Unbelievably, in my view, SKS’s stock is rising. Streeting is a back stabbing creep who apparently can’t count and Burnham is an opportunistic carpet bagger with little or no substance. As I keep saying, only Ed Milliband is better than SKS for leader. That’s not a reflection on Ed, that’s s reflection on the rest. Truly poor pickings in the Labour Party.
Rubbish, Burnham has a +4% rating with voters far ahead of Ed Miliband and even Streeting on -28% is better than Ed Miliband on -32%.
Miliband only polls better than Rayner on -33% and Starmer himself on -46% now
It’s slightly baffling to me that you have a motorway which presumably is a massive eyesore but you won’t have a mast near it that provides coverage. I guess people have very odd priorities.
We should have 99% coverage on motorways as a minimum. This is frequently achieved in other countries and those that don’t have government supported schemes to do it e.g. Germany and France
M6 is pre-existing I can do nothing about that.
Masts you can put 1 in a stupid location or multiple smaller ones elsewhere to give you the same coverage. My viewpoint is you build the smaller ones, yes it costs money but that's a shareholder issue (and I'm a shareholder).
We should not allow companies to do stuff on the cheap to save money so they can make higher profits.
A longtime friend called to see us yesterday to invite us to his 80th birthday celebrations next year
He is a very successful North Wales businessman and he explained thaf Reeves budget, and the minimum wage rise, has added £100,000 pa to his restaurant costs and it is not sustainable
He is reducing staff, which in hospitality are in the main young, examining his menus, and looking at increasing prices but he is uncertain that his restaurant can survive
In all this chaos, can we have labour ministers that understand business as they are not the magic money tree some think they are
Theo Bartram (ex-Brown aide iirc) was pointing on X earlier that no one in Labour had worked in the City or shown much interest in how they work but also that it was the same the other way. He thinks both need to start seriously speaking to each other
Martin Sorel was on the radio this morning pointing out that prior to the election Labour did the whole thing of sitting down meeting business leaders to listen to them and discuss plans and then once in power have completely ignored everything they were told about how to get growth and help business.
So it’s all very well getting them to speak but when you have ideological imperatives such as increasing minimum wage or duff tax policies for example then the talking is pointless.
After the Tories, we hoped for an improvement, but still the same.
The lack of focus of our political class on steps that could be taken to improve growth and our balance of payments is painful and deeply damaging. They would so much prefer to talk and do something, anything, about anything else.
It's why I was interested in the relative success of Manchester in recent years. If Burnham has been willing to do the hard yards to contribute, or even not get in the way, of that he will be a breath of fresh air. We really, really need to start focusing on how things are going to be paid for as opposed to how we would like to spend the non existent money.
It cost a bit in sunk costs, but I sometimes drive into Manchester and am glad he binned off the CAZ. A bit of practicality about the man.
So he binned off the Clean Air Zone because of the motorist lobby? I'd forgotten that. According to reports Manchester has worse air pollution than London. That suggests he has no spine like Keir, there is of course another Mayor who's taken considerable abuse about a clean air zone, has held firm and achieved significant improvement in air quality. If there are hard choices to be made to the disadvantage of vociferous lobby groups then it seems the other Mayor would be a better choice.
London has the best Mayor.
In 2019, air pollution experts at King’s College London estimated that without further action it would take 193 years for London to meet government-set limits for nitrogen dioxide pollution (NO2). But last year the NO2 level in London fell to within the legal limit for the first time since UK regulations were introduced in 2010.
Unbelievably, in my view, SKS’s stock is rising. Streeting is a back stabbing creep who apparently can’t count and Burnham is an opportunistic carpet bagger with little or no substance. As I keep saying, only Ed Milliband is better than SKS for leader. That’s not a reflection on Ed, that’s s reflection on the rest. Truly poor pickings in the Labour Party.
Standing in your home constituency isn't exactly "carpet bagger", is it ?
And I think there's a fair amount of evidence that the creep can count, which explains his move today. Also, hasn't he stabbed Starmer in the front rather than the back ?
A longtime friend called to see us yesterday to invite us to his 80th birthday celebrations next year
He is a very successful North Wales businessman and he explained thaf Reeves budget, and the minimum wage rise, has added £100,000 pa to his restaurant costs and it is not sustainable
He is reducing staff, which in hospitality are in the main young, examining his menus, and looking at increasing prices but he is uncertain that his restaurant can survive
In all this chaos, can we have labour ministers that understand business as they are not the magic money tree some think they are
Theo Bartram (ex-Brown aide iirc) was pointing on X earlier that no one in Labour had worked in the City or shown much interest in how they work but also that it was the same the other way. He thinks both need to start seriously speaking to each other
Martin Sorel was on the radio this morning pointing out that prior to the election Labour did the whole thing of sitting down meeting business leaders to listen to them and discuss plans and then once in power have completely ignored everything they were told about how to get growth and help business.
So it’s all very well getting them to speak but when you have ideological imperatives such as increasing minimum wage or duff tax policies for example then the talking is pointless.
After the Tories, we hoped for an improvement, but still the same.
The lack of focus of our political class on steps that could be taken to improve growth and our balance of payments is painful and deeply damaging. They would so much prefer to talk and do something, anything, about anything else.
It's why I was interested in the relative success of Manchester in recent years. If Burnham has been willing to do the hard yards to contribute, or even not get in the way, of that he will be a breath of fresh air. We really, really need to start focusing on how things are going to be paid for as opposed to how we would like to spend the non existent money.
It cost a bit in sunk costs, but I sometimes drive into Manchester and am glad he binned off the CAZ. A bit of practicality about the man.
I went into Manchester a few days ago to see the Banksy exhibition. It was good. Manchester's tram system though is exceptional. It's just so easy to use. They seem to be every three or four minutes and you can get anywhere. There's definitely a late 80's feel about the place. I don't know how much is Burnham but he certainly hasn't done anything to damp it down.
Unbelievably, in my view, SKS’s stock is rising. Streeting is a back stabbing creep who apparently can’t count and Burnham is an opportunistic carpet bagger with little or no substance. As I keep saying, only Ed Milliband is better than SKS for leader. That’s not a reflection on Ed, that’s s reflection on the rest. Truly poor pickings in the Labour Party.
Standing in your home constituency isn't exactly "carpet bagger", is it ?
And I think there's a fair amount of evidence that the creep can count, which explains his move today. Also, hasn't he stabbed Starmer in the front rather than the back ?
If what you want is to never see phone masts again then I’m afraid that’s simply unrealistic. They are tall, they look like masts. However much you try and hide them they are there.
So we either accept that and make it work or we tear them all down and give up.
At the moment we reject most masts (although on appeal some get approved - so a waste of time and money) and then people complain about poor connectivity.
I think in rural areas there’s more (although it’s still slanted way too much to “no”) scope for discussion but inside a major city like London I cannot see the reason to reject anything.
And now you go randomly in a completely different direction.
The thing is if 5 small masts can do the same as 1 big mast without the visual impact damaging 2 national parks, sorry but you need to build 5 masts instead of saving a few quid.
But that’s what they already do. And the majority of even those will get rejected, so what do you propose they do?
Also not to sound rude but 5 masts is not an optimal solution due to interference, you can’t just substitute one mast with five and except a seamless experience. Radio planning is extremely complex.
