As it is being discussed, here is the Telegraph obituary:-
Sir Jeremy Hanley, formidable Conservative MP whose gaffes cut short his tenure as party chairman He cut the party’s overdraft by £4.5 million in a year, but was dubbed a ‘pantaloon’ by the grandee Lord McAlpine for his unguarded comments https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/d621d9fead4c7f29
There was a long interview with Stéphane Séjourné (EU Commissioner) on Euronews en français last week. He identified the EU's priorities as:
Energy independence by accelerating move to renewals. Deregulation and emphasis on free movement of capital. (This always ends well.) Latin and South America is the burning priority for strategic and commercial partnerships.
She says the EU should open all negotiation clusters with Ukraine before summer to progress the official accession talks.
“There is now new momentum and we must use it to advance Ukraine’s path into the EU. This means opening all negotiation clusters before summer. Getting Ukraine into the EU is not charity. It’s an investment into our own security. And our message to Putin is clear: Ukraine’s European future is more important to us than destruction of Ukraine is to Russia.”.
Getting Ukraine in the EU is still being framed in terms of Kyiv's domestic reforms. But the reality is it would create serious fissures in European agriculture.
On a related note far too little attention is being paid to the French presidential election next year. Le Pen's chances seem better than ever. It's another reason for Putin to try and hang on in the war on the basis that a Russophile France in the EU will be more favourable to him. Could Le Pen use opposition to Ukraine in the EU as a way to appeal to French farmers?
MLP can't run due to corruption shenanigans. Instead the fash are relying on this fucking idiot...
FPT - I think I'd prefer another Labour majority to either a Labour-Green coalition or a Labour-LD one.
Any of them would encourage Labour to pander to its nutter progressive side, and do really stupid shit.
I wouldn’t, I don’t want a Labour government hammering us with tax thanks. I would only prefer a Labour majority to a Labour Green or Labour SNP government which would be even worse
A Labour-LD coalition would let men with penises into women's toilets by 9am on day one, and would be on the very next flight out of Heathrow to group trombone Maroš Šefčovič before nightfall.
This would continue for months, all the while filled with the repulsive pomposity LDs display on a daily basis until the whole population of the UK felt physically sick and was begging for the atom bomb to end it all.
Is it just me or is the number of mainstream commentators using Bluesky rather than X increasing? I know I’d normally be shot down by Leon for this claim, but I believe he’s currently in the sin bin.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
First off, we won't be rejoining the EU any time soon but it would be unwise to rule it out in perpetuity.
As for the more substantive, the question Badenoch, Davey and to an extent Polanski all have to face as the election approaches will be on which side of the fence will they sit once the votes are counted and the shape of the next Commons is known.
The first assumption is the unwisest of all - that things remain as they are. That never happens in politics and to presume Reform and Labour will be the two largest parties in 2029 is to take a decent leap of faith. Badenoch's main hope will be that isn't the case and Reform (whether through its own contradictions or via Restore) implodes to the extent it becomes an old fashioned Labour vs Conservative stand off.
Being in third place in an election isn't a position with which the Conservatives are familiar nor, I suggest comfortable.
The positioning of the Conservatives vis-a-vis Reform is critical - equidistance only gets you so far. Badenoch will have to answer the awkward question as to whether her party would prefer to support a Reform minority over a Lab/LD minority. The risk is IF the election looks like being Reform vs Labour, the Conservative vote will be squeezed mercilessly. Longer term, the Conservatives would be the likely beneficiaries of a Reform Government implosion but not if they are seen as part of or supportive of that Government.
The Conservatives are in truth becoming like the Lib Dems - a party ofisolated strongholds surrounded by vast areas of irrelevance. The locals showed these pockets of Conservative strength to be resilient but for all the crowing among some on here about the Tory performance in London, the performance outside the capital was bleak in many areas.
Ed Davey faces a different dilemma - should he actively prop up a minority second term Labour administration? Some on here seem to think that a certainty - I'm much less convinced. Rather like the Conservatives, it suits the LDs NOT to be seen to be too close to either Reform or Labour at this time or indeed any time.
I can see no circumstances under which Polanski would work with Reform and as I've seen in Newham, co-operation with Labour isn't impossible if it keeps the wolf from the door.
The UK will need a government which means parties working with each other. The challenge for Reform is that nobody will work with them. The challenge for everyone else is that if Reform do quite well they will all have to get together.
Kemi might work with Farage even if no other GB party leader would in return for a senior post in a Farage cabinet in a hung Parliament if Reform won most seats. Though that looks less likely against Burnham as Labour leader with Labour then likely to win most seats
After the Lib Dem’s experience in 2015, I don’t see that.
I’d think she’d do a quasi confidence and supply, picking things to agree and disagree with on a case by case basis, hopefully getting some plus points from the electorate for restraining some of the batshittery (of which there would be no shortage) without getting covered in a lot of the general ordure flowing off the cooling rotating device (of which also there would be plenty).
Coalition means you get stuck with the bad bits for sure.
Clegg’s problem in 2010 was at least half of LD voters would have preferred him to go into government with Labour than the Conservatives. Kemi doesn’t have that problem as most Conservative voters would prefer a Reform led government to a Labour government.
Though yes she would likely do confidence and supply
Largely unnoticed or at least uncommented upon was the Lib Dems performance in the recent locals. Where they were strong - especially where they had a sitting MP they did well -in some cases spectacularly well (e.g. Richmond). If Lib Dem MPs are "harder to shift than shit of a shovel" they are likely to have a significant block of MPs after the next election. In 2010 the mess that economy was in meant that labour was not really an option but next time there is, I think, no way they can join a coalition with Reform or the Conservatives and the SNP's price of a referendum would be too high. So a Labour, Lib Dem, Green coalition looks a possible or even a probable outcome. - Health Warning - I have nil points in the prediction competition
Another unnoticed result in the locals - the Lib Dems won every seat in Watford as well as the mayoralty.
A fabulous day to be outside painting. Getting away from the world.
Least I was, until what looked very much like a B52 overhead, heading south out to sea (presumably from Fairford). It will be on station after dark if Trump decides to press the button on Tehran's energy grid.
There is just no escape from the Orange Menace.
I would have thought a man of your means would engage tradesmen. Hat and coat...
I took it to mean the artistic sort. Outside with an easel. Bit disappointed now.
So did I (hence my hat and coat comment) but apparently not.
A man after my own heart! Tradesmen wouldn't exist if they relied on my custom. I have an electric shower to replace this afternoon. Exactly the same one as is coming out. I hope it is simply plug and play, and I haven't forgotten the DIYer schoolboy error of not cutting the water and electricity supply before going in.
Mind you as the years catch up, the post event cost to the body of painting the house or digging the garden suggests a reconsideration may be necessary in a year or two.
I'm the opposite. Anything other than the very straightforward and physically undemanding I tend to get someone in. My dad and my brothers are more like you. They like to sort things themselves if at all possible.
I put the effort in to get A Levels and an engineering degree in order to avoid doing manual graft.
The idea of doing it in my spare time, when I can be otherwise sitting in the garden with a book (as I am now), is just crazy talk.
However, my wife does think I'm a lazy fecker.
A certain amount of manual graft is good for you I reckon. Physically and mentally.
Its kind of mad that young healthy people pay to use a gym and then also pay for someone to do physical tasks for us.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
Until and unless opinion changes on Freedom of Movement and the Single Currency, we're not joining or rejoining.
I see despite the catastrophic results for the Conservatives, they remain the administration on HCC albeit propped up by Reform (for now).
