The minister who does not want their resignation to distract from the King’s Speech, distracts from King’s Speech by letting it be known they may be resigning the day after the King’s Speech.
The minister who does not want their resignation to distract from the King’s Speech, distracts from King’s Speech by letting it be known they may be resigning the day after the King’s Speech.
I have been giving Wes Streeting lessons on how to act subtle.
Appeals court spares Trump from paying $83 million defamation award to E. Jean Carroll — for now
This now goes to the Supreme Court. Let's see how craven the Supremes will be? I think we know how Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh will vote...
If that was anyone except Trump, there would be almost unanimous support for the Carroll case being one of the most egregious abuses of the court in decades. The State law was changed specifically to allow it to proceed.
What a load of bollocks, Sandpit. It was changed, with almost unanimous bipartisan support, to allow many such suits to proceed, since prior to that, a 3 year statute of limitations applied. Please spend less time with MAGA Twitter.
Before 2019, a three-year statute of limitations applied to civil suits for sexual misconduct in New York. In 2019, New York extended the statute of limitations for civil suits arising from sex crimes against adults to 20 years, but this extension was not retroactive.
In 2022, the ASA was enacted. The bill was sponsored by state Senator Brad Hoylman and Assemblymember Linda Rosenthal. It unanimously passed the Senate in April 2022, passed the Assembly on a 140–3 vote in May 2022, and was signed into law by Governor Kathy Hochul.
...Complaints against State of New York under the ASA were filed in the Court of Claims; as of November 17, 2023, 1,469 claims had been filed in the Court of Claims, mostly naming the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision as a defendant.The many imprisoned and formerly imprisoned women in New York who filed claims under the ASA alleged that guards raped or sexually abused them in prisons and jails. A significant proportion of these ASA claims were raised by former inmates of the Bayview Correctional Facility, which was closed in 2012. A federal survey in 2008 and 2009 found that Bayview had one of the U.S.'s highest rates of prison staff-perpetrated sexual abuse. At least 479 suits filed under the ASA alleged abuse at Rikers Island jail complex...
And in any event, the defamation case could have proceeded without the change in the law.<
My government, in between stabbing each other in the back, have asked Camilla and I to break from our morning coffee to read this set of absurd proposals. These proposals may not even last the week if my Minister Streeting ousts my PM Starmer and then decides to rip it all up.
In which case I may as well take this speech home with me and use it as organic toilet paper in our royal privy chamber. Anyway, here it is...
Appeals court spares Trump from paying $83 million defamation award to E. Jean Carroll — for now
This now goes to the Supreme Court. Let's see how craven the Supremes will be? I think we know how Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh will vote...
If that was anyone except Trump, there would be almost unanimous support for the Carroll case being one of the most egregious abuses of the court in decades. The State law was changed specifically to allow it to proceed.
LOL. I think Trump being a rapist is the more important point here, and I think Trump refusing to pay a court-determined award is the second most important point here.
Carroll won two defamation cases against Trump and that had nothing to do with any change in state law. The 2022 Adult Survivors Act did add an additional element to the second case, but Trump would still be owing money tens of millions of dollars and known as a rapist without it.
After 5 minutes, in which Heath refused to give her any advice or join the Shadow Cabinet, Thatcher spent 10 minutes talking to Tim Kitson and Heath's housekeeper so the journalists outside didn't clock that the meeting had been a disaster.
As Kitson later recalled, Heath even piled up books on two out of the three chairs in his study to make it impossible for his visitor to sit down!
* The books thing does sound like something Starmer might have emulated, if he knew the story,
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
Streeting will only stand if he has the nominations, I wouldn't be sure Rayner does
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
Would Starmer get an automatic by into the contest or does he need to drum up his own names?
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
You don't think Starmer will stand down at this point, so it's just Streeting v Rayner-or-Miliband?
My government, in between stabbing each other in the back, have asked Camilla and I to break from our morning coffee to read this set of absurd proposals. These proposals may not even last the week if my Minister Streeting ousts my PM Starmer and then decides to rip it all up.
In which case I may as well take this speech home with me and use it as organic toilet paper in our royal privy chamber. Anyway, here it is...
Charles would never say 'have asked Camilla and I', despite not going to Eton. Trinity will have taught him the use of the English accusative.
My government, in between stabbing each other in the back, have asked Camilla and I to break from our morning coffee to read this set of absurd proposals. These proposals may not even last the week if my Minister Streeting ousts my PM Starmer and then decides to rip it all up.