We were talking about 60 miles of motorway which mobile phone companies seem to be obsessed about the coverage of.
to the extent that back in 2012 Orange went down because they moved the mast's coverage so putting 3 network engineers' homes in a blackspot.
Network goes down and they couldn't raise any of them to get the servers back up.
Yes because 60 miles of motorway covers a ridiculous amount of traffic especially commercial, you know for all those businesses that use it.
If you don’t want to cover motorways with coverage then again you want us to be an international outlier of 1. That’s fine but it’s not a mainstream position for a country.
Again you miss the point, if you want to cover 60 miles of motorway there are multiple ways of doing it.
You don't wreck 2 national parks to save a bit of money, you can do it properly using smaller masts..
Doing things improperly to save a bit of money is the British way, and is one of the reasons for all of this (gestures wildly while weeping.)
Everyone saying he'll put up taxes to fund spending so as to satisfy the markets - but surely the question will be how will the OBR score his tax rises in terms of the revenue they will generate and when that revenue will come in.
It's already been said that raising top rate of income tax will raise almost nothing.
If he brings in some new wealth tax there's going to be a significant time delay before any revenue actually comes in - whilst new system is set up, then a financial year, then 10 months to do tax return etc.
The new Mansion Tax announced in the November 2025 Budget comes into effect in April 2028.
So how is Burnham going to actually generate the revenue to fund the spending which he will want to do quickly?
Well, the current fiscal framework is helpful in that respect, because you only have to balance the budget in year four or five, so spending now and taxing later is already part of the process (i.e. there's the ongoing fiction of increasing fuel duty in the budget plans, but this is always deferred.)
Everyone saying he'll put up taxes to fund spending so as to satisfy the markets - but surely the question will be how will the OBR score his tax rises in terms of the revenue they will generate and when that revenue will come in.
It's already been said that raising top rate of income tax will raise almost nothing.
If he brings in some new wealth tax there's going to be a significant time delay before any revenue actually comes in - whilst new system is set up, then a financial year, then 10 months to do tax return etc.
The new Mansion Tax announced in the November 2025 Budget comes into effect in April 2028.
So how is Burnham going to actually generate the revenue to fund the spending which he will want to do quickly?
He brings forward the Mansion Tax to autumn this year and his Chancellor announces the 50% top income tax rate and a new wealth and land tax in the autumn too and then holds off on new spending until next year
A longtime friend called to see us yesterday to invite us to his 80th birthday celebrations next year
He is a very successful North Wales businessman and he explained thaf Reeves budget, and the minimum wage rise, has added £100,000 pa to his restaurant costs and it is not sustainable
He is reducing staff, which in hospitality are in the main young, examining his menus, and looking at increasing prices but he is uncertain that his restaurant can survive
In all this chaos, can we have labour ministers that understand business as they are not the magic money tree some think they are
Theo Bartram (ex-Brown aide iirc) was pointing on X earlier that no one in Labour had worked in the City or shown much interest in how they work but also that it was the same the other way. He thinks both need to start seriously speaking to each other
Martin Sorel was on the radio this morning pointing out that prior to the election Labour did the whole thing of sitting down meeting business leaders to listen to them and discuss plans and then once in power have completely ignored everything they were told about how to get growth and help business.
So it’s all very well getting them to speak but when you have ideological imperatives such as increasing minimum wage or duff tax policies for example then the talking is pointless.
After the Tories, we hoped for an improvement, but still the same.
The lack of focus of our political class on steps that could be taken to improve growth and our balance of payments is painful and deeply damaging. They would so much prefer to talk and do something, anything, about anything else.
It's why I was interested in the relative success of Manchester in recent years. If Burnham has been willing to do the hard yards to contribute, or even not get in the way, of that he will be a breath of fresh air. We really, really need to start focusing on how things are going to be paid for as opposed to how we would like to spend the non existent money.
It cost a bit in sunk costs, but I sometimes drive into Manchester and am glad he binned off the CAZ. A bit of practicality about the man.
I went into Manchester a few days ago to see the Banksy exhibition. It was good. Manchester's tram system though is exceptional. It's just so easy to use. They seem to be every three or four minutes and you can get anywhere. There's definitely a late 80's feel about the place. I don't know how much is Burnham but he certainly hasn't done anything to damp it down.
There were teachers in Gorton and Denton saying many of the kids had never been into Manchester let alone anywhere else. Lot of work to do.
Unbelievably, in my view, SKS’s stock is rising. Streeting is a back stabbing creep who apparently can’t count and Burnham is an opportunistic carpet bagger with little or no substance. As I keep saying, only Ed Milliband is better than SKS for leader. That’s not a reflection on Ed, that’s s reflection on the rest. Truly poor pickings in the Labour Party.
Rubbish, Burnham has a +4% rating with voters far ahead of Ed Miliband and even Streeting on -28% is better than Ed Miliband on -32%.
Miliband only polls better than Rayner on -33% and Starmer himself on -46% now
I'd feel more confident about the comparison between Burnham and others if we were comparing like with like. Burnham hasn't been in a Cabinet post for the last two years and hasn't suffered all the slings and arrows that brings. He is a regional Mayor. He is not exposed to the same day by day national media scrutiny as Miliband or Streeting, nor is he scrutinised to the same degree by Labour's political opponents. At the moment we are permitted to project all our hopey, changey aspirations on to a politician who hasn't had the same degree of political onslaught as his rivals.
Underrated possibility that Burnham wins the by-election, seizes the leadership and becomes PM, then becomes the first sitting prime minister to lose his seat at the next election.
That would be even funnier if Labour win most seats too.
I'm rooting for Andy Burnham to win the by-election because it would put a spoke in the wheels of Reform. Derailing their journey to power is my absolute number one political priority.
However I see this whole Burnham thing as yet another sign of how our politics is getting dumbed down and obsessed with personality. Labour are desperate to change leader not because of policy direction but because Starmer can't connect. Something about him turns people off.
That's the 'change' being made. Swapping him for somebody with a more appealing persona. Hoping that will turn the polls. I hope so too. But let's not go thinking there's a bunch of affordable policies out there just waiting to be unleashed once the dead hand of Starmer is prised off the tiller that will transform how the great British public feel about life.
The full story is the coalition is with Greens, libdems and independents.
I think Kemi has to realise she's not in charge of local government, the councillors have to make it work. She may have to need to get a few pointers for possibly after the next General Election.
As the next GE gets closer it seems clear that the question will distil into a fairly simple one of 'Reform government or Not Reform Government', and that this is really the subtext for non activists, who are mostly not very political social democrat centrists with better things to do than post on PB.
For the majority who don't want a Reform government this will become a more urgent than usual question. Reform is tied up with Trumpism, dog whistle ethnocentrism, noisy nationalism, 'ICE UK', plutocratic cash from abroad, people who post vile stuff on X and scapegoating. In addition offering belief in simple answers to complex problems. It is different in kind from the older knockabout of Tory v Labour etc.
Avoiding Reform government at this stage involves other more or less house trained parties getting strong support. Refinements come later.
Burnham, who I don't personally care much for, looks like being the best prospect of Labour beating Reform in actual seats, such as mine.
The greatest danger if he succeeds in the current project is a repeat of the ludicrous messianism we have seen before with Boris, Corbyn, Truss and of course Farage.