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
You're getting a bit overwrought there imo. I'm talking about a gradual process with democratic consent each step of the way, not another big bang referendum anytime soon or maybe at all. The process ends with a close, aligned relationship, the precise nature (and title) of which is very much tba.
With so much in flux you can't sensibly forecast any further than this. But the point is, if I'm right, the 'we' you refer to will be distilled down to hard core Brit Nats ideologically opposed to any pooling of sovereignty regardless of the practical benefits. That will not be a large enough constituency to derail the direction of travel.
A fabulous day to be outside painting. Getting away from the world.
Least I was, until what looked very much like a B52 overhead, heading south out to sea (presumably from Fairford). It will be on station after dark if Trump decides to press the button on Tehran's energy grid.
There is just no escape from the Orange Menace.
I would have thought a man of your means would engage tradesmen. Hat and coat...
I took it to mean the artistic sort. Outside with an easel. Bit disappointed now.
So did I (hence my hat and coat comment) but apparently not.
A man after my own heart! Tradesmen wouldn't exist if they relied on my custom. I have an electric shower to replace this afternoon. Exactly the same one as is coming out. I hope it is simply plug and play, and I haven't forgotten the DIYer schoolboy error of not cutting the water and electricity supply before going in.
Mind you as the years catch up, the post event cost to the body of painting the house or digging the garden suggests a reconsideration may be necessary in a year or two.
I'm the opposite. Anything other than the very straightforward and physically undemanding I tend to get someone in. My dad and my brothers are more like you. They like to sort things themselves if at all possible.
I put the effort in to get A Levels and an engineering degree in order to avoid doing manual graft.
The idea of doing it in my spare time, when I can be otherwise sitting in the garden with a book (as I am now), is just crazy talk.
However, my wife does think I'm a lazy fecker.
A certain amount of manual graft is good for you I reckon. Physically and mentally.
Its kind of mad that young healthy people pay to use a gym and then also pay for someone to do physical tasks for us.
It also gives you a considerable edge when supervising work that is beyond your basic abilities.
I can change taps and solder pipe - I wouldn’t fit a boiler (not gas trained for a start). But I know enough to know a bad job when I see one being done.
A fabulous day to be outside painting. Getting away from the world.
Least I was, until what looked very much like a B52 overhead, heading south out to sea (presumably from Fairford). It will be on station after dark if Trump decides to press the button on Tehran's energy grid.
There is just no escape from the Orange Menace.
I would have thought a man of your means would engage tradesmen. Hat and coat...
I took it to mean the artistic sort. Outside with an easel. Bit disappointed now.
So did I (hence my hat and coat comment) but apparently not.
A man after my own heart! Tradesmen wouldn't exist if they relied on my custom. I have an electric shower to replace this afternoon. Exactly the same one as is coming out. I hope it is simply plug and play, and I haven't forgotten the DIYer schoolboy error of not cutting the water and electricity supply before going in.
Mind you as the years catch up, the post event cost to the body of painting the house or digging the garden suggests a reconsideration may be necessary in a year or two.
I'm the opposite. Anything other than the very straightforward and physically undemanding I tend to get someone in. My dad and my brothers are more like you. They like to sort things themselves if at all possible.
I put the effort in to get A Levels and an engineering degree in order to avoid doing manual graft.
The idea of doing it in my spare time, when I can be otherwise sitting in the garden with a book (as I am now), is just crazy talk.
However, my wife does think I'm a lazy fecker.
A certain amount of manual graft is good for you I reckon. Physically and mentally.
Its kind of mad that young healthy people pay to use a gym and then also pay for someone to do physical tasks for us.
It also gives you a considerable edge when supervising work that is beyond your basic abilities.
I can change taps and solder pipe - I wouldn’t fit a boiler (not gas trained for a start). But I know enough to know a bad job when I see one being done.
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
Sue Gray, Sir Keir Starmer’s former Chief of Staff, is advising Andy Burnham on how to ‘transition to power’ if he topples the Prime Minister, sources have told The Mail on Sunday.
Anyway, my prediction for the great relegation battle. West Ham will beat Leeds, but Spurs will save themselves by securing a 1-1 draw with a streaky equaliser in the last 10. Noting here, Everton's recent propensity for conceding late goals, a propensity they share with Boro (sob ...)
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
The above is why I’ve previously suggested PB as a policy stress testing think tank for hire.
Give us a policy and we’ll tell the second, third and fourth order effects in minutes.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
And the demographics are not Brexit's friend.
You guys are so dumb.
As Stewart Lee said in his famous Brexit sketch 'people who understand data'.
Amid all the talk of freezing the price of groceries, I looked at what goes into the cost of a pint of milk.
Two things jump out...One: milk prices might as well be state-controlled, such is the psychological power of supermarket price wars. Two pints of semi-skimmed milk at Tesco? £1.20. Ocado? £1.20. Asda, Morrisons, Aldi? £1.20 In fact, two pints at Tesco have been £1.20 since 2023!
Two: when milk prices did increase, between 2020 and 2022, it was not because of soaring profits. The biggest contributors: farming costs, overheads, and, most significantly, labour!
“Supermarket pricing is a modern miracle. In 2001, the typical household spent £80.90 a week on food, adjusted for inflation, according to the ONS. By 2024, the latest year available, that bill was £70.50.”
Sue Gray, Sir Keir Starmer’s former Chief of Staff, is advising Andy Burnham on how to ‘transition to power’ if he topples the Prime Minister, sources have told The Mail on Sunday.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
And the demographics are not Brexit's friend.
You guys are so dumb.
As Stewart Lee said in his famous Brexit sketch 'people who understand data'.
No, you are just as prone to confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance as anyone else.
In fact, it's worse with you because you genuinely believe you're always right and your arrogance is justified.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
Until and unless opinion changes on Freedom of Movement and the Single Currency, we're not joining or rejoining.
I see despite the catastrophic results for the Conservatives, they remain the administration on HCC albeit propped up by Reform (for now).
I've never understood the single currency issue. You've got countries who have been members for over 20 years but show no sign of joining. Without a clear enforceable timeline it's meaningless as a criteria. Why does the EU continue to insist on it. More than that I found it strange that once the UK had been given opt outs other countries weren't allowed to join on the same terms.
Amazing that The BBC are only now discovering the nature of Israel. It's taken them 2 years to even hint at what everyone who knows the country knows what they have been doing to their neighbours for the last 60 odd years.
A fabulous day to be outside painting. Getting away from the world.
Least I was, until what looked very much like a B52 overhead, heading south out to sea (presumably from Fairford). It will be on station after dark if Trump decides to press the button on Tehran's energy grid.
There is just no escape from the Orange Menace.
I would have thought a man of your means would engage tradesmen. Hat and coat...
I took it to mean the artistic sort. Outside with an easel. Bit disappointed now.
So did I (hence my hat and coat comment) but apparently not.
A man after my own heart! Tradesmen wouldn't exist if they relied on my custom. I have an electric shower to replace this afternoon. Exactly the same one as is coming out. I hope it is simply plug and play, and I haven't forgotten the DIYer schoolboy error of not cutting the water and electricity supply before going in.
Mind you as the years catch up, the post event cost to the body of painting the house or digging the garden suggests a reconsideration may be necessary in a year or two.
I'm the opposite. Anything other than the very straightforward and physically undemanding I tend to get someone in. My dad and my brothers are more like you. They like to sort things themselves if at all possible.
I put the effort in to get A Levels and an engineering degree in order to avoid doing manual graft.