In which case I may as well take this speech home with me and use it as organic toilet paper in our royal privy chamber. Anyway, here it is...
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
Would Starmer get an automatic by into the contest or does he need to drum up his own names?
We're really going to get chaos with Ed aren't we. Sigh.
Or anarchy with Ange
All very exciting. What is certain is a hideous civil war, lasting months, which sends the bond markets mad and probably leads to a gennylec and then Prime Minister Big Nige by Christmas Eve
Starmer's chances are not helped by the fact that the 11 Labour-affiliated trade unions this morning issued a joint statement calling on him to step down so as not to lead the party into the next GE.
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
Would Starmer get an automatic by into the contest or does he need to drum up his own names?
We're really going to get chaos with Ed aren't we. Sigh.
Or anarchy with Ange
All very exciting. What is certain is a hideous civil war, lasting months, which sends the bond markets mad and probably leads to a gennylec and then Prime Minister Big Nige by Christmas Eve
Heh
Labour has a big majority, even if we had 99% unemployment and an economy consisting solely of EDI officers, human rights lawyers and civil servants Labour MPs still wouldn't vote for an early general election
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
Would Starmer get an automatic by into the contest or does he need to drum up his own names?
Yes, I believe so (if he wants to).
Yes. The leader himself takes up none of the 403 available nominations. So the maximum number of candidates if this goes ahead is 5. 4 max are nominated, taking up a minimum of 324 MPs, leaving only 79 so no 5th place. That place is taken, if desired as of right, by the leader.
Them's the rules. Rule one is to be able to count.
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
Would Starmer get an automatic by into the contest or does he need to drum up his own names?
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
Would Starmer get an automatic by into the contest or does he need to drum up his own names?
Yes, I believe so (if he wants to).
Yes. The leader himself takes up none of the 403 available nominations. So the maximum number of candidates if this goes ahead is 5. 4 max are nominated, taking up a minimum of 324 MPs, leaving only 79 so no 5th place. That place is taken, if desired as of right, by the leader.
Them's the rules. Rule one is to be able to count.
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
You don't think Starmer will stand down at this point, so it's just Streeting v Rayner-or-Miliband?
Your guess is as good as mine, but I think he's shown unexpected determination in the last few days which suggests that Starmer will stand, and as others have said he has an automatic place on the members ballot if he chooses to do so.
There will also be many overpromoted frontbenchers urging him to stand and standing by him, because they know that if he goes, they go too.
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
Would Starmer get an automatic by into the contest or does he need to drum up his own names?
Yes, I believe so (if he wants to).
Yes. The leader himself takes up none of the 403 available nominations. So the maximum number of candidates if this goes ahead is 5. 4 max are nominated, taking up a minimum of 324 MPs, leaving only 79 so no 5th place. That place is taken, if desired as of right, by the leader.
Them's the rules. Rule one is to be able to count.
Feels very unlikely that 4 will reach the threshold though. The top 2 (or Starmer loyalists) should have sufficient excess votes to not make it viable.
My guess is Starmer enters the contest. Following process and all. Might even beat one or more of his rivals.
This is the only interesting (in a positive way) bit. Depending on the actual detail.
...Legislation will encourage airport expansion, faster road building The King is now talking about infrastructure - he says the country’s “economic security” depends on it being “world class”. The government plans to: “Unlock the benefits of airport expansion” Enable roads, including the Lower Thames Crossing, to be built faster “Deliver a fair deal” for the north of England, through Northern Powerhouse Rail “Safeguard domestic production of steel”..
FPT, a comment on what is reasonable to expect two years into a Labour government with a huge majority.
Two years into a government is not a bad time to assess things. IMO by that time the thoughtless will expect perfection on a stick, and that's just life; but what might a realist expect by July 2026, now weeks away?
I suggest that two years into a Labour government with an impregnable majority it is realistic to expect these things:
1) Stable boring government 2) Excellent communication and mastery of the narrative 3) Some immediate wounds bound up and sorted 4) General competence 5) High levels of market confidence in the government 6) That we should be able to understand over all the big issues what the plan is, the timetable and how it is going to funded and believe it is all in the hands of skilled competent people who explain it well to us and don't keep blaming someone else or the past.
Items in (6) would include: defence, NHS, dentistry, welfare and benefits, debt and deficit, balance of trade, water and other necessities that don't work too well, net zero, the problem of industrial energy costs, social care, planning, social housing, inward migration, policy towards EU, levelling up the north, agriculture. Lots more of course.