I think the mistake you make is thinking that non activists are mostly social democrat centrists. If that were the case then Labour or the Lib Dems would romp home at every election.
Depends how you define social democrats. Lab + LD/Lib is a higher vote share than Con at most elections going back decades, as far as I can see from a quick Google. Now, not all LD/Lib voters are social democrats (I'm not sure I'd take that label!) but some are. And the Con-Lib coalition is good evidence to not lump Lab and LD together*. But are social democrats the largest group in the electorate? I'd say it's quite possible and depends how they are defined.
*the subsequent collapse in support for LD suggests that lumping Con and LD together was also not welcome to many LD voters!
In general the political argument of the great majority in the UK is within the constraints of post WWII social democracy. We are finding and will continue to find even Reform coming into line, with the exception of their UK nationalism. The voters of Clacton are social democrats (welfare state+private enterprise+NATO etc) to a man and woman.
You keep saying this. The evidence for it remains poor. Look at MAGA. MAGA voters are just as reliant on govt largesse, but the Trump administration is absolutely not following a post-WWII consensus playbook.
I am taking no view about USA and MAGA voters. I am taking a view about UK political reality. Once allowance is made for self interest, such as our preference for other people paying tax, UK voters vote for a welfare state, private enterprise, regulation or public ownership of natural monopolies (preferring whichever is not prevailing at the time), NATO, NHS, free education to 18.
This is the essence of the post WWII social democrat consensus. The evidence of UK voters' support for it is so overwhelming that I mention it too often because the plain reality is so often denied.
Unbelievably, in my view, SKS’s stock is rising. Streeting is a back stabbing creep who apparently can’t count and Burnham is an opportunistic carpet bagger with little or no substance. As I keep saying, only Ed Milliband is better than SKS for leader. That’s not a reflection on Ed, that’s s reflection on the rest. Truly poor pickings in the Labour Party.
Rubbish, Burnham has a +4% rating with voters far ahead of Ed Miliband and even Streeting on -28% is better than Ed Miliband on -32%.
Miliband only polls better than Rayner on -33% and Starmer himself on -46% now
I'd feel more confident about the comparison between Burnham and others if we were comparing like with like. Burnham hasn't been in a Cabinet post for the last two years and hasn't suffered all the slings and arrows that brings. He is a regional Mayor. He is not exposed to the same day by day national media scrutiny as Miliband or Streeting, nor is he scrutinised to the same degree by Labour's political opponents. At the moment we are permitted to project all our hopey, changey aspirations on to a politician who hasn't had the same degree of political onslaught as his rivals.
There are still a lot of don't knows for Burnham, but I think being a blank slate has a lot going for it for Labour. It's a chance for a genuine reboot of the government, and a new PM has the chance to make a new beginning.
If they then bollox it up again then that's disappointing, but it doesn't negate that the opportunity existed.
My best guess, fwiw, is that Burnham will bollox it up, but where there's a majority of over 150, there's hope.
Pollster, James Frayne: "Reform voters are perfectly affluent working class and lower middle class voters. These people are not voting for Reform in some terrible cry for help. They're voting on the basis of perceived policy failure."
It's remarkable how many Conservative councillors are Conservative in name only.
Nah, in this case it was utterly justified, Alan Amos is not only a traitorous pig-dog defector (on repeated occasions) but he's also a terrible human being.
Pollster, James Frayne: "Reform voters are perfectly affluent working class and lower middle class voters. These people are not voting for Reform in some terrible cry for help. They're voting on the basis of perceived policy failure."
Pollster, James Frayne: "Reform voters are perfectly affluent working class and lower middle class voters. These people are not voting for Reform in some terrible cry for help. They're voting on the basis of perceived policy failure."
Clearly shows how xenophobic and ignorant these people are. Just because you have money doesn’t make you more worldly or enlightened.
Pollster, James Frayne: "Reform voters are perfectly affluent working class and lower middle class voters. These people are not voting for Reform in some terrible cry for help. They're voting on the basis of perceived policy failure."
It's still a protest vote regarding perceived policy failure. Come 2031 they will have elected Reform (having perviously elected Bozo's Tory party and then SKS's Labour) seen nothing changed and be trying to work out where their 2033/4 vote is going.
The full story is the coalition is with Greens, libdems and independents.
I think Kemi has to realise she's not in charge of local government, the councillors have to make it work. She may have to need to get a few pointers for possibly after the next General Election.
Ridiculous! Kemi wants Tory councillors to line up with the fascists and racists! Wow! When people say that the Tories are Reform Lite now, they are right. I fear for them!
I see the media are still pushing the line that there will be a leadership race between Burnham and others if he wins the by-election.
Just let it go ! There will be a coronation or a day of nominations where the vast majority go for Burnham and then the others pull out saying it’s time for unity and will get some cabinet jobs .
Pollster, James Frayne: "Reform voters are perfectly affluent working class and lower middle class voters. These people are not voting for Reform in some terrible cry for help. They're voting on the basis of perceived policy failure."
It's still a protest vote regarding perceived policy failure. Come 2031 they will have elected Reform (having perviously elected Bozo's Tory party and then SKS's Labour) seen nothing changed and be trying to work out where their 2033/4 vote is going.
"After the disappointment of Reform, the country is crying out for a true right wing government." (c) Leon 2032.
Pollster, James Frayne: "Reform voters are perfectly affluent working class and lower middle class voters. These people are not voting for Reform in some terrible cry for help. They're voting on the basis of perceived policy failure."
What! All of them?
It sounds like an off-the-cuff generalisation. Do we have any actual data?
If what you want is to never see phone masts again then I’m afraid that’s simply unrealistic. They are tall, they look like masts. However much you try and hide them they are there.
So we either accept that and make it work or we tear them all down and give up.
At the moment we reject most masts (although on appeal some get approved - so a waste of time and money) and then people complain about poor connectivity.
I think in rural areas there’s more (although it’s still slanted way too much to “no”) scope for discussion but inside a major city like London I cannot see the reason to reject anything.
And now you go randomly in a completely different direction.
The thing is if 5 small masts can do the same as 1 big mast without the visual impact damaging 2 national parks, sorry but you need to build 5 masts instead of saving a few quid.
But that’s what they already do. And the majority of even those will get rejected, so what do you propose they do?
Also not to sound rude but 5 masts is not an optimal solution due to interference, you can’t just substitute one mast with five and except a seamless experience. Radio planning is extremely complex.
We were talking about 60 miles of motorway which mobile phone companies seem to be obsessed about the coverage of.
to the extent that back in 2012 Orange went down because they moved the mast's coverage so putting 3 network engineers' homes in a blackspot.
Network goes down and they couldn't raise any of them to get the servers back up.
Yes because 60 miles of motorway covers a ridiculous amount of traffic especially commercial, you know for all those businesses that use it.
If you don’t want to cover motorways with coverage then again you want us to be an international outlier of 1. That’s fine but it’s not a mainstream position for a country.
Again you miss the point, if you want to cover 60 miles of motorway there are multiple ways of doing it.
You don't wreck 2 national parks to save a bit of money, you can do it properly using smaller masts..
But you accept we should have masts put up to cover 60 miles of road? Which somebody is going to see?
Pollster, James Frayne: "Reform voters are perfectly affluent working class and lower middle class voters. These people are not voting for Reform in some terrible cry for help. They're voting on the basis of perceived policy failure."