The idea of doing it in my spare time, when I can be otherwise sitting in the garden with a book (as I am now), is just crazy talk.
However, my wife does think I'm a lazy fecker.
A certain amount of manual graft is good for you I reckon. Physically and mentally.
Its kind of mad that young healthy people pay to use a gym and then also pay for someone to do physical tasks for us.
Another example of weird penny pinching by this government.
Funding for primary school sport in England is to be cut by Labour, including the abolition of a grant designed to cement the 2012 Olympic legacy, to the dismay of school leaders. The Department for Education (DfE) said that the £320m fund paid directly to primary schools each year through its PE and sports premium would be scrapped and replaced by a “sport partnerships network” worth £193m a year to cover primary and secondary schools.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
Until and unless opinion changes on Freedom of Movement and the Single Currency, we're not joining or rejoining.
I see despite the catastrophic results for the Conservatives, they remain the administration on HCC albeit propped up by Reform (for now).
I've never understood the single currency issue. You've got countries who have been members for over 20 years but show no sign of joining. Without a clear enforceable timeline it's meaningless as a criteria. Why does the EU continue to insist on it. More than that I found it strange that once the UK had been given opt outs other countries weren't allowed to join on the same terms.
The Brexiter concern is/was that a government might just accede to the Euro by simple Commons majority.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
If the polling question is tweaked slightly, to “two-way free movement”, support for it tends to increase notably
Amid all the talk of freezing the price of groceries, I looked at what goes into the cost of a pint of milk.
Two things jump out...One: milk prices might as well be state-controlled, such is the psychological power of supermarket price wars. Two pints of semi-skimmed milk at Tesco? £1.20. Ocado? £1.20. Asda, Morrisons, Aldi? £1.20 In fact, two pints at Tesco have been £1.20 since 2023!
Two: when milk prices did increase, between 2020 and 2022, it was not because of soaring profits. The biggest contributors: farming costs, overheads, and, most significantly, labour!
“Supermarket pricing is a modern miracle. In 2001, the typical household spent £80.90 a week on food, adjusted for inflation, according to the ONS. By 2024, the latest year available, that bill was £70.50.”
Remember the special negotiation centre Tesco built? Where a single supplier representative is brow beaten by a group of Tesco negotiators. In rooms designed using the aesthetic language of interrogation…
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
Until and unless opinion changes on Freedom of Movement and the Single Currency, we're not joining or rejoining.
I see despite the catastrophic results for the Conservatives, they remain the administration on HCC albeit propped up by Reform (for now).
I've never understood the single currency issue. You've got countries who have been members for over 20 years but show no sign of joining. Without a clear enforceable timeline it's meaningless as a criteria. Why does the EU continue to insist on it. More than that I found it strange that once the UK had been given opt outs other countries weren't allowed to join on the same terms.
The Brexiter concern is/was that a government might just accede to the Euro by simple Commons majority.
I'm thinking post Brexit really. I see your point but well, governments are elected to take decisions.
In short no-one outside the UK could force us to join the Euro against our wishes.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
Until and unless opinion changes on Freedom of Movement and the Single Currency, we're not joining or rejoining.
I see despite the catastrophic results for the Conservatives, they remain the administration on HCC albeit propped up by Reform (for now).
I've never understood the single currency issue. You've got countries who have been members for over 20 years but show no sign of joining. Without a clear enforceable timeline it's meaningless as a criteria. Why does the EU continue to insist on it. More than that I found it strange that once the UK had been given opt outs other countries weren't allowed to join on the same terms.
The Brexiter concern is/was that a government might just accede to the Euro by simple Commons majority.
I'm thinking post Brexit really. I see your point but well, governments are elected to take decisions.
In short no-one outside the UK could force us to join the Euro against our wishes.
For the first time in my entire life I'm on anti-histamines, I think due to very heavy hawthorn pollen (every hedge is hawthorn around here, and my area is full of preserved ancient field hedges), and my nearly-always-in-remission asthma has been seriously triggered.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
If the polling question is tweaked slightly, to “two-way free movement”, support for it tends to increase notably
The solution is obvious, we rejoin but have designated Brexit "theme parks" for diehard leavers, where they can pay extra for everything and spend their time in an endless queue being told they've taken back control.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
The above is why I’ve previously suggested PB as a policy stress testing think tank for hire.
Give us a policy and we’ll tell the second, third and fourth order effects in minutes.
Would make OGH rich, probably.
What about a teacher on 1265 hours per annum directed time for which they are paid? Yet expected to do hundreds of hundreds of extra hours which not only wouldn't be taxed, but, as now, aren't even paid. You have the danger of bringing down the goodwill on which the entire education sector relies. As well as a mass exodus as you make professions which actually think you should be paid for the hours you do even more attractive.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
If the polling question is tweaked slightly, to “two-way free movement”, support for it tends to increase notably
The solution is obvious, we rejoin but have designated Brexit "theme parks" for diehard leavers, where they can pay extra for everything and spend their time in an endless queue being told they've taken back control.
Much easier to stay out and have a designated EU theme park. Remainers can go there and feel great about Brussels.
Accidental Chinese intelligence asset Reid has resurfaced, on a topic that is gripping the nation (well, a tiny percentage of it). I wonder what the women-only spaces situation is on HM submarines?
Joani Reid MP @JoaniReid · 22 May The law is clear. Women-only spaces must mean women-only spaces.
John Swinney should stop hiding behind process and implement the EHRC guidance across Scotland’s public sector.
Women and girls should not have to wait for the SNP to find the courage to accept reality.
The last I heard it is quite well organised, and a man entering eg a women's dorm (what's the naval word?) is a formal disciplinary offence. AIUI the RN policy is "no nookie on board - go to a hotel when we are in port."
In the USN, it seems to be "grope in the rope store, and don't get caught".
It's an interesting comparison between European navies and the USN, where manly man's man Pantomine Pete wants to recreate the 1970s, or the 1950s, or the 1850s, or something. Women have been on USN ships for 30 years, so he might find it difficult.
Panto Pete does not like women in front line combat roles, including submarines, so it might be interesting.
Accidental Chinese intelligence asset Reid has resurfaced, on a topic that is gripping the nation (well, a tiny percentage of it). I wonder what the women-only spaces situation is on HM submarines?
Joani Reid MP @JoaniReid · 22 May The law is clear. Women-only spaces must mean women-only spaces.
John Swinney should stop hiding behind process and implement the EHRC guidance across Scotland’s public sector.
Women and girls should not have to wait for the SNP to find the courage to accept reality.
While retailers selling “new stuff” are struggling, the market for old items is booming. Average growth for UK antique dealers hit a very healthy 5.8pc in 2025 – numbers most purveyors of the brand new can only dream of reaching
Accidental Chinese intelligence asset Reid has resurfaced, on a topic that is gripping the nation (well, a tiny percentage of it). I wonder what the women-only spaces situation is on HM submarines?
Joani Reid MP @JoaniReid · 22 May The law is clear. Women-only spaces must mean women-only spaces.
John Swinney should stop hiding behind process and implement the EHRC guidance across Scotland’s public sector.
Women and girls should not have to wait for the SNP to find the courage to accept reality.
The last I heard it is quite well organised, and a man entering eg a women's dorm (what's the naval word?) is a formal disciplinary offence. AIUI the RN policy is "no nookie on board - go to a hotel when we are in port."
In the USN, it seems to be "grope in the rope store, and don't get caught".
