 2016 but in reverse.
Put his best brains on the job and be single minded. Get everything right that Cameron's mob got wrong accompanied by a huge advertising campaign.
Starmer is incapable of doing anything radical. We saw that on Monday. If he was suddenly going to start pulling rabbits out of hats, he had the opportunity to do so. He cannot.
Has Streeting been advocating for anything radical? PR? A wealth tax? Abolishing the Lords? Raising revenue...how? Streeting might take an axe to some parts of the welfare system to raise some money for health and education, and force that through his unwilling party - although his background might make him cautious in that regard. But what else? The only real argument for Streeting is that he might be able to sell Starmer's stuff a bit better.
The biggest argument for Burnham is that he has at least got some sort of platform being put together
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yet there's no surer way to be unpopular that to extract it via taxes or debt (–> higher interest rates)
Slap a one-off 25% windfall tax on the UK's 500 richest people. That would net £200bn straight away.
It’s per year.
So even if they don’t leave before your windfall tax and meekly bring all their assets onshore to be taxed, they won’t be there for year 2.
So now you have a capital flight of Argentinian proportions, the deficit. And probably a small problem with the next bond auction.
Because if you expropriating one bunch, everyone will figure they are next.
They could always try targetting some actual growth 🤞
Targeting growth is like “I will start a targeted gym and sport program every day. Within 4 years I will be doing 2000m on a rowing erg in 6 minutes*”
Lots of people say that. The number who do that is somewhat smaller
*if you did that, you would recruited for the UK Olympic rowing team.
Yes, like me targetting being good and cutting down on my eating and drinking to lose a few pounds, I’d guess 😃
50% prob Tomorrow, Streeting will announce he is standing. If so, Rayner will also stand to keep the seat warm for Burnham's return to the Commons (that's the deal) Starmer will also contest. Winner will be Rayner, 50%; Starmer 40%; Streeting 10%.
50% prob. No-one will stand until Burnham is back in the Commons and stands. Only Starmer stands against him. Winner will be Burnham 90%: Starmer 10%.
The other 25% is Starmer staying until next election when next PM includes Farage, Badenoch as well as the above three.
I don’t see Rayner getting to be PM and then handing it over to Burnham . That would look ridiculous to the public and I don’t believe any politician is that altruistic.
It's all very well being King of the North or able to win in Ilford, but it's the huge tracts of suburbia across the county where elections are won and lost.
Who can appeal to them?
That was an insightful piece that someone posted on the previous thread, that removing SKS only removes the problem of SKS being leader. It doesn't change any of the underlying issues.
Indeed. Do we know what Burnham, Streeting, Rayner, or anyone else who thinks they are a contender would actually do? What new policies would be pursued?
Last month I spoke to a former Treasury SPAD, the brutal reality is that the government, this one or the next one needs to find £200 billion a year in tax revenues to become popular.
Yet there's no surer way to be unpopular that to extract it via taxes or debt (–> higher interest rates)
Slap a one-off 25% windfall tax on the UK's 500 richest people. That would net £200bn straight away.
So that’s one year covered and then a bigger deficit the next year when they leave
Comments
(It still means slowly, or never.)
It’s a lot better than I used to be cabin crew for EasyJet Streeting ! Burnham no I don’t use eye liner and didn’t fail miserably in two previous leadership attempts . Rayner , for the love of God stop shopping at Primark get yourself down to Chanel , enough with those puffy shoulders . Poor Miliband , the sex appeal of I don’t know what !
I think there is an element of much of the crowd of contenders not wanting the job.
Is anyone likely to turn round the probable historic defeat, that is coming?
The smart money would be on a Reform government causing 52 card pickup. Labour would hope to become the new Champion of The People in the chaos.
But they have to try. Or be seen to try.
Could it be that Burnham efforts to become an MP are semi performative?
ETA: Christ, googling - was Tony Adams on Strictly?
The Labour left wish list is something like double that.
🤪🤪
Priorities, dear boy, priorities.
In fairness your reading knocks mine into a cocked hat but I did pick up Empire of the Deep: The Rise and Fall of the British Navy in Waterstones at the weekend - hoping it's going to be interesting and educational.
"Fuck-off!"
"No, you fuck-off!"