What! All of them?
It sounds like an off-the-cuff generalisation. Do we have any actual data?
Was there any actual data provided for the widespread assumption (typified by Rochdale's recent thread header) that Reform voters are angry befuddled poverty-stricken masses?
A hospital trust has admitted that nearly 50 staff members looked inappropriately at the medical records of victims of the Southport knife attack.
The data breach happened at Aintree Hospital in Liverpool, where some of the injured were treated, in the days after the July 2024 attack but has only emerged this week.
It’s slightly baffling to me that you have a motorway which presumably is a massive eyesore but you won’t have a mast near it that provides coverage. I guess people have very odd priorities.
We should have 99% coverage on motorways as a minimum. This is frequently achieved in other countries and those that don’t have government supported schemes to do it e.g. Germany and France
M6 is pre-existing I can do nothing about that.
Masts you can put 1 in a stupid location or multiple smaller ones elsewhere to give you the same coverage. My viewpoint is you build the smaller ones, yes it costs money but that's a shareholder issue (and I'm a shareholder).
We should not allow companies to do stuff on the cheap to save money so they can make higher profits.
Okay but where do you site those masts? Somebody isn’t going to like the look of them, they have to go somewhere where some people can see them?
It’s slightly baffling to me that you have a motorway which presumably is a massive eyesore but you won’t have a mast near it that provides coverage. I guess people have very odd priorities.
We should have 99% coverage on motorways as a minimum. This is frequently achieved in other countries and those that don’t have government supported schemes to do it e.g. Germany and France
M6 is pre-existing I can do nothing about that.
Masts you can put 1 in a stupid location or multiple smaller ones elsewhere to give you the same coverage. My viewpoint is you build the smaller ones, yes it costs money but that's a shareholder issue (and I'm a shareholder).
We should not allow companies to do stuff on the cheap to save money so they can make higher profits.
Okay but where do you site those masts? Somebody isn’t going to like the look of them, they have to go somewhere where some people can see them?
How about along the motorway - which you've already called a massive eyesore, adding the fake tree design and no one will notice.
Pollster, James Frayne: "Reform voters are perfectly affluent working class and lower middle class voters. These people are not voting for Reform in some terrible cry for help. They're voting on the basis of perceived policy failure."
What! All of them?
It sounds like an off-the-cuff generalisation. Do we have any actual data?
It would not surprise me. Age would be a major factor there.
IIRC the data once analysed showed that Leave voters were more secure than Remain voters.
Again, largely due to age (older voters owning homes and voting Leave, younger tenants who don't voting Remain).
Far from being a cry for help, some people are so secure they have no qualms with rocking the boat . . . while those who are insecure can be more risk averse.
Pollster, James Frayne: "Reform voters are perfectly affluent working class and lower middle class voters. These people are not voting for Reform in some terrible cry for help. They're voting on the basis of perceived policy failure."
What! All of them?
It sounds like an off-the-cuff generalisation. Do we have any actual data?
We don't need no stinkin' data.
More seriously: Reform, like every political party, draws its support from every aspect of society. There are Refom voting Remainers and students and nurses and academics and bankers. And there are Green / LibDem voting Leavers and builders and pensioners and the like.
With that said... there is a fairly strong correlation between Reform strength and economic deprivation. According to the OCSI looking at the 2024 election results: "if the electorate were restricted to those struggling financially, Reform would lead with 39 per cent of the vote, followed by Labour and the Greens tied on 15 per cent" And three of Reform's five wins in 2024 came in seats that were in the bototm third of seats by economic deprivation.
But that isn't only where Reform is relatively strong, which I suspect is James Frayne's point.
The full story is the coalition is with Greens, libdems and independents.
I think Kemi has to realise she's not in charge of local government, the councillors have to make it work. She may have to need to get a few pointers for possibly after the next General Election.
Yes. I don't understand if the Tories won't work with Reform nor with the Greens then how does this council function?
Unbelievably, in my view, SKS’s stock is rising. Streeting is a back stabbing creep who apparently can’t count and Burnham is an opportunistic carpet bagger with little or no substance. As I keep saying, only Ed Milliband is better than SKS for leader. That’s not a reflection on Ed, that’s s reflection on the rest. Truly poor pickings in the Labour Party.
Rubbish, Burnham has a +4% rating with voters far ahead of Ed Miliband and even Streeting on -28% is better than Ed Miliband on -32%.
Miliband only polls better than Rayner on -33% and Starmer himself on -46% now
I'd feel more confident about the comparison between Burnham and others if we were comparing like with like. Burnham hasn't been in a Cabinet post for the last two years and hasn't suffered all the slings and arrows that brings. He is a regional Mayor. He is not exposed to the same day by day national media scrutiny as Miliband or Streeting, nor is he scrutinised to the same degree by Labour's political opponents. At the moment we are permitted to project all our hopey, changey aspirations on to a politician who hasn't had the same degree of political onslaught as his rivals.
There are still a lot of don't knows for Burnham, but I think being a blank slate has a lot going for it for Labour. It's a chance for a genuine reboot of the government, and a new PM has the chance to make a new beginning.
If they then bollox it up again then that's disappointing, but it doesn't negate that the opportunity existed.
My best guess, fwiw, is that Burnham will bollox it up, but where there's a majority of over 150, there's hope.
Yes, my thoughts too, at least there's an opportunity created. Being an outsider not an insider when voters are wanting a change of direction is a help not a hindrance.
Amidst all the furore of the past couple of weeks, one thing has also been overlooked. The imminent prospect of the release of reams of internal correspondence relevant to Mandelson to satisfy the "Humble Address" requirements. That will potentially compromise many closely involved with Starmer's wing of the party, certainly Starmer and probably also Streeting unless there's nothing to add to the choice bits he had already released, and potentially many other Cabinet and other ministers other than those widely known to be hostile to Mandelson (Miliband, Rayner.) There will then be an overriding need for a new PM drawn from outside of the inner circle to come in with a fresh broom to clean out the stables.
Someone wants to give the Farage Shorts photo some competition.
Jesus Christ. Please don't post that picture again.
Ignoring that photo, which needs to be banned before TSE uses it on repeat, at least Burnham like Prince William has not picked a glory hunting team. He could easily be a Liverpool or Man United fan yet he supports the continual underachievers that are Everton.
Amidst the whirl of politics, KC3 went to Golders Green and was almost mobbed by anxious but happy Jewish people. Grateful for his presence. Imagine a Labour prime minister trying to do this. Oh wait he did and was screamed at
“Today, in response to a series of smaller attacks on Jews, our British monarch has just taken on a role as patron of the Community Security Trust. He has visited this site of an attempted massacre to shake hands with a traumatised and fearful Jewish community. He has, in short, behaved like a mensch. His visit tells a different story about how British institutions and leaders relate to this country’s Jewish community.”
Anyhoo, the big news yesterday was Nigel Farge lying again and potentially landing himself with a massive tax bill.
I'd disagree that that was the big story. The big story was the ongoing will-Andy-Burnham-get-to-be-PM story. I know many complain about the way the country collectively shrugs its shoulders at stories of Nigel Farage's dodginess, but this isn't really news: it's completely expected. It's priced in.