It's an interesting comparison between European navies and the USN, where manly man's man Pantomine Pete wants to recreate the 1970s, or the 1950s, or the 1850s, or something. Women have been on USN ships for 30 years, so he might find it difficult.
Panto Pete does not like women in front line combat roles, including submarines, so it might be interesting.
Istr that hot bedding goes on in the nukes (one at a time I assume). I guess strict regulation applies.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
If the polling question is tweaked slightly, to “two-way free movement”, support for it tends to increase notably
The solution is obvious, we rejoin but have designated Brexit "theme parks" for diehard leavers, where they can pay extra for everything and spend their time in an endless queue being told they've taken back control.
Much easier to stay out and have a designated EU theme park. Remainers can go there and feel great about Brussels.
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
The above is why I’ve previously suggested PB as a policy stress testing think tank for hire.
Give us a policy and we’ll tell the second, third and fourth order effects in minutes.
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
They're quite annoying me with this bollocks at the moment. It always seems to be Zia Yusuf debasing himself with this stuff too. I thought his job was Home Affairs? Either he's going off he rails again and becoming a liability (which last time ended with his short-lived flounce), or he's the most loyal-lieutenant to Nigel ever, coming out with a massive shitpost every time Nigel looks shaky.
I have never had much time for Tice as a media performer either (seems a very nice man), and he was all kinds of shite on Peston, demanding an apology for being asked about the Plumber's Twitter account.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
If the polling question is tweaked slightly, to “two-way free movement”, support for it tends to increase notably
The solution is obvious, we rejoin but have designated Brexit "theme parks" for diehard leavers, where they can pay extra for everything and spend their time in an endless queue being told they've taken back control.
Much easier to stay out and have a designated EU theme park. Remainers can go there and feel great about Brussels.
They could be taken there.
In a bus...
Will there be a branch of Gail's?
Attached to the Waitrose, in the Ted Heath Memorial Mall.
I am fascinated by these lurid assertions of electoral fraud in a certain ward in a certain person's Constituency.
Now it can't be exactly as Talk Radio are reporting it so I wonder what we do know.
There are two candidates which were allegedly fraudulent. Really ? Well, in the abstract for both candidates someone would have had to have filled in Nomination Papers, fact. On the main form there would be the candidate's name, address and his electoral number on the current register (if they are on that register). There would then be the tick box as to how that candidate could lawfully seek election. Then there would have to be a proposer and a seconder. Finally someone has to sign that form, usually the agent or in default of an agent the person acting as the agent.
Next, in the abstract there would have to be the form when the nominee consented to being a candidate. This they have to sign in the presence of a credible witness or maybe two. Usually that would be the person acting as agent.
I am unclear as to what the assertion is being made. If the people did not exist then they couldn't be on the Electoral Roll and so couldn't have an Electoral Number so in turn they could not have passed vetting of the main nomination paper, fact. (Except for the business, property qualification)
So, they would have to be real people. The assertion might be that they knew nothing about their "nomination" in which case they could not have signed the consent to nomination. In that case the "agent" and all the witnesses have committed an offence. The proposer and seconder might have acted lawfully genuinely believing the nomination was proper and had the informed consent of the "candidate".
I still find this hard to believe. Another scenario is that the people were real and were persuaded to stand as paper candidates "Independents". It could be asserted there was nothing wrong with this and that is what will no doubt be asserted. However, if the candidates were not credible candidates and were described as "Independents" when they were not then the descriptions of themselves would be false and fall foul of the "Literal Democrats" description - they were candidates put in place to deceive fair minded electors. My guess is this is most likely to be the reality.
Anyway, if any of this is true and I hope it is not, then that is Electoral Fraud, Undue Election, one heck of a fine and disqualification from standing for election for 5 or 10 years. I am glad it didn't happen in my kitchen.
First off, we won't be rejoining the EU any time soon but it would be unwise to rule it out in perpetuity.
As for the more substantive, the question Badenoch, Davey and to an extent Polanski all have to face as the election approaches will be on which side of the fence will they sit once the votes are counted and the shape of the next Commons is known.
The first assumption is the unwisest of all - that things remain as they are. That never happens in politics and to presume Reform and Labour will be the two largest parties in 2029 is to take a decent leap of faith. Badenoch's main hope will be that isn't the case and Reform (whether through its own contradictions or via Restore) implodes to the extent it becomes an old fashioned Labour vs Conservative stand off.
Being in third place in an election isn't a position with which the Conservatives are familiar nor, I suggest comfortable.
The positioning of the Conservatives vis-a-vis Reform is critical - equidistance only gets you so far. Badenoch will have to answer the awkward question as to whether her party would prefer to support a Reform minority over a Lab/LD minority. The risk is IF the election looks like being Reform vs Labour, the Conservative vote will be squeezed mercilessly. Longer term, the Conservatives would be the likely beneficiaries of a Reform Government implosion but not if they are seen as part of or supportive of that Government.
The Conservatives are in truth becoming like the Lib Dems - a party ofisolated strongholds surrounded by vast areas of irrelevance. The locals showed these pockets of Conservative strength to be resilient but for all the crowing among some on here about the Tory performance in London, the performance outside the capital was bleak in many areas.
Ed Davey faces a different dilemma - should he actively prop up a minority second term Labour administration? Some on here seem to think that a certainty - I'm much less convinced. Rather like the Conservatives, it suits the LDs NOT to be seen to be too close to either Reform or Labour at this time or indeed any time.
I can see no circumstances under which Polanski would work with Reform and as I've seen in Newham, co-operation with Labour isn't impossible if it keeps the wolf from the door.
The UK will need a government which means parties working with each other. The challenge for Reform is that nobody will work with them. The challenge for everyone else is that if Reform do quite well they will all have to get together.
Kemi might work with Farage even if no other GB party leader would in return for a senior post in a Farage cabinet in a hung Parliament if Reform won most seats. Though that looks less likely against Burnham as Labour leader with Labour then likely to win most seats
After the Lib Dem’s experience in 2015, I don’t see that.
I’d think she’d do a quasi confidence and supply, picking things to agree and disagree with on a case by case basis, hopefully getting some plus points from the electorate for restraining some of the batshittery (of which there would be no shortage) without getting covered in a lot of the general ordure flowing off the cooling rotating device (of which also there would be plenty).
Coalition means you get stuck with the bad bits for sure.
Clegg’s problem in 2010 was at least half of LD voters would have preferred him to go into government with Labour than the Conservatives. Kemi doesn’t have that problem as most Conservative voters would prefer a Reform led government to a Labour government.
Though yes she would likely do confidence and supply
Largely unnoticed or at least uncommented upon was the Lib Dems performance in the recent locals. Where they were strong - especially where they had a sitting MP they did well -in some cases spectacularly well (e.g. Richmond). If Lib Dem MPs are "harder to shift than shit of a shovel" they are likely to have a significant block of MPs after the next election. In 2010 the mess that economy was in meant that labour was not really an option but next time there is, I think, no way they can join a coalition with Reform or the Conservatives and the SNP's price of a referendum would be too high. So a Labour, Lib Dem, Green coalition looks a possible or even a probable outcome. - Health Warning - I have nil points in the prediction competition
Another unnoticed result in the locals - the Lib Dems won every seat in Watford as well as the mayoralty.
They have huge history in Watford.
It's had a directly elected Mayor since 2002, and they have all been Lib Dems, including Dorothy Thornhill who had 4 terms.
Nice to see the Green bubble deflating, much like the inflatable Bozo in times past.