This is the only interesting (in a positive way) bit. Depending on the actual detail.
...Legislation will encourage airport expansion, faster road building The King is now talking about infrastructure - he says the country’s “economic security” depends on it being “world class”. The government plans to: “Unlock the benefits of airport expansion” Enable roads, including the Lower Thames Crossing, to be built faster “Deliver a fair deal” for the north of England, through Northern Powerhouse Rail “Safeguard domestic production of steel”..
It will become compulsory by default.
It is a fundamental shift in the relations ship between subjects in the UK and the state. One that was not in the manifesto and as such a proposal that has no mandate.
Interesting Farage now second most popular amongst voters not voting for their own party after Davey, ahead of Kemi and well ahead of Polanski and Starmer
A minister resigning just as the king arrives in Parliament?
No, he's purposely delayed resigning until after that, if the stories in the header are correct. (And has yet to comment directly himself.)
Once it's announced, he's effectively done it, and by getting his mates to tell the media just as the king was sitting down, the news is out. It will get tons of mentions in the Commons debate to come, and the business about waiting until tomorrow would appear to be a sham.
We're really going to get chaos with Ed aren't we. Sigh.
Or anarchy with Ange
All very exciting. What is certain is a hideous civil war, lasting months, which sends the bond markets mad and probably leads to a gennylec and then Prime Minister Big Nige by Christmas Eve
Heh
Labour has a big majority, even if we had 99% unemployment and an economy consisting solely of EDI officers, human rights lawyers and civil servants Labour MPs still wouldn't vote for an early general election
You don’t understand the mechanics
If there is a bond strike (really quite possible now) and Britain teeters towards bankruptcy, the markets will demand massive brutal cuts in benefits. As that’s the only way to grow the economy and therefore service the debts. Massive tax hikes will just make it all worse
So then the Labour PM has to persuade Labour MPs to vote for the most severe welfare cuts since thatcher. Or beyond. How many will vote for that?
Very few. Political stasis ensues. But the bond markets won’t wait. Cue: General election as the only way to break the deadlock
Government to speed up remediation for people living with unsafe cladding. A bill will be brought forward to speed up remediation for people living in homes with unsafe cladding,
There will be a three way ballot: Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband. (Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
Would Starmer get an automatic by into the contest or does he need to drum up his own names?
I note that the count of Reform Councillors from the May 2026 cohort elected six days ago defenestrated, voluntarily or involuntarily, is now .. er .. SIX. Of these one was on two Councils so has been removed twice.
There is at least one more unclear, and others who Farage will have to deal with if he wants to maintain his current stance on antisemitism.
My government, in between stabbing each other in the back, have asked Camilla and I to break from our morning coffee to read this set of absurd proposals. These proposals may not even last the week if my Minister Streeting ousts my PM Starmer and then decides to rip it all up.
In which case I may as well take this speech home with me and use it as organic toilet paper in our royal privy chamber. Anyway, here it is...
What happens if there is a new Lab leader and PM in the next however many days?
Andy Burnham is the top preference to become the next Labour leader and prime minister in the event of a leadership contest - among both Labour members and the general public
Our poll of Labour members, conducted before the May 7th elections, showed:
- Burnham was the top choice of two-fifths of the membership (42%), 31 points ahead of both Wes Streeting and Angela Rayner - Almost two-thirds (63%) put him in their top three preferences
Our poll of the general public, also conducted before the elections, had Burnham in the lead, albeit with a notably slimmer margin:
- 15% named him as their top preference, 10 points ahead of Rayner, Ed Miliband, and Yvette Cooper - A quarter (26%) put Burnham in their top three preferences
Whether Burnham could win back lost Labour voters is an open question, but the data suggests he would improve the Labour Party's image in the eyes of the public. We found:
- Net favourability towards the party would increase by +19% under Burnham's leadership - The only other candidates with net positive scores were Cooper (+5%), Streeting (+5%), Louise Haigh (+3%), and Lucy Powell (+2%)
Least friendly: Burnham 6/10, Raynor 3/10, Miliband 1/10 Most friendly: Streeting 9/10, Miliband 1/10
So an immediate contest is viewed less unfavourably than one that waits for Burnham.