I disagree, in so far as it is a big story if not THE absolutely humungeous story of yesterday. In the eyes of the public, tax dodging is far more consequentai for a politician's reputation than technical Westminster village stuff such as non-declaration of political donations, so if HMRC go after Farage that matters.
In the same vein, council tax dodging could seriously damage Polanski.
I doubt most of the public think person-to-person gifts should be taxable at all. See inheritance tax.
I'm not sure the legality of it is really the issue. This, and his ever changing story about what it was for, will hang around his neck for a long time and will do real damage. More and more will come out - girlfriend won't reveal how she paid for the house in Clacton, £1.4m house allegedly bought in cash just after the "donation" for security. Just doesn't add up. This will run right up to the GE.
Someone wants to give the Farage Shorts photo some competition.
Jesus Christ. Please don't post that picture again.
Ignoring that photo, which needs to be banned before TSE uses it on repeat, at least Burnham like Prince William has not picked a glory hunting team. He could easily be a Liverpool or Man United fan yet he supports the continual underachievers that are Everton.
Amidst the whirl of politics, KC3 went to Golders Green and was almost mobbed by anxious but happy Jewish people. Grateful for his presence. Imagine a Labour prime minister trying to do this. Oh wait he did and was screamed at
“Today, in response to a series of smaller attacks on Jews, our British monarch has just taken on a role as patron of the Community Security Trust. He has visited this site of an attempted massacre to shake hands with a traumatised and fearful Jewish community. He has, in short, behaved like a mensch. His visit tells a different story about how British institutions and leaders relate to this country’s Jewish community.”
Charles showing more leadership that Starmer in the US and at home right now. It must be very grating for Labour.
He really is. As I said the the other day, thank god we have a monarchy. Can you imagine this depressing unholy mess without that comforting knowledge: that there is something, however ruritanian, above our absurd and squalid politics?
And KC3 is actually good at the job. Sometimes very good. He can be too woke for me but I’m sure he can be too posh and Tory for lefties. That probably shows he is hitting the right spot
We'd be in a much worse position without a monarchy.
Who else could stand up to Trump, without dividing Americans, and unite and reassure his own people back home?
As the next GE gets closer it seems clear that the question will distil into a fairly simple one of 'Reform government or Not Reform Government', and that this is really the subtext for non activists, who are mostly not very political social democrat centrists with better things to do than post on PB.
For the majority who don't want a Reform government this will become a more urgent than usual question. Reform is tied up with Trumpism, dog whistle ethnocentrism, noisy nationalism, 'ICE UK', plutocratic cash from abroad, people who post vile stuff on X and scapegoating. In addition offering belief in simple answers to complex problems. It is different in kind from the older knockabout of Tory v Labour etc.
Avoiding Reform government at this stage involves other more or less house trained parties getting strong support. Refinements come later.
Burnham, who I don't personally care much for, looks like being the best prospect of Labour beating Reform in actual seats, such as mine.
The greatest danger if he succeeds in the current project is a repeat of the ludicrous messianism we have seen before with Boris, Corbyn, Truss and of course Farage.
I think the mistake you make is thinking that non activists are mostly social democrat centrists. If that were the case then Labour or the Lib Dems would romp home at every election.
Depends how you define social democrats. Lab + LD/Lib is a higher vote share than Con at most elections going back decades, as far as I can see from a quick Google. Now, not all LD/Lib voters are social democrats (I'm not sure I'd take that label!) but some are. And the Con-Lib coalition is good evidence to not lump Lab and LD together*. But are social democrats the largest group in the electorate? I'd say it's quite possible and depends how they are defined.
*the subsequent collapse in support for LD suggests that lumping Con and LD together was also not welcome to many LD voters!
In general the political argument of the great majority in the UK is within the constraints of post WWII social democracy. We are finding and will continue to find even Reform coming into line, with the exception of their UK nationalism. The voters of Clacton are social democrats (welfare state+private enterprise+NATO etc) to a man and woman.
You keep saying this. The evidence for it remains poor. Look at MAGA. MAGA voters are just as reliant on govt largesse, but the Trump administration is absolutely not following a post-WWII consensus playbook.
I am taking no view about USA and MAGA voters. I am taking a view about UK political reality. Once allowance is made for self interest, such as our preference for other people paying tax, UK voters vote for a welfare state, private enterprise, regulation or public ownership of natural monopolies (preferring whichever is not prevailing at the time), NATO, NHS, free education to 18.
This is the essence of the post WWII social democrat consensus. The evidence of UK voters' support for it is so overwhelming that I mention it too often because the plain reality is so often denied.
UK voters have supported it, but we're seeing unprecedented changes in UK voting patterns, so we can't just assume it will continue, and that Reform and Reform voters will bend to the orthodoxy.
Generations of US politicians in the South have successfully sold policies that seem unhelpful to their working class voters' interest. This is a classic discussion in US political science: why do poor Southerners vote Republican? One proposed answer is racial identity. Working class, white Southerners get to feel they're not bottom of the pile because they're given a group below them. (See Thomas Frank's "What’s the Matter with Kansas?", 2004, and Arlie Hochschild's "Strangers in Their Own Land", 2016.) Reform are perhaps offering the same and perhaps it will work for them. That is, Reform can replace the post-WWII social democrat consensus with libertarian, small state, pro-oligarch policies fueled by status threat, scaremongering around immigrants &/or Muslims.
Someone wants to give the Farage Shorts photo some competition.
Jesus Christ. Please don't post that picture again.
Ignoring that photo, which needs to be banned before TSE uses it on repeat, at least Burnham like Prince William has not picked a glory hunting team. He could easily be a Liverpool or Man United fan yet he supports the continual underachievers that are Everton.
When he started supporting them they were successful.
Someone wants to give the Farage Shorts photo some competition.
Jesus Christ. Please don't post that picture again.
Ignoring that photo, which needs to be banned before TSE uses it on repeat, at least Burnham like Prince William has not picked a glory hunting team. He could easily be a Liverpool or Man United fan yet he supports the continual underachievers that are Everton.
When he started supporting them they were successful.
It's a slightly false statistic (As obviously you can't win promotion or the FA Trophy inside the EPL) but they have the biggest trophy/celebration drought of all 92 football league clubs at the moment I think !
A hospital trust has admitted that nearly 50 staff members looked inappropriately at the medical records of victims of the Southport knife attack.
The data breach happened at Aintree Hospital in Liverpool, where some of the injured were treated, in the days after the July 2024 attack but has only emerged this week.
Doesn't surprise me in the slightest. When you give people access to data they will look at it. People are very curious [aka nosy].
You can only prevent this by not giving people access to the data in the first place - e.g. tying access to the data to scanning the patient barcode on their ID wrist strap, or to a specific workflow (consultant scheduled to operate on patient).
This is why a digital ID system/ID cards as generally conceived by the British state has to be resisted. The result would be to make all your data available to every government employee at all times.
A hospital trust has admitted that nearly 50 staff members looked inappropriately at the medical records of victims of the Southport knife attack.
The data breach happened at Aintree Hospital in Liverpool, where some of the injured were treated, in the days after the July 2024 attack but has only emerged this week.
Doesn't surprise me in the slightest. When you give people access to data they will look at it. People are very curious [aka nosy].