Unlike cult followers of Farage who dont care about the grift, the Jezza disciples that thought they had found a new messiah demand authenticity, and have found out their new god is Walter Titty rather than a younger Magic Grandpa. I think those Farage cult followers who do care that Nige is perhaps not their right wing saviour are the ones that have jumped to Ruper Lowe's party.
Amazing that The BBC are only now discovering the nature of Israel. It's taken them 2 years to even hint at what everyone who knows the country knows what they have been doing to their neighbours for the last 60 odd years.
All diplomatic relations should be severed until regime change
Amid all the talk of freezing the price of groceries, I looked at what goes into the cost of a pint of milk.
Two things jump out...One: milk prices might as well be state-controlled, such is the psychological power of supermarket price wars. Two pints of semi-skimmed milk at Tesco? £1.20. Ocado? £1.20. Asda, Morrisons, Aldi? £1.20 In fact, two pints at Tesco have been £1.20 since 2023!
Two: when milk prices did increase, between 2020 and 2022, it was not because of soaring profits. The biggest contributors: farming costs, overheads, and, most significantly, labour!
“Supermarket pricing is a modern miracle. In 2001, the typical household spent £80.90 a week on food, adjusted for inflation, according to the ONS. By 2024, the latest year available, that bill was £70.50.”
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
The above is why I’ve previously suggested PB as a policy stress testing think tank for hire.
Give us a policy and we’ll tell the second, third and fourth order effects in minutes.
Would make OGH rich, probably.
What about a teacher on 1265 hours per annum directed time for which they are paid? Yet expected to do hundreds of hundreds of extra hours which not only wouldn't be taxed, but, as now, aren't even paid. You have the danger of bringing down the goodwill on which the entire education sector relies. As well as a mass exodus as you make professions which actually think you should be paid for the hours you do even more attractive.
Yes the tax avoidance strategy of most workers is not getting paid very much. It's far cheaper and simpler than the convoluted, lawyer-led structures used by wealthy high earners.
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
For the first time in my entire life I'm on anti-histamines, I think due to very heavy hawthorn pollen (every hedge is hawthorn around here, and my area is full of preserved ancient field hedges), and my nearly-always-in-remission asthma has been seriously triggered.
I have bought the previously prescription-only Fexofenidine Hydrochloride to try this year. Not had to use it yet though.
Accidental Chinese intelligence asset Reid has resurfaced, on a topic that is gripping the nation (well, a tiny percentage of it). I wonder what the women-only spaces situation is on HM submarines?
Joani Reid MP @JoaniReid · 22 May The law is clear. Women-only spaces must mean women-only spaces.
John Swinney should stop hiding behind process and implement the EHRC guidance across Scotland’s public sector.
Women and girls should not have to wait for the SNP to find the courage to accept reality.
The last I heard it is quite well organised, and a man entering eg a women's dorm (what's the naval word?) is a formal disciplinary offence. AIUI the RN policy is "no nookie on board - go to a hotel when we are in port."
In the USN, it seems to be "grope in the rope store, and don't get caught".
It's an interesting comparison between European navies and the USN, where manly man's man Pantomine Pete wants to recreate the 1970s, or the 1950s, or the 1850s, or something. Women have been on USN ships for 30 years, so he might find it difficult.
Panto Pete does not like women in front line combat roles, including submarines, so it might be interesting.
Istr that hot bedding goes on in the nukes (one at a time I assume). I guess strict regulation applies.
I think it has moved forward a long way for the new subs Dreadnaughts and Aukus, with separate quarters and living / bathing facilities. But I do not know the details.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
I don't think points 1 and 3 are things that couldn't be ironed out. It is already the case with benefits that things get averaged out. Same as the most low brow suggestion of what if people charged a £1000 / hr for overtime, again that is pretty easy to combat.
But there are so many other major issues its not a serious policy, its an election stunt, that will be get kicked into the long grass in a few months.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
If the polling question is tweaked slightly, to “two-way free movement”, support for it tends to increase notably
The solution is obvious, we rejoin but have designated Brexit "theme parks" for diehard leavers, where they can pay extra for everything and spend their time in an endless queue being told they've taken back control.
Much easier to stay out and have a designated EU theme park. Remainers can go there and feel great about Brussels.
They could be taken there.
In a bus...
Sadly if it's 'in', we won't be getting our Brexit theme park, due to EU habitat laws protecting 'rare' jumping spiders. If we come out, and we scrap the inherited EU law, we may actually be able to build the remainiac theme park. So I rather think the argument decides itself.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
They don't care. It's pure signal. "We are on the side of grafters". They'll hope the details aren't particularly critiqued by the target audience.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
I doubt ;'Roger is Jewish. He may be from a Jewish background but he is entirely secular.
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
They don't care. It's pure signal. "We are on the side of grafters". They'll hope the details aren't particularly critiqued by the target audience.
It's not a Government-in-waiting policy. Like the migrant processing centres, it's a very oppositional 'we will never have to govern' policy.
Telegraph in a froth this morning over Burnham's possible plans for a levy on estates on death to fund social care.
Back to labelling it a death tax and saying more people will be hit by the levy.
So, a) how do they propose to fund social care otherwise?
and b) there is already a dementia tax of near 100% for those unlucky enough to need long term care such as dementia care in their final years. Every single penny bar £23K of inheritance can be taken by the state to fund care depending on your assets and how long you live.
Though Burnham has said he would scrap inheritance tax at the same time. I can’t see it getting though anyway unless he wins a majority as the LDs would likely block it in a hung parliament. Their southern LD voters with expensive homes wouldn’t accept it.
Of course if you only have at home care not residential care your home is not taken. We should use a Japanese style insurance system to fund social care
Yes, you are right about care at home. I meant if you need to be in a care home.
Boris had a fantastic plan to cap care costs even in care homes at £86k and fund it with a new social care levy paid via a 1.25% rise in national insurance. The hapless Truss scrapped it
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
I don't think points 1 and 3 are things that couldn't be ironed out. It is already the case with benefits that things get averaged out. Same as the most low brow suggestion of what if people charged a £1000 / hr for overtime, again that is pretty easy to combat.
But there are so many other major issues its not a serious policy, its an election stunt, that will be get kicked into the long grass in a few months.
It does illustrate though that Reform are still thinking in terms of election stunts rather than constructive policies which fit into a coherent economic strategy.
We've seen with Starmer's gang the difficulties for a government when it hasn't done any proper preparation.
Yet it seems that Farage doesn't want to learn from Starmer's mistakes but to imitate Trump's liking for gimmicks.
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
They don't care. It's pure signal. "We are on the side of grafters". They'll hope the details aren't particularly critiqued by the target audience.
It's not a Government-in-waiting policy. Like the migrant processing centres, it's a very oppositional 'we will never have to govern' policy.
I seem to remember Sarkozy proposed something similar to make work pay.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
They don't care. It's pure signal. "We are on the side of grafters". They'll hope the details aren't particularly critiqued by the target audience.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
I don't think points 1 and 3 are things that couldn't be ironed out. It is already the case with benefits that things get averaged out. Same as the most low brow suggestion of what if people charged a £1000 / hr for overtime, again that is pretty easy to combat.
But there are so many other major issues its not a serious policy, its an election stunt, that will be get kicked into the long grass in a few months.
I can't see any way around people conspiring with their employers to fudge their nominal wages and hours, short of government mandated clocking in machines. If I'm employing someone for £18/hr for an actual 36hrs, and reporting it as minimum wage for 36hrs plus a pile of overtime they will pay a lot less tax under this policy.
Lots of better ways to fix the tax system than this.