Would leftish Labour people think differently about government bonds if instead of describing it as the 'bond market' it was described as the funds in which their UK pension funds hold nearly a trillion pounds of the worker's cash, out of which the boilermakers, train drivers and factory workers draw their hard earned pensuions?
My government, in between stabbing each other in the back, have asked Camilla and I to break from our morning coffee to read this set of absurd proposals. These proposals may not even last the week if my Minister Streeting ousts my PM Starmer and then decides to rip it all up.
In which case I may as well take this speech home with me and use it as organic toilet paper in our royal privy chamber. Anyway, here it is...
What happens if there is a new Lab leader and PM in the next however many days?
Assuming he follows through I have to say I'm very impressed by Streeting's "actually run against the leader" approach to running against the leader as opposed to everyone else's "scheme and bitch and brief the press a lot" approach.
We're really going to get chaos with Ed aren't we. Sigh.
Or anarchy with Ange
All very exciting. What is certain is a hideous civil war, lasting months, which sends the bond markets mad and probably leads to a gennylec and then Prime Minister Big Nige by Christmas Eve
Heh
Labour has a big majority, even if we had 99% unemployment and an economy consisting solely of EDI officers, human rights lawyers and civil servants Labour MPs still wouldn't vote for an early general election
You don’t understand the mechanics
If there is a bond strike (really quite possible now) and Britain teeters towards bankruptcy, the markets will demand massive brutal cuts in benefits. As that’s the only way to grow the economy and therefore service the debts. Massive tax hikes will just make it all worse
I'm not sure that's true.
The current higher bond interest rates are due at least as much to the masochistic policy of quantitative tightening for no apparent reason (and much faster than the the Fed is doing), as to the government's admitted complete incompetence.
So, rather than welfare cuts, the immediate way to get interest rates under control would be to pause QT. I think the Labour Party would be more likely to override the BoE's independence on this issue than allow welfare cuts if push came to shove.
But of course they are completely financially incompetent and economically illiterate, so you never know with this shower.
They were already at extremely low levels due to incredibly high.demand over the past few years.
I believe there are huge numbers of popcorn ships stuck in the Gulf as well, unable to transit Hormuz. The UAE have announced that they are building one of those reinforced glass pressurised air tubes to bypass the Straights but it could be a few years before it comes online.
Thus, the high price of popcorn in your local Odeon.
What is surprising there is that Farage isn't more unpopular with non-Ref voters. Depends if non-Ref is based on 2024 votes or current intention
Maybe not. Yes, some people will basically respond on the basis of whether they like or dislike each leader, but there will be others who view things more dispassionately - you might hate Farage but on the day after he's just won 1,000 seats it isn't unreasonable to say he's doing a decent job as leader of his party, whilst still not wanting him to run the country. Note that the strapline above the graphic doesn't fully align with the text of the question actually asked, which is given below it.
So Streeting DOES have the numbers and was informing Starmer of that. I guess that is the most plausible reason for such a short meeting. Here we go then. Game on. Unless it's (huge integer) dimensional chess and there's another twist he's going for first mover hostile challenge before Burnham can do anything. People say they want a decisive 'jfdi' person at the helm rather than timid managerialism, don't they. Looks like Wes has listened.
After 5 minutes, in which Heath refused to give her any advice or join the Shadow Cabinet, Thatcher spent 10 minutes talking to Tim Kitson and Heath's housekeeper so the journalists outside didn't clock that the meeting had been a disaster.
As Kitson later recalled, Heath even piled up books on two out of the three chairs in his study to make it impossible for his visitor to sit down!
* The books thing does sound like something Starmer might have emulated, if he knew the story,
I was reading a similar story about a meeting between Queen Jinga and the Portuguese governor of Luanda. The governor refused to provide Jinga with a chair, so that she would be obliged to remain standing: "whereupon Jinga, in a gesture at once characteristically bold and characteristically impetuous, ordered one of her slaves to kneel on all fours to form a seat. After that she sat down." (The Warrior Queens, Antonia Fraser)
I can't remember which PBer recommended the book, but I've been enjoying reading it.
Least friendly: Burnham 6/10, Raynor 3/10, Miliband 1/10 Most friendly: Streeting 9/10, Miliband 1/10
So an immediate contest is viewed less unfavourably than one that waits for Burnham.
Would leftish Labour people think differently about government bonds if instead of describing it as the 'bond market' it was described as the funds in which their UK pension funds hold nearly a trillion pounds of the worker's cash, out of which the boilermakers, train drivers and factory workers draw their hard earned pensuions?