You can only prevent this by not giving people access to the data in the first place - e.g. tying access to the data to scanning the patient barcode on their ID wrist strap, or to a specific workflow (consultant scheduled to operate on patient).
This is why a digital ID system/ID cards as generally conceived by the British state has to be resisted. The result would be to make all your data available to every government employee at all times.
It's been repeatedly demanded (and was feature of the original Blair ID card scheme) that access be universal and unlimited. So, literally, a council worker investigating bin recycling could access medical records!
Someone wants to give the Farage Shorts photo some competition.
Jesus Christ. Please don't post that picture again.
Ignoring that photo, which needs to be banned before TSE uses it on repeat, at least Burnham like Prince William has not picked a glory hunting team. He could easily be a Liverpool or Man United fan yet he supports the continual underachievers that are Everton.
And pretty much anything is an upgrade on Arsenal.
Pollster, James Frayne: "Reform voters are perfectly affluent working class and lower middle class voters. These people are not voting for Reform in some terrible cry for help. They're voting on the basis of perceived policy failure."
What! All of them?
It sounds like an off-the-cuff generalisation. Do we have any actual data?
We don't need no stinkin' data.
More seriously: Reform, like every political party, draws its support from every aspect of society. There are Refom voting Remainers and students and nurses and academics and bankers. And there are Green / LibDem voting Leavers and builders and pensioners and the like.
With that said... there is a fairly strong correlation between Reform strength and economic deprivation. According to the OCSI looking at the 2024 election results: "if the electorate were restricted to those struggling financially, Reform would lead with 39 per cent of the vote, followed by Labour and the Greens tied on 15 per cent" And three of Reform's five wins in 2024 came in seats that were in the bototm third of seats by economic deprivation.
But that isn't only where Reform is relatively strong, which I suspect is James Frayne's point.
The strongest correlation (for people old enough) is with a Leave vote in 2016. Whatever drove Brexit is driving Reform - despite Brexit having happened. They are re-assembling the same coalition of voters as delivered that.
Like Johnson did to win GE19. Not all Leavers but enough to win a GE. Farage is looking to pull off the same trick a third time. It's getting harder as the Ref is now a decade ago. But it's also easier because with this new multiparty politics you only need about 30% to clean up.
Just been to the ACTUAL site of Ad Gefrin, the summer palace of the Northumbrian Kings of the Golden Age, 550AD-700AD
Magnificent site. In the lee of the Cheviots, under one of the larger Bronze Age hill forts in Europe (thousands lived there). Two miles away there’s an Anglo Saxon/Norman church with links to the gunpowder plot and the grave of Josephine Butler - the great Victorian feminist
6000 years of deep deep deep British history in one tiny forgotten corner of our amazing island. Great little pub as well
As the next GE gets closer it seems clear that the question will distil into a fairly simple one of 'Reform government or Not Reform Government', and that this is really the subtext for non activists, who are mostly not very political social democrat centrists with better things to do than post on PB.
For the majority who don't want a Reform government this will become a more urgent than usual question. Reform is tied up with Trumpism, dog whistle ethnocentrism, noisy nationalism, 'ICE UK', plutocratic cash from abroad, people who post vile stuff on X and scapegoating. In addition offering belief in simple answers to complex problems. It is different in kind from the older knockabout of Tory v Labour etc.
Avoiding Reform government at this stage involves other more or less house trained parties getting strong support. Refinements come later.
Burnham, who I don't personally care much for, looks like being the best prospect of Labour beating Reform in actual seats, such as mine.
The greatest danger if he succeeds in the current project is a repeat of the ludicrous messianism we have seen before with Boris, Corbyn, Truss and of course Farage.
I think the mistake you make is thinking that non activists are mostly social democrat centrists. If that were the case then Labour or the Lib Dems would romp home at every election.
Depends how you define social democrats. Lab + LD/Lib is a higher vote share than Con at most elections going back decades, as far as I can see from a quick Google. Now, not all LD/Lib voters are social democrats (I'm not sure I'd take that label!) but some are. And the Con-Lib coalition is good evidence to not lump Lab and LD together*. But are social democrats the largest group in the electorate? I'd say it's quite possible and depends how they are defined.
*the subsequent collapse in support for LD suggests that lumping Con and LD together was also not welcome to many LD voters!
In general the political argument of the great majority in the UK is within the constraints of post WWII social democracy. We are finding and will continue to find even Reform coming into line, with the exception of their UK nationalism. The voters of Clacton are social democrats (welfare state+private enterprise+NATO etc) to a man and woman.
You keep saying this. The evidence for it remains poor. Look at MAGA. MAGA voters are just as reliant on govt largesse, but the Trump administration is absolutely not following a post-WWII consensus playbook.
I am taking no view about USA and MAGA voters. I am taking a view about UK political reality. Once allowance is made for self interest, such as our preference for other people paying tax, UK voters vote for a welfare state, private enterprise, regulation or public ownership of natural monopolies (preferring whichever is not prevailing at the time), NATO, NHS, free education to 18.
This is the essence of the post WWII social democrat consensus. The evidence of UK voters' support for it is so overwhelming that I mention it too often because the plain reality is so often denied.
UK voters have supported it, but we're seeing unprecedented changes in UK voting patterns, so we can't just assume it will continue, and that Reform and Reform voters will bend to the orthodoxy.
Generations of US politicians in the South have successfully sold policies that seem unhelpful to their working class voters' interest. This is a classic discussion in US political science: why do poor Southerners vote Republican? One proposed answer is racial identity. Working class, white Southerners get to feel they're not bottom of the pile because they're given a group below them. (See Thomas Frank's "What’s the Matter with Kansas?", 2004, and Arlie Hochschild's "Strangers in Their Own Land", 2016.) Reform are perhaps offering the same and perhaps it will work for them. That is, Reform can replace the post-WWII social democrat consensus with libertarian, small state, pro-oligarch policies fueled by status threat, scaremongering around immigrants &/or Muslims.
Yes, all this is possible but it does not derogate from what I have said, about which we are, SFAICS, more or less agreed. I don't assume either that the post WWII social democratic consensus is possible in the future, or that people in the future will vote for it if given other options.
My opinion about the future only goes to the next election and its subsequent 5 year term - about 2034. It is this: Reform will stand on ticket of social democracy (as I have too frequently defined and described) + GB nationalism + slowing down of net zero + deportation of illegals + limited inward migration + a modest degree of withdrawal from international treaties consistent with that. They will not return migrants to war zones but will loosen the concept of legitimate refugee. The young wives and children of Ukrainian soldiers living near me are safe. As are my doctor friends with ILR/dual nationality unless they rob a bank.
Unlike Trump Reform would not try to abolish the rule of law and separation of powers.
Reform will not form a government, though the policy I outline here gives them their best chance. Only the Greens might possibly stand on a platform moving away from social democracy towards a socialist dirigiste state. They won't win. The rest will stand on social democratic platforms, as they always do, with the usual variety of emphases. If by any chance one of them were likely to be competent I will vote for them.
I am off again to North America shortly, forget the WC, hotel prices have become absolutely insane there. £200-250 a night for a bog standard hotel and not talking for Manhattan.
I am off again to North America shortly, hotel prices have become absolutely insane.
A colleague has said some hotels in America are now adding insane service charges.
Las Vegas apparently has become a complete joke for this, room + various taxes, non-optional resort fee + tax, parkingz etc etc etc. A £100 hotel room becomes £200.