Btw, does 'remarkable reform progress' include a significant reduction in the level of corruption in Ukraine? As I understand it, Ukraine used to be amongst the few countries that could teach the Russians a thing or two about taking backhanders. Has something changed?
Not really. The Verkhovna Rada is completely paralysed when it comes to passing the enabling legislation that the EU (and IMF) are demanding. The legislation will be politically toxic and nobody wants to dip their hands in the blood.
Zelensky's polical party/Situationist performance art piece 'Servant of the People' has a notional majority. In reality, it's fractured into many different factions and is unwhippable. Especially since so many members are now under investigation by NABU, etc. that the normally efficient method of just giving them cash is unavailable. He generally has to rely on the votes of the pro-Russian groups (ex Party of the Regions types), obtained by threatening them with tax audits, etc.
As I said, the political landscape needs some sort of reset to go any futher.
Thanks Dura.
That is a welcome corrective to the notion that the Ukrainians are to a man and woman blameless innocents with a saint-like leader. That does not of course mean that anyone should wish them anything but well in their efforts to repel a brutal invader, nor should they be discouraged from joining the EU if they wish and it can be worked out.
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
They don't care. It's pure signal. "We are on the side of grafters". They'll hope the details aren't particularly critiqued by the target audience.
It's not a Government-in-waiting policy. Like the migrant processing centres, it's a very oppositional 'we will never have to govern' policy.
I seem to remember Sarkozy proposed something similar to make work pay.
Are you citing that as evidence that it's a stupid idea or as evidence that Farage thinks like a crook?
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
I don't think points 1 and 3 are things that couldn't be ironed out. It is already the case with benefits that things get averaged out. Same as the most low brow suggestion of what if people charged a £1000 / hr for overtime, again that is pretty easy to combat.
But there are so many other major issues its not a serious policy, its an election stunt, that will be get kicked into the long grass in a few months.
I can't see any way around people conspiring with their employers to fudge their nominal wages and hours, short of government mandated clocking in machines. If I'm employing someone for £18/hr for an actual 36hrs, and reporting it as minimum wage for 36hrs plus a pile of overtime they will pay a lot less tax under this policy.
Lots of better ways to fix the tax system than this.
The low hanging fruit for a Reform right wing is higher tax free threshold with reduced in work benefits, remove cliff edges at £60k and £100...and if you want to be really radical things like combining NI and IC. However, all of this requires some serious hard work and careful thinking to get right (there will be winner and losers however you do it).
A suspect somebody at Reform has looked and said loads of people in Makersfield work shifts / paid per hour type jobs, this is a way we can show loads of leg of your taxes are too high, here is a freebie.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
OT - I live in the only constituency this or last century not to benefit from having its MP as Prime Minister. La Truss didn't last long enough (even if she had remembered where her constituency was). I suspect enough locals will work out that PM Burnham will be good for the North West to give him victory.
Restore will surely be squeezed won't they? However, they will fight hard. The 'Vote Nigel to Safe Sir Keir' line seems potentially valuable for them. Having sat out the locals I am fascinated that they are standing here. Very risky but if they derail Farage they'll surely think it worth it. Reform of course have to win just about every by-election to keep their momentum up. They certainly have to win this one. The last thing they (or the Cons or the Greens) want is Starmer's removal
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
Not that Zionists are unanimous in their support for the current Israeli Government of course. It has probably done more to endanger Israel's future than even the most dedicated Iranian or Palestinian.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
The minor flaw in that argument is that it was a complete waste of time and effort.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
For the first time in my entire life I'm on anti-histamines, I think due to very heavy hawthorn pollen (every hedge is hawthorn around here, and my area is full of preserved ancient field hedges), and my nearly-always-in-remission asthma has been seriously triggered.
I have bought the previously prescription-only Fexofenidine Hydrochloride to try this year. Not had to use it yet though.
I used to suffer from it to the extent of avoiding the countryside altogether. It's largely worn off since I was 60 - always nice when you grow out of something unpleasant!
The trouble is that the Miliband brothers are a bit weird and really struggle with photographs of them with food.
That banana. God.
The other trouble is the 'change' they want to see is actually deeply damaging and won't help a single person. David Milliband is currently doing to our energy provision and by extension to our economy what he did to that bacon sandwich - agonisingly ripping it apart sinew by sinew.
I think we need a ban on the word 'change' in politics. 'Change' is a totally meaningless concept. People did not 'vote for change' - a 'change' could be death squads hunting down morris dancers. People didn't vote for that. Anyone who cannot articulate pithily what specific 'change' they feel people voted for and how they plan to deliver that specific 'change' should be treated with deep mistrust. It is especially concerning when they team this unknown 'change' with 'further and faster', which means not only are they asking for a blank cheque, they're also going to take that blank cheque and introduce radical and probably unwelcome change because 'this is what people wanted'.
1st para nonsense. 2nd para spot on.
I'm still trying to imagine David Milliband eating a bacon sandwich..😏
I vote that the Labour Leadership should be chosen by a bacon sandwich eating contest
Someone would argue that’s Islamophobia and anti-vegan
I am fascinated by these lurid assertions of electoral fraud in a certain ward in a certain person's Constituency.
Now it can't be exactly as Talk Radio are reporting it so I wonder what we do know.
There are two candidates which were allegedly fraudulent. Really ? Well, in the abstract for both candidates someone would have had to have filled in Nomination Papers, fact. On the main form there would be the candidate's name, address and his electoral number on the current register (if they are on that register). There would then be the tick box as to how that candidate could lawfully seek election. Then there would have to be a proposer and a seconder. Finally someone has to sign that form, usually the agent or in default of an agent the person acting as the agent.
Next, in the abstract there would have to be the form when the nominee consented to being a candidate. This they have to sign in the presence of a credible witness or maybe two. Usually that would be the person acting as agent.
I am unclear as to what the assertion is being made. If the people did not exist then they couldn't be on the Electoral Roll and so couldn't have an Electoral Number so in turn they could not have passed vetting of the main nomination paper, fact. (Except for the business, property qualification)
So, they would have to be real people. The assertion might be that they knew nothing about their "nomination" in which case they could not have signed the consent to nomination. In that case the "agent" and all the witnesses have committed an offence. The proposer and seconder might have acted lawfully genuinely believing the nomination was proper and had the informed consent of the "candidate".
I still find this hard to believe. Another scenario is that the people were real and were persuaded to stand as paper candidates "Independents". It could be asserted there was nothing wrong with this and that is what will no doubt be asserted. However, if the candidates were not credible candidates and were described as "Independents" when they were not then the descriptions of themselves would be false and fall foul of the "Literal Democrats" description - they were candidates put in place to deceive fair minded electors. My guess is this is most likely to be the reality.
Anyway, if any of this is true and I hope it is not, then that is Electoral Fraud, Undue Election, one heck of a fine and disqualification from standing for election for 5 or 10 years. I am glad it didn't happen in my kitchen.
What do we really know, in the abstract ?
I remember in the Eighties the Trots in North Lambeth would go round spotting boarded up flats (plenty) and go to the polling station pretending to be the elector registered at that address. Given this, it would be easy enough for three of more bad actors to work their way through Mr Cumbria's check list. The only contact with authority would be handing in their papers to the Town Hall where electoral services staff hard pressed during the election period are not going to query forms which, on the face of, it tick all the boxes.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Btw, does 'remarkable reform progress' include a significant reduction in the level of corruption in Ukraine? As I understand it, Ukraine used to be amongst the few countries that could teach the Russians a thing or two about taking backhanders. Has something changed?