Do they know any of this?
You'd like to think they would but who knows. Also, if you don't like the bond markets, don't run a deficit (although given you also have to roll debt worth 90% odd of GDP that ship has sailed anyway).
Least friendly: Burnham 6/10, Raynor 3/10, Miliband 1/10 Most friendly: Streeting 9/10, Miliband 1/10
So an immediate contest is viewed less unfavourably than one that waits for Burnham.
Would leftish Labour people think differently about government bonds if instead of describing it as the 'bond market' it was described as the funds in which their UK pension funds hold nearly a trillion pounds of the worker's cash, out of which the boilermakers, train drivers and factory workers draw their hard earned pensuions?
Do they know any of this?
Since the relaxation of pension rules, a significantly bigger portion of it is now overseas institutions. Which makes us more vulnerable to a meltdown.
My government, in between stabbing each other in the back, have asked Camilla and I to break from our morning coffee to read this set of absurd proposals. These proposals may not even last the week if my Minister Streeting ousts my PM Starmer and then decides to rip it all up.
In which case I may as well take this speech home with me and use it as organic toilet paper in our royal privy chamber. Anyway, here it is...
What happens if there is a new Lab leader and PM in the next however many days?
Do we get a new King's Speech?
I don't think so, unless there's a new parliamentary session. Equally there's no restriction that they have to do what the king just announced, or can't do other stuff.
Least friendly: Burnham 6/10, Raynor 3/10, Miliband 1/10 Most friendly: Streeting 9/10, Miliband 1/10
So an immediate contest is viewed less unfavourably than one that waits for Burnham.
Would leftish Labour people think differently about government bonds if instead of describing it as the 'bond market' it was described as the funds in which their UK pension funds hold nearly a trillion pounds of the worker's cash, out of which the boilermakers, train drivers and factory workers draw their hard earned pensuions?
Do they know any of this?
You'd like to think they would but who knows. Also, if you don't like the bond markets, don't run a deficit (although given you also have to roll debt worth 90% odd of GDP that ship has sailed anyway).
I think the likes of that particular MP think that 'bond markets' are in the UK so have to do what the government tells them. I don't think it's clicked that these are foreigners whom we cannot force to lend us money.
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 in 2020: three months seventeen days.
Comments please? @edmundintokyo said last night that voting will be online this time.
I only said that because (if memory serves) it was online last time. I think they can do it at whatever speed the NEC sees fit, I just don't think there's any technical reason why it needs to be that slow.
We're really going to get chaos with Ed aren't we. Sigh.
Streeting beats Miliband but not Rayner in Labour members polls, so if Rayner gets enough MPs to nominate her we are more likely to get PM Big Ange
Big Ange means a bond market meltdown
If she whacks up tax on the wealthy and high earners to pay for her big spending and welfare splurge though the bond markets can't say she hasn't funded her plans even if they dislike her socialist budgets. Truss' problem was she cut taxes but didn't cut spending as well to fund them
Comments
Continuity Starmer.
But 90% less likely to be invalided out.
It cannot continue
Think of my 100/1 tip.
Only Streeting might unseat him. And Wes deserves the crown if he has the bollocks to do the assassination
Also Streeting is about the most presentable and won’t spook the markets. He seems to get it
Go Wes, indeed
The minister who does not want their resignation to distract from the King’s Speech, distracts from King’s Speech by letting it be known they may be resigning the day after the King’s Speech.
That being so, your 100/1 comes home.
God help us! ( On account of a dreadful Prime Minister,alteady despised by the media, and your inevitable, justifiable smugness on your win).
(And has yet to comment directly himself.)
It was changed, with almost unanimous bipartisan support, to allow many such suits to proceed, since prior to that, a 3 year statute of limitations applied.
Please spend less time with MAGA Twitter.
Adult Survivors Act
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adult_Survivors_Act
Before 2019, a three-year statute of limitations applied to civil suits for sexual misconduct in New York. In 2019, New York extended the statute of limitations for civil suits arising from sex crimes against adults to 20 years, but this extension was not retroactive.
In 2022, the ASA was enacted. The bill was sponsored by state Senator Brad Hoylman and Assemblymember Linda Rosenthal. It unanimously passed the Senate in April 2022, passed the Assembly on a 140–3 vote in May 2022, and was signed into law by Governor Kathy Hochul.