Starmer, meanwhile looks to tough it out; "I'm Not Scared", he declares.
What have I done to deserve this, we all wonder
That's your £200b plan right there.
Morning Sir Keir
So, I've asked you here as I want no more scandals about which I knew nothing but really should have asked some questions... Did you torch that pet shop?
Then continue with the City Watch series.
or Wyrd Sister
And continue with the Witches/Granny Weatherwax series.
It’s on I reckon.
“Agentic”
“Compute”
“At Scale”
All of which are meaningless buzzwords designed to confuse outgroups.
With no coffee, and no biscuits.
Ruddy hell- that's a lot of underpants.
I expect it all to kick off this afternoon and through tomorrow
They cannot both be in cabinet
But it is a real thing, and novel, so new words and ways of talking about it are emerging.
Still bloody annoying though
And fun.
"Not a problem, Prime Minister. I'm only here to measure the curtains."
Anyway, enough of this banter, I am off to Citizens Advice to do battle with the DWP - who make HMRC look like paragons of efficiency.
(Obviously, to the tune of "Go Wes...")
Regarding the impact of these people on any economy, how much of their average £3bn (each!) wealth do you think the top 350 richest people pump into the economy each year?
It's not as though Starmer is renowned for his smalltalk, and Streeting didn't take a book with him (as is my morning coffee practice*).
*Currently reading Queen Caroline and Sir William Gell.
The early 1800s are fascinating.
So even if they don’t leave before your windfall tax and meekly bring all their assets onshore to be taxed, they won’t be there for year 2.
So now you have a capital flight of Argentinian proportions, the deficit. And probably a small problem with the next bond auction.
Because if you expropriating one bunch, everyone will figure they are next.
It'll put him on a collision course with Farage in a contest that he's certain to win. He needs to do exactly what the the government did in 2016 but in reverse.
Put his best brains on the job and be single minded. Get everything right that Cameron's mob got wrong accompanied by a huge advertising campaign.
To be read in parallel with R v Farooqi, 2013, which is a classic text on barristers telling judges to get stuffed, and should be the basis of a stage play.
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Judgment-Rajiv-Menon-KC-CA-2026-000767-1.pdf?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
That will end well.
However... we're fucked. Neoliberalism isn't working we need to try something different.
History shows that ''efficiency savings' and 'getting more people off benefits' are about as plausible as setting up golden egg geese farms, so do please let me know your solution.
@LukeTryl
49m
In our first Westminster VI after the local elections, Reform’s lead increases to 9pts over Labour
➡️ REF UK 30% (+2)
🌹 LAB 21% (nc)
🌳 CON 19% (-1)
🌍 GREEN 11% (-1)
🔶 LIB DEM 14% (+2)
❓OTH 2% (-3)
🟡 SNP 3% (+1)
https://xcancel.com/LukeTryl/status/2054463047956119816/
Ask Liz Truss how that ends.
50% prob Tomorrow, Streeting will announce he is standing.
If so, Rayner will also stand to keep the seat warm for Burnham's return to the Commons (that's the deal)
Starmer will also contest.
Winner will be Rayner, 50%; Starmer 40%; Streeting 10%.
50% prob. No-one will stand until Burnham is back in the Commons and stands.
Only Starmer stands against him.
Winner will be Burnham 90%: Starmer 10%.
So odds on next PM:
Burnham 45% 2.2 (current odds 3.1 value)
Rayner 25% 4.0 (current odds 6.0 value)
Streeting 5% 20.0 (current odds 6.6 not value)
The other 25% is Starmer staying until next election when next PM includes Farage, Badenoch as well as the above three.
Lots of people say that. The number who do that is somewhat smaller
*if you did that, you would recruited for the UK Olympic rowing team.
Digital currency trading firm backed by Peter Thiel buys company that administers local government scheme
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/05/05/council-pensions-to-be-run-by-us-crypto-exchange/ (£££)
This illustrates the problem. British firms being flogged off to foreigners so that future profits, dividends and taxes (and even government subsidies) are sent abroad rather than supporting our economy. And all nodded through by an Establishment that can't tell the difference between genuine foreign investment and asset stripping.
The biggest argument for Burnham is that he has at least got some sort of platform being put together
I’d agree with you.
It would be mad.