Not really. The Verkhovna Rada is completely paralysed when it comes to passing the enabling legislation that the EU (and IMF) are demanding. The legislation will be politically toxic and nobody wants to dip their hands in the blood.
Zelensky's polical party/Situationist performance art piece 'Servant of the People' has a notional majority. In reality, it's fractured into many different factions and is unwhippable. Especially since so many members are now under investigation by NABU, etc. that the normally efficient method of just giving them cash is unavailable. He generally has to rely on the votes of the pro-Russian groups (ex Party of the Regions types), obtained by threatening them with tax audits, etc.
As I said, the political landscape needs some sort of reset to go any futher.
Thanks Dura.
That is a welcome corrective to the notion that the Ukrainians are to a man and woman blameless innocents with a saint-like leader. That does not of course mean that anyone should wish them anything but well in their efforts to repel a brutal invader, nor should they be discouraged from joining the EU if they wish and it can be worked out.
No need to be naive about any of this though.
Ironically, the Ukrainian media, whether in Russian or Ukraininan, has much less circumspection about airing these matters than the Anglophone media where the Ukrainians = Ewoks narrative has to prevail.
Opinion on Britain’s relationship with the European Union remains divided.
Just over a third (36%) say the UK should rejoin the EU. However, a larger proportion favour remaining outside the bloc in some form, whether through a closer relationship, maintaining the current arrangement or pursuing a more distant relationship.
Among alternative options, negotiating a closer relationship with the EU attracts the broadest level of acceptability across the public.
The poll also finds that voters believe constitutional or structural changes should often require a stronger democratic mandate. Half of respondents say re-joining the EU should only happen following a referendum.
Parliament is sovereign. We should rejoin on a manifesto commitment if we rejoin at all.
I very much regret we left, but leave we did. We, alongside France and Germany were in the driving seat. We rejoin at the back of the bus with Lichtenstein. Hardly seems worth the effort.
At least we won't have to queue at passport control before we get on the bus.
Britain rejoining the EU would be like Canada joining the US. Why would we want to do that?
There was a long interview with Stéphane Séjourné (EU Commissioner) on Euronews en français last week. He identified the EU's priorities as:
Energy independence by accelerating move to renewals. Deregulation and emphasis on free movement of capital. (This always ends well.) Latin and South America is the burning priority for strategic and commercial partnerships.
Ukraine and UK not mentioned.
They have just done a Trade Agreement with Mexico, and did the Mercosaur one recently. So it is I think all about "ability to operate around the USA" whilst the USA is in chaos setting fire to domestic fluff in its belly button. With the best will in the world, we are not on that scale.
And as a matter of politics, the sticking points wrt the USA and Ukraine have been considerably eased with Orban being defenestrated, and the funding for Ukraine having been released.
We aren't going anywhere, and are chasing more integration anyway via EU or other means - for example the UK is in the 9 nations who signed the Hamburg Declaration a couple of months ago to generate 100GW of new North Sea wind power cooperatively by 2050.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
I doubt ;'Roger is Jewish. He may be from a Jewish background but he is entirely secular.
Let's not re-run the whole ‘is Jewish an ethnic or religious label’ debate. And let's not call Jews the wrong sort of Jews simply because they disagree with other Jews. There is no Jewish hive mind.
Btw, does 'remarkable reform progress' include a significant reduction in the level of corruption in Ukraine? As I understand it, Ukraine used to be amongst the few countries that could teach the Russians a thing or two about taking backhanders. Has something changed?
Not really. The Verkhovna Rada is completely paralysed when it comes to passing the enabling legislation that the EU (and IMF) are demanding. The legislation will be politically toxic and nobody wants to dip their hands in the blood.
Zelensky's polical party/Situationist performance art piece 'Servant of the People' has a notional majority. In reality, it's fractured into many different factions and is unwhippable. Especially since so many members are now under investigation by NABU, etc. that the normally efficient method of just giving them cash is unavailable. He generally has to rely on the votes of the pro-Russian groups (ex Party of the Regions types), obtained by threatening them with tax audits, etc.
As I said, the political landscape needs some sort of reset to go any futher.
Thanks Dura.
That is a welcome corrective to the notion that the Ukrainians are to a man and woman blameless innocents with a saint-like leader. That does not of course mean that anyone should wish them anything but well in their efforts to repel a brutal invader, nor should they be discouraged from joining the EU if they wish and it can be worked out.
No need to be naive about any of this though.
Ironically, the Ukrainian media, whether in Russian or Ukraininan, has much less circumspection about airing these matters than the Anglophone media where the Ukrainians = Ewoks narrative has to prevail.
The trouble is that the Miliband brothers are a bit weird and really struggle with photographs of them with food.
That banana. God.
The other trouble is the 'change' they want to see is actually deeply damaging and won't help a single person. David Milliband is currently doing to our energy provision and by extension to our economy what he did to that bacon sandwich - agonisingly ripping it apart sinew by sinew.
I think we need a ban on the word 'change' in politics. 'Change' is a totally meaningless concept. People did not 'vote for change' - a 'change' could be death squads hunting down morris dancers. People didn't vote for that. Anyone who cannot articulate pithily what specific 'change' they feel people voted for and how they plan to deliver that specific 'change' should be treated with deep mistrust. It is especially concerning when they team this unknown 'change' with 'further and faster', which means not only are they asking for a blank cheque, they're also going to take that blank cheque and introduce radical and probably unwelcome change because 'this is what people wanted'.
1st para nonsense. 2nd para spot on.
I'm still trying to imagine David Milliband eating a bacon sandwich..😏
I vote that the Labour Leadership should be chosen by a bacon sandwich eating contest
Someone would argue that’s Islamophobia and anti-vegan
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Like many words the exact meaning is a matter of dispute. But since you used it, it seemed reasonable to point to sites that disagreed with your assertion. If you merely meant "most Jews have an interest in Israel" you might be right. As perhaps the most secular of Jews here, I'm horrified by the atrocities of Netanyahu, and feel more strongly than I do about things in, say, Armenia, though for all I know they may be worse. You'd struggle to call me a Zionist, though.
Comments
Sir Jeremy Hanley, formidable Conservative MP whose gaffes cut short his tenure as party chairman
He cut the party’s overdraft by £4.5 million in a year, but was dubbed a ‘pantaloon’ by the grandee Lord McAlpine for his unguarded comments
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/d621d9fead4c7f29
Gift link so no paywall. Long but anecdote-heavy.
This would continue for months, all the while filled with the repulsive pomposity LDs display on a daily basis until the whole population of the UK felt physically sick and was begging for the atom bomb to end it all.
No thanks.
Not mine.
Economist nerds the country over would be besides themselves with excitement.
Probably never be fully reversed either.
Its kind of mad that young healthy people pay to use a gym and then also pay for someone to do physical tasks for us.
Until and unless opinion changes on Freedom of Movement and the Single Currency, we're not joining or rejoining.
I see despite the catastrophic results for the Conservatives, they remain the administration on HCC albeit propped up by Reform (for now).
With so much in flux you can't sensibly forecast any further than this. But the point is, if I'm right, the 'we' you refer to will be distilled down to hard core Brit Nats ideologically opposed to any pooling of sovereignty regardless of the practical benefits. That will not be a large enough constituency to derail the direction of travel.
I can change taps and solder pipe - I wouldn’t fit a boiler (not gas trained for a start). But I know enough to know a bad job when I see one being done.