...Complaints against State of New York under the ASA were filed in the Court of Claims; as of November 17, 2023, 1,469 claims had been filed in the Court of Claims, mostly naming the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision as a defendant.The many imprisoned and formerly imprisoned women in New York who filed claims under the ASA alleged that guards raped or sexually abused them in prisons and jails. A significant proportion of these ASA claims were raised by former inmates of the Bayview Correctional Facility, which was closed in 2012. A federal survey in 2008 and 2009 found that Bayview had one of the U.S.'s highest rates of prison staff-perpetrated sexual abuse. At least 479 suits filed under the ASA alleged abuse at Rikers Island jail complex...
And in any event, the defamation case could have proceeded without the change in the law.<
In which case I may as well take this speech home with me and use it as organic toilet paper in our royal privy chamber. Anyway, here it is...
Carroll won two defamation cases against Trump and that had nothing to do with any change in state law. The 2022 Adult Survivors Act did add an additional element to the second case, but Trump would still be owing money tens of millions of dollars and known as a rapist without it.
https://x.com/TomChidwick/status/2054483057650851859
It looks like Streeting's meeting with the PM went as well as Margaret Thatcher's visit to Ted Heath's house after the Tory leadership contest in 1975.
After 5 minutes, in which Heath refused to give her any advice or join the Shadow Cabinet, Thatcher spent 10 minutes talking to Tim Kitson and Heath's housekeeper so the journalists outside didn't clock that the meeting had been a disaster.
As Kitson later recalled, Heath even piled up books on two out of the three chairs in his study to make it impossible for his visitor to sit down!
* The books thing does sound like something Starmer might have emulated, if he knew the story,
Streeting v Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
(Rayner or Miliband may quite possibly both stand but one will quickly withdraw in favour of the other, they can't both get 81 MPs to back them.)
Streeting is most likely to be eliminated in the first round, so it will come down to Starmer v Rayner or Miliband.
All very exciting. What is certain is a hideous civil war, lasting months, which sends the bond markets mad and probably leads to a gennylec and then Prime Minister Big Nige by Christmas Eve
Heh
https://labourlist.org/2026/05/affiliated-unions-call-for-new-labour-leader/
Them's the rules. Rule one is to be able to count.
(From: https://xcancel.com/LukeTryl/status/2054463072895467872#m)
Fark right off
Indeed Beth Rigby announced Streeting to stand just before Charles started speaking
There will also be many overpromoted frontbenchers urging him to stand and standing by him, because they know that if he goes, they go too.
Credit card sized fits in Wallet confirms who I am.
My guess is Starmer enters the contest. Following process and all. Might even beat one or more of his rivals.
This is the only interesting (in a positive way) bit. Depending on the actual detail.
...Legislation will encourage airport expansion, faster road building
The King is now talking about infrastructure - he says the country’s “economic security” depends on it being “world class”. The government plans to:
“Unlock the benefits of airport expansion”
Enable roads, including the Lower Thames Crossing, to be built faster
“Deliver a fair deal” for the north of England, through Northern Powerhouse Rail
“Safeguard domestic production of steel”..
Two years into a government is not a bad time to assess things. IMO by that time the thoughtless will expect perfection on a stick, and that's just life; but what might a realist expect by July 2026, now weeks away?
I suggest that two years into a Labour government with an impregnable majority it is realistic to expect these things:
1) Stable boring government
2) Excellent communication and mastery of the narrative
3) Some immediate wounds bound up and sorted
4) General competence
5) High levels of market confidence in the government
6) That we should be able to understand over all the big issues what the plan is, the timetable and how it is going to funded and believe it is all in the hands of skilled competent people who explain it well to us and don't keep blaming someone else or the past.
Items in (6) would include: defence, NHS, dentistry, welfare and benefits, debt and deficit, balance of trade, water and other necessities that don't work too well, net zero, the problem of industrial energy costs, social care, planning, social housing, inward migration, policy towards EU, levelling up the north, agriculture. Lots more of course.
I don't think this government is quite there yet.
It is a fundamental shift in the relations ship between subjects in the UK and the state. One that was not in the manifesto and as such a proposal that has no mandate.
If there is a bond strike (really quite possible now) and Britain teeters towards bankruptcy, the markets will demand massive brutal cuts in benefits. As that’s the only way to grow the economy and therefore service the debts. Massive tax hikes will just make it all worse
So then the Labour PM has to persuade Labour MPs to vote for the most severe welfare cuts since thatcher. Or beyond. How many will vote for that?