I am off again to North America shortly, hotel prices have become absolutely insane.
A colleague has said some hotels in America are now adding insane service charges.
Las Vegas apparently has become a complete joke for this, room + various taxes, non-optional resort fee + tax, parkingz etc etc etc. A £100 hotel room becomes £200.
I’ve heard of $100 burgers once you add it all together
I am off again to North America shortly, forget the WC, hotel prices have become absolutely insane there. £200-250 a night for a bog standard hotel and not talking for Manhattan.
Given the collapse of international tourism thanks to Trump that seems really odd. Anyone know what is driving it (other than greed, of course).
Someone wants to give the Farage Shorts photo some competition.
Jesus Christ. Please don't post that picture again.
Ignoring that photo, which needs to be banned before TSE uses it on repeat, at least Burnham like Prince William has not picked a glory hunting team. He could easily be a Liverpool or Man United fan yet he supports the continual underachievers that are Everton.
Speaking of Everton (Which as a red, I never, ever do)
When the new shopping arcade Liverpool ONE opened, Everton opened a new shop in the centre and called in Everton Two.
I am off again to North America shortly, forget the WC, hotel prices have become absolutely insane there. £200-250 a night for a bog standard hotel and not talking for Manhattan.
Given the collapse of international tourism thanks to Trump that seems really odd. Anyone know what is driving it (other than greed, of course).
My guess would be cost of labour is much higher, most chain hotels are now a franchise model that get squeezed for fees / revenue share, US upper middle class still have money and still big demand for travel e.g. loads of national parks have introduced timed entries as getting overrun.
As the next GE gets closer it seems clear that the question will distil into a fairly simple one of 'Reform government or Not Reform Government', and that this is really the subtext for non activists, who are mostly not very political social democrat centrists with better things to do than post on PB.
For the majority who don't want a Reform government this will become a more urgent than usual question. Reform is tied up with Trumpism, dog whistle ethnocentrism, noisy nationalism, 'ICE UK', plutocratic cash from abroad, people who post vile stuff on X and scapegoating. In addition offering belief in simple answers to complex problems. It is different in kind from the older knockabout of Tory v Labour etc.
Avoiding Reform government at this stage involves other more or less house trained parties getting strong support. Refinements come later.
Burnham, who I don't personally care much for, looks like being the best prospect of Labour beating Reform in actual seats, such as mine.
The greatest danger if he succeeds in the current project is a repeat of the ludicrous messianism we have seen before with Boris, Corbyn, Truss and of course Farage.
I think the mistake you make is thinking that non activists are mostly social democrat centrists. If that were the case then Labour or the Lib Dems would romp home at every election.
Depends how you define social democrats. Lab + LD/Lib is a higher vote share than Con at most elections going back decades, as far as I can see from a quick Google. Now, not all LD/Lib voters are social democrats (I'm not sure I'd take that label!) but some are. And the Con-Lib coalition is good evidence to not lump Lab and LD together*. But are social democrats the largest group in the electorate? I'd say it's quite possible and depends how they are defined.
*the subsequent collapse in support for LD suggests that lumping Con and LD together was also not welcome to many LD voters!
In general the political argument of the great majority in the UK is within the constraints of post WWII social democracy. We are finding and will continue to find even Reform coming into line, with the exception of their UK nationalism. The voters of Clacton are social democrats (welfare state+private enterprise+NATO etc) to a man and woman.
You keep saying this. The evidence for it remains poor. Look at MAGA. MAGA voters are just as reliant on govt largesse, but the Trump administration is absolutely not following a post-WWII consensus playbook.
I am taking no view about USA and MAGA voters. I am taking a view about UK political reality. Once allowance is made for self interest, such as our preference for other people paying tax, UK voters vote for a welfare state, private enterprise, regulation or public ownership of natural monopolies (preferring whichever is not prevailing at the time), NATO, NHS, free education to 18.
This is the essence of the post WWII social democrat consensus. The evidence of UK voters' support for it is so overwhelming that I mention it too often because the plain reality is so often denied.
UK voters have supported it, but we're seeing unprecedented changes in UK voting patterns, so we can't just assume it will continue, and that Reform and Reform voters will bend to the orthodoxy.
Generations of US politicians in the South have successfully sold policies that seem unhelpful to their working class voters' interest. This is a classic discussion in US political science: why do poor Southerners vote Republican? One proposed answer is racial identity. Working class, white Southerners get to feel they're not bottom of the pile because they're given a group below them. (See Thomas Frank's "What’s the Matter with Kansas?", 2004, and Arlie Hochschild's "Strangers in Their Own Land", 2016.) Reform are perhaps offering the same and perhaps it will work for them. That is, Reform can replace the post-WWII social democrat consensus with libertarian, small state, pro-oligarch policies fueled by status threat, scaremongering around immigrants &/or Muslims.
Yes, all this is possible but it does not derogate from what I have said, about which we are, SFAICS, more or less agreed. I don't assume either that the post WWII social democratic consensus is possible in the future, or that people in the future will vote for it if given other options.
My opinion about the future only goes to the next election and its subsequent 5 year term - about 2034. It is this: Reform will stand on ticket of social democracy (as I have too frequently defined and described) + GB nationalism + slowing down of net zero + deportation of illegals + limited inward migration + a modest degree of withdrawal from international treaties consistent with that. They will not return migrants to war zones but will loosen the concept of legitimate refugee. The young wives and children of Ukrainian soldiers living near me are safe. As are my doctor friends with ILR/dual nationality unless they rob a bank.
Unlike Trump Reform would not try to abolish the rule of law and separation of powers.
Reform will not form a government, though the policy I outline here gives them their best chance. Only the Greens might possibly stand on a platform moving away from social democracy towards a socialist dirigiste state. They won't win. The rest will stand on social democratic platforms, as they always do, with the usual variety of emphases. If by any chance one of them were likely to be competent I will vote for them.
Your basis for that blithe assertion is?
This is someone who has just taken a £5 million bribe. He's not going to do things by the book.
I am off again to North America shortly, forget the WC, hotel prices have become absolutely insane there. £200-250 a night for a bog standard hotel and not talking for Manhattan.
Given the collapse of international tourism thanks to Trump that seems really odd. Anyone know what is driving it (other than greed, of course).
My guess would be cost of labour is much higher, most chain hotels are now a franchise model that get squeezed for fees / revenue share, US upper middle class still have money and still big demand for travel e.g. loads of national parks have introduced timed entries as getting overrun.
There are also prices set by algorithm to maximise profit over occupancy.
Comments
Miliband only polls better than Rayner on -33% and Starmer himself on -46% now
https://yougov.com/en-gb/articles/54772-political-favourability-ratings-may-2026
Masts you can put 1 in a stupid location or multiple smaller ones elsewhere to give you the same coverage. My viewpoint is you build the smaller ones, yes it costs money but that's a shareholder issue (and I'm a shareholder).
We should not allow companies to do stuff on the cheap to save money so they can make higher profits.
In 2019, air pollution experts at King’s College London estimated that without further action it would take 193 years for London to meet government-set limits for nitrogen dioxide pollution (NO2). But last year the NO2 level in London fell to within the legal limit for the first time since UK regulations were introduced in 2010.