I can change taps and solder pipe - I wouldn’t fit a boiler (not gas trained for a start). But I know enough to know a bad job when I see one being done.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
Sue Gray, Sir Keir Starmer’s former Chief of Staff, is advising Andy Burnham on how to ‘transition to power’ if he topples the Prime Minister, sources have told The Mail on Sunday.
Give us a policy and we’ll tell the second, third and fourth order effects in minutes.
Would make OGH rich, probably.
Two things jump out...One: milk prices might as well be state-controlled, such is the psychological power of supermarket price wars. Two pints of semi-skimmed milk at Tesco? £1.20. Ocado? £1.20. Asda, Morrisons, Aldi? £1.20 In fact, two pints at Tesco have been £1.20 since 2023!
Two: when milk prices did increase, between 2020 and 2022, it was not because of soaring profits. The biggest contributors: farming costs, overheads, and, most significantly, labour!
“Supermarket pricing is a modern miracle. In 2001, the typical household spent £80.90 a week on food, adjusted for inflation, according to the ONS. By 2024, the latest year available, that bill was £70.50.”
https://x.com/TomHCalver/status/2058495810665390578?s=20
In fact, it's worse with you because you genuinely believe you're always right and your arrogance is justified.
Chortle.
Betting PostF1: Exciting new opportunity to lose money.
Backed Norris each way at 7. He looked very good in the sprint and if rain does affect things I think he could be in good shape then too. https://morrisf1.blogspot.com/2026/05/canada-2026-pre-race.html
https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
Funding for primary school sport in England is to be cut by Labour, including the abolition of a grant designed to cement the 2012 Olympic legacy, to the dismay of school leaders. The Department for Education (DfE) said that the £320m fund paid directly to primary schools each year through its PE and sports premium would be scrapped and replaced by a “sport partnerships network” worth £193m a year to cover primary and secondary schools.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/may/22/primary-schools-lose-out-as-labour-slashes-sport-funding
Ref 27% (+2)
Lab 20% (+1)
Con 18% (-1)
Grn 14% (-3)
LD 12% (-2)
Others 8% (+1)
https://x.com/Ipsos_in_the_UK/status/2058518602936995958
Remember the special negotiation centre Tesco built? Where a single supplier representative is brow beaten by a group of Tesco negotiators. In rooms designed using the aesthetic language of interrogation…
In short no-one outside the UK could force us to join the Euro against our wishes.
See the whole Brown/Lisbon treaty farce.
How are others doing with pollen, hay fever etc?
For the first time in my entire life I'm on anti-histamines, I think due to very heavy hawthorn pollen (every hedge is hawthorn around here, and my area is full of preserved ancient field hedges), and my nearly-always-in-remission asthma has been seriously triggered.
Yet expected to do hundreds of hundreds of extra hours which not only wouldn't be taxed, but, as now, aren't even paid.
You have the danger of bringing down the goodwill on which the entire education sector relies.
As well as a mass exodus as you make professions which actually think you should be paid for the hours you do even more attractive.
They could be taken there.
In a bus...
In the USN, it seems to be "grope in the rope store, and don't get caught".
It's an interesting comparison between European navies and the USN, where manly man's man Pantomine Pete wants to recreate the 1970s, or the 1950s, or the 1850s, or something. Women have been on USN ships for 30 years, so he might find it difficult.
Panto Pete does not like women in front line combat roles, including submarines, so it might be interesting.
No idea, if the terminology is different on a sub because I'm not a pasty faced drug addict who stinks of WD40 and jizz.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/gen-z-antiques-dealers/
I feel like all that growth might have been down one PB poster......
I have never had much time for Tice as a media performer either (seems a very nice man), and he was all kinds of shite on Peston, demanding an apology for being asked about the Plumber's Twitter account.
Calm down lads.
Now it can't be exactly as Talk Radio are reporting it so I wonder what we do know.
There are two candidates which were allegedly fraudulent. Really ? Well, in the abstract for both candidates someone would have had to have filled in Nomination Papers, fact. On the main form there would be the candidate's name, address and his electoral number on the current register (if they are on that register). There would then be the tick box as to how that candidate could lawfully seek election. Then there would have to be a proposer and a seconder. Finally someone has to sign that form, usually the agent or in default of an agent the person acting as the agent.
Next, in the abstract there would have to be the form when the nominee consented to being a candidate. This they have to sign in the presence of a credible witness or maybe two. Usually that would be the person acting as agent.
I am unclear as to what the assertion is being made. If the people did not exist then they couldn't be on the Electoral Roll and so couldn't have an Electoral Number so in turn they could not have passed vetting of the main nomination paper, fact. (Except for the business, property qualification)
So, they would have to be real people. The assertion might be that they knew nothing about their "nomination" in which case they could not have signed the consent to nomination. In that case the "agent" and all the witnesses have committed an offence. The proposer and seconder might have acted lawfully genuinely believing the nomination was proper and had the informed consent of the "candidate".
I still find this hard to believe. Another scenario is that the people were real and were persuaded to stand as paper candidates "Independents". It could be asserted there was nothing wrong with this and that is what will no doubt be asserted. However, if the candidates were not credible candidates and were described as "Independents" when they were not then the descriptions of themselves would be false and fall foul of the "Literal Democrats" description - they were candidates put in place to deceive fair minded electors. My guess is this is most likely to be the reality.
Anyway, if any of this is true and I hope it is not, then that is Electoral Fraud, Undue Election, one heck of a fine and disqualification from standing for election for 5 or 10 years. I am glad it didn't happen in my kitchen.
What do we really know, in the abstract ?
It's had a directly elected Mayor since 2002, and they have all been Lib Dems, including Dorothy Thornhill who had 4 terms.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
But there are so many other major issues its not a serious policy, its an election stunt, that will be get kicked into the long grass in a few months.
It’s the women’s fane first. Bout 500 in so far. Men start at 3.30
We've seen with Starmer's gang the difficulties for a government when it hasn't done any proper preparation.
Yet it seems that Farage doesn't want to learn from Starmer's mistakes but to imitate Trump's liking for gimmicks.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
I do, so does Roger.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
Lots of better ways to fix the tax system than this.
That is a welcome corrective to the notion that the Ukrainians are to a man and woman blameless innocents with a saint-like leader. That does not of course mean that anyone should wish them anything but well in their efforts to repel a brutal invader, nor should they be discouraged from joining the EU if they wish and it can be worked out.
No need to be naive about any of this though.
A suspect somebody at Reform has looked and said loads of people in Makersfield work shifts / paid per hour type jobs, this is a way we can show loads of leg of your taxes are too high, here is a freebie.
Restore will surely be squeezed won't they? However, they will fight hard. The 'Vote Nigel to Safe Sir Keir' line seems potentially valuable for them. Having sat out the locals I am fascinated that they are standing here. Very risky but if they derail Farage they'll surely think it worth it.
Reform of course have to win just about every by-election to keep their momentum up. They certainly have to win this one. The last thing they (or the Cons or the Greens) want is Starmer's removal
https://www.jpr.org.uk/insights/what-exactly-jewish-majority-view-israel
for the nuanced state of Jewish opinion in the UK and the similarly diverse opinion in the US:
https://www.inss.org.il/social_media/jfna-survey-finds-just-37-of-jewish-americans-identify-as-zionists/
Given this, it would be easy enough for three of more bad actors to work their way through Mr Cumbria's check list. The only contact with authority would be handing in their papers to the Town Hall where electoral services staff hard pressed during the election period are not going to query forms which, on the face of, it tick all the boxes.
Freedom of action to collaborate as it makes sense is far more logical than going all in on one relationship