Very few. Political stasis ensues. But the bond markets won’t wait. Cue: General election as the only way to break the deadlock
https://www.ft.com/content/3e1c5173-bdb0-456c-9d00-398ccf0d5a60
Least friendly: Burnham 6/10, Raynor 3/10, Miliband 1/10
Most friendly: Streeting 9/10, Miliband 1/10
So an immediate contest is viewed less unfavourably than one that waits for Burnham.
Still.....
Too political in tone and clumsy in construction
Labour has lost the ability to do politics well
There is at least one more unclear, and others who Farage will have to deal with if he wants to maintain his current stance on antisemitism.
There is a tracker here by Paul Webster, which afaics reports for all major parties and is not restricted to this cohort:
https://pgw.report/council-changes-2026/v2/
So the speech lasted seconds before the chaos in labour takes over
Exclusive: Tory leader Kemi Badenoch triggers start of race to select Conservative candidate for London Mayor
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/london-mayor-james-cleverly-sadiq-khan-conservative-labour-candidate-b1280892.html
While there is nothing else happening in the world of politics...
Andy Burnham is the only likely Labour alternative that a notable number of Britons think would do better - but this is still only 34%
Burnham: 34% say would be better
Rayner: 15%
Miliband: 13%
Streeting: 13%
Cooper: 9%
Mahmood: 9%
Lammy: 3%
https://x.com/YouGov/status/2054085141765464461?s=20
% of 2024 Labour voters who think each would do a better job as PM than Keir Starmer
Burnham: 41%
Rayner: 25%
Miliband: 23%
Cooper: 12%
Streeting: 11%
Mahmood: 5%
Lammy: 3%
https://x.com/YouGov/status/2054085144214900822?s=20
Do we get a new King's Speech?
Our poll of Labour members, conducted before the May 7th elections, showed:
- Burnham was the top choice of two-fifths of the membership (42%), 31 points ahead of both Wes Streeting and Angela Rayner
- Almost two-thirds (63%) put him in their top three preferences
https://x.com/Survation/status/2054204579386896497?s=20
Our poll of the general public, also conducted before the elections, had Burnham in the lead, albeit with a notably slimmer margin:
- 15% named him as their top preference, 10 points ahead of Rayner, Ed Miliband, and Yvette Cooper
- A quarter (26%) put Burnham in their top three preferences
https://x.com/Survation/status/2054204582520102958?s=20
Whether Burnham could win back lost Labour voters is an open question, but the data suggests he would improve the Labour Party's image in the eyes of the public. We found:
- Net favourability towards the party would increase by +19% under Burnham's leadership
- The only other candidates with net positive scores were Cooper (+5%), Streeting (+5%), Louise Haigh (+3%), and Lucy Powell (+2%)
https://x.com/Survation/status/2054204585628119072?s=20
When looking at 2024 voters or voting intention groups, Burnham is the only candidate to generate net positive favourability scores across the board.
Among 2024 voters, net favourability was +33% among Labour supporters, +27% with Liberal Democrats, and +26% with the Greens.
By voting intention, Burnham brought in net favourability scores of +12% for would-be Conservatives and +16% for prospective Reform UK voters.
https://x.com/Survation/status/2054204588853440858?s=20
- https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn03938/
- https://labourlist.org/2025/11/labour-leadership-election-rules-keir-starmer-challenger/
Timeline- 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
2020 timelinehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Labour_Party_leadership_election_(UK)
- 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 in 2020: three months seventeen days.Comments please? @edmundintokyo said last night that voting will be online this time.
Do they know any of this?
The current higher bond interest rates are due at least as much to the masochistic policy of quantitative tightening for no apparent reason (and much faster than the the Fed is doing), as to the government's admitted complete incompetence.
So, rather than welfare cuts, the immediate way to get interest rates under control would be to pause QT. I think the Labour Party would be more likely to override the BoE's independence on this issue than allow welfare cuts if push came to shove.
But of course they are completely financially incompetent and economically illiterate, so you never know with this shower.
Thus, the high price of popcorn in your local Odeon.
I can't remember which PBer recommended the book, but I've been enjoying reading it.
That's fucking mental.
https://x.com/PolitlcsGlobal/status/2054486963248332932?s=20
Which makes us more vulnerable to a meltdown.
O/T Hailstones here earlier, though only briefly.
"Fall of the Wes !"