Khan had faced severe opposition to the 2023 expansion of Ulez to outer London boroughs – a key plank of his drive to improve the health of millions of Londons – not just from political opponents but also from Keir Starmer and the national Labour party.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/may/11/sadiq-khan-10-years-london-mayor-labour-environment
@Ipsos_in_the_UK
: % of adults in the north west of England favourable towards parties & leaders.
- 48% favourable towards Andy Burnham.
- 22% favourable towards the Labour Party
Feels significant. Reform / Greens top but for Burnham.
https://x.com/keiranpedley/status/2055235004729286890?s=20
And I think there's a fair amount of evidence that the creep can count, which explains his move today.
Also, hasn't he stabbed Starmer in the front rather than the back ?
It led to a Green councillor becoming leader of the council'
https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/2054935609865605498?s=20
@atrupar
·
11m
Q: Have you rejected the latest proposal from Iran?
TRUMP: I looked at it, and if I don't like the first sentence I just throw it away
https://x.com/atrupar/status/2055251454290456838
However I see this whole Burnham thing as yet another sign of how our politics is getting dumbed down and obsessed with personality. Labour are desperate to change leader not because of policy direction but because Starmer can't connect. Something about him turns people off.
That's the 'change' being made. Swapping him for somebody with a more appealing persona. Hoping that will turn the polls. I hope so too. But let's not go thinking there's a bunch of affordable policies out there just waiting to be unleashed once the dead hand of Starmer is prised off the tiller that will transform how the great British public feel about life.
I think Kemi has to realise she's not in charge of local government, the councillors have to make it work. She may have to need to get a few pointers for possibly after the next General Election.
This is the essence of the post WWII social democrat consensus. The evidence of UK voters' support for it is so overwhelming that I mention it too often because the plain reality is so often denied.
If they then bollox it up again then that's disappointing, but it doesn't negate that the opportunity existed.
My best guess, fwiw, is that Burnham will bollox it up, but where there's a majority of over 150, there's hope.
https://x.com/popconuk/status/2054872038787977322
Pollster, James Frayne: "Reform voters are perfectly affluent working class and lower middle class voters. These people are not voting for Reform in some terrible cry for help. They're voting on the basis of perceived policy failure."
Streeting allies say he will stand in any leadership race
Making him council leader would be a crime.
Just let it go ! There will be a coronation or a day of nominations where the vast majority go for Burnham and then the others pull out saying it’s time for unity and will get some cabinet jobs .
The data breach happened at Aintree Hospital in Liverpool, where some of the injured were treated, in the days after the July 2024 attack but has only emerged this week.
IIRC the data once analysed showed that Leave voters were more secure than Remain voters.
Again, largely due to age (older voters owning homes and voting Leave, younger tenants who don't voting Remain).
Far from being a cry for help, some people are so secure they have no qualms with rocking the boat . . . while those who are insecure can be more risk averse.
More seriously: Reform, like every political party, draws its support from every aspect of society. There are Refom voting Remainers and students and nurses and academics and bankers. And there are Green / LibDem voting Leavers and builders and pensioners and the like.
With that said... there is a fairly strong correlation between Reform strength and economic deprivation. According to the OCSI looking at the 2024 election results: "if the electorate were restricted to those struggling financially, Reform would lead with 39 per cent of the vote, followed by Labour and the Greens tied on 15 per cent" And three of Reform's five wins in 2024 came in seats that were in the bototm third of seats by economic deprivation.
But that isn't only where Reform is relatively strong, which I suspect is James Frayne's point.
You dancing?
You asking?
I'm asking
I'm dancing.
Amidst all the furore of the past couple of weeks, one thing has also been overlooked. The imminent prospect of the release of reams of internal correspondence relevant to Mandelson to satisfy the "Humble Address" requirements. That will potentially compromise many closely involved with Starmer's wing of the party, certainly Starmer and probably also Streeting unless there's nothing to add to the choice bits he had already released, and potentially many other Cabinet and other ministers other than those widely known to be hostile to Mandelson (Miliband, Rayner.) There will then be an overriding need for a new PM drawn from outside of the inner circle to come in with a fresh broom to clean out the stables.
Who else could stand up to Trump, without dividing Americans, and unite and reassure his own people back home?
It's a superb asset for this country.
Generations of US politicians in the South have successfully sold policies that seem unhelpful to their working class voters' interest. This is a classic discussion in US political science: why do poor Southerners vote Republican? One proposed answer is racial identity. Working class, white Southerners get to feel they're not bottom of the pile because they're given a group below them. (See Thomas Frank's "What’s the Matter with Kansas?", 2004, and Arlie Hochschild's "Strangers in Their Own Land", 2016.) Reform are perhaps offering the same and perhaps it will work for them. That is, Reform can replace the post-WWII social democrat consensus with libertarian, small state, pro-oligarch policies fueled by status threat, scaremongering around immigrants &/or Muslims.
What a disingenuous c***!
What kind of people vote for this creature?
It cannot be unseen.
You can only prevent this by not giving people access to the data in the first place - e.g. tying access to the data to scanning the patient barcode on their ID wrist strap, or to a specific workflow (consultant scheduled to operate on patient).
This is why a digital ID system/ID cards as generally conceived by the British state has to be resisted. The result would be to make all your data available to every government employee at all times.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GPJOvcvWgAAErA2?format=jpg&name=medium
The coming men of British politics.
https://youtu.be/k45uSUi8AI0
Like Johnson did to win GE19. Not all Leavers but enough to win a GE. Farage is looking to pull off the same trick a third time. It's getting harder as the Ref is now a decade ago. But it's also easier because with this new multiparty politics you only need about 30% to clean up.
The host cities in the US report that hotel bookings are down on normal for the time of the WC. Who could possibly foresee this?
Magnificent site. In the lee of the Cheviots, under one of the larger Bronze Age hill forts in Europe (thousands lived there). Two miles away there’s an Anglo Saxon/Norman church with links to the gunpowder plot and the grave of Josephine Butler - the great Victorian feminist
6000 years of deep deep deep British history in one tiny forgotten corner of our amazing island. Great little pub as well
We live in a remarkable place
My opinion about the future only goes to the next election and its subsequent 5 year term - about 2034. It is this: Reform will stand on ticket of social democracy (as I have too frequently defined and described) + GB nationalism + slowing down of net zero + deportation of illegals + limited inward migration + a modest degree of withdrawal from international treaties consistent with that. They will not return migrants to war zones but will loosen the concept of legitimate refugee. The young wives and children of Ukrainian soldiers living near me are safe. As are my doctor friends with ILR/dual nationality unless they rob a bank.
Unlike Trump Reform would not try to abolish the rule of law and separation of powers.
Reform will not form a government, though the policy I outline here gives them their best chance. Only the Greens might possibly stand on a platform moving away from social democracy towards a socialist dirigiste state. They won't win. The rest will stand on social democratic platforms, as they always do, with the usual variety of emphases. If by any chance one of them were likely to be competent I will vote for them.
Guardian
I do wonder if Burnham could lose here. It will an enormous blow to Labour at the worst possible time
When the new shopping arcade Liverpool ONE opened, Everton opened a new shop in the centre and called in Everton Two.
SO the address is
Everton TWO, Liverpool ONE
Small club
This is someone who has just taken a £5 million bribe. He's not going to do things by the book.