The pale white blokes who complain about there being too many pale white blokes elect another pale white bloke.
They may not but Labour do far better with female voters than male so I don't think it's the "gotcha" moment you want it to be.
I can guarantee that if Labour had chosen a black female leader you would be the first deriding it as "woke" gesture politics.
The "gotcha" isnt the one you think it is, its the blatant hypocrisy of Labour lecturing everyone else for something the dont do themselves.
As for a black female leader I'd quite happily vote for Kemi if it wasnt for the untrustworthy shits behing her.
A black female leader - look like the Tories live Labour values more than Labour
400 Labour MPs are looking for someone who can win in 2029/8. This easily trumps all other considerations SFAICS. No woman comes to mind who most of the public would think 'winner of the millions of centre ground voters'. If one did, we would in the last few weeks hear a lot about them. The very obvious fact that the gallant 400 have quietly decided that Rayner is not that person is significant. The 186 women Labour MPs acting collegiately would be an overwhelming force. But they have decided that no female candidate is currently suitable. I think they are right to conclude this, sadly.
Labour has exposed the absolute desperate failing with gender / colour / reliious related shortlisting and indeed left wing shortlisting
Freedom of choice for ALL is key
Quality of Choice is more important.
I would not touch Kemi Badenoch in the same way I would not touch Diane Abbott with a political bargepole, not du to colour, gender, looks , faith . I would not touch either because they are dangerous extremists whose policies i simply cannot agree with or endorse.
I could voote for Shabana Mahmood , Lisa Nandy who are women and of mixed race and I could vote for Penny Mordaunt who is a woman, bt the question has to be ability and policy first second third fourth fifth to infinity.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If we don't decarbonise the grid we run out vERY QUICKLY and for however long it does last WE PAY EXTORIONATE SUMS.
The Carbon / Oil / Coal / Gas freaks sit like King Canute on the shore of complete and utter disaster for the Climate, The Planet and any hope beyond 2100 (if not appreciably sooner)
Typical public sector slackers - my Head of Department has decided to close our research labs on Wed and Thurs because of the 'extreme' heat.
We have gone a bit soft in this country.
That'll be the temperature.
Depending on where you are, Fri might be worse.
The modelling has picked up that there will be a slight E/NE breeze off the North Sea and this is set to knock a few degrees off the maximum temperatures on Weds and Thurs for all except the south coast and perhaps the Severn valley. Yesterday's storm will also knock the maximums a bit (but not the humidity, which is why the red warning will stay).
There will also be a slower progression, so Friday may become the hottest day in the east.
40C looks rather less likely, but the June record will still go.
Just a thought -The Labour Party won 33.7% of the votes cast at the 2024 General election (That is 66.3% did NOT vote Labour) - 600,000 less actual votes than Jeremy Corbyn got in 2019. I think sometimes they need to be reminded of this.
And a MoreinCommon poll last night for Preston had a Burnham led Labour receiving a bounce but still only getting 27%, 1% ahead of Reform on 26% and with the Conservatives up to 23%
NEW: Police Scotland say they had “further questions” for Nicola Sturgeon after her no comment interview during her arrest. 🔺Senior cop says her written statement only answered “some points”. 🔺Sturgeon said she fully cooperated. Police say “people’s definition… is subjective”.
Typical public sector slackers - my Head of Department has decided to close our research labs on Wed and Thurs because of the 'extreme' heat.
We have gone a bit soft in this country.
That'll be the temperature.
Depending on where you are, Fri might be worse.
The modelling has picked up that there will be a slight E/NE breeze off the North Sea and this is set to knock a few degrees off the maximum temperatures on Weds and Thurs for all except the south coast and perhaps the Severn valley. Yesterday's storm will also knock the maximums a bit (but not the humidity, which is why the red warning will stay).
There will also be a slower progression, so Friday may become the hottest day in the east.
40C looks rather less likely, but the June record will still go.
Yes UKV is much less bullish about over 40.
Edit - I actually think the extremes that prompted the red are now unlikely.
NEW: Police Scotland say they had “further questions” for Nicola Sturgeon after her no comment interview during her arrest. 🔺Senior cop says her written statement only answered “some points”. 🔺Sturgeon said she fully cooperated. Police say “people’s definition… is subjective”.
Just a thought -The Labour Party won 33.7% of the votes cast at the 2024 General election (That is 66.3% did NOT vote Labour) - 600,000 less actual votes than Jeremy Corbyn got in 2019. I think sometimes they need to be reminded of this.
People with Zero Self Awareness
Make that 2,109,000 actual votes less than in 2017
But they are totally blinded to facts due to their apoplectic rage that Corbyn was still leader in 2017 despite all their best efforts to remove him.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
I see the hindsighters are chiming in with their hindsight.
In an all my years covering politics I have never met anyone so lacking in interest in the skills a leader needs - the ability to tell a story; to listen to colleagues; to woo, persuade & chivvy. Keir Starmer isn’t just uninterested in these requirements of the job. He is dismissive & contemptuous of them. @AndrewMarr9 sums this up in the @NewStatesman rather more memorably than I could …
All evaluation of the past - like how the PMship of Starmer is to be assessed - is hindsight. There is nothing wrong with it. Robinson and Marr are, sadly, right.
As an example of Starmer's regime, is it possible to identify a single genuine courageous hard choice he has made and stuck with WRT the electorate and/or his MPs?
Yeah, but I have more respect for those who were highlighting the cowardice and fickleness live as it happened rather than those who were deferring to the office of pm in hushed tones. Some of the latter were even applauding the appointment of Mandelson and fawning over Trump as master strokes.
"Are you really saying to people, you just need to wait for this speech, and then you'll discover that Keir Starmer's got it after all?" @bbcnickrobinsonasks Business Secretary Peter Kyle about the public's faith in the PM following Labour's losses in the elections. https://x.com/BBCr4today/status/2053754461378482271
On topic, one of the things we somehow have to get back to is having Great Officers with plausible Prime Ministerial batons in their knapsack. People who are obviously loyal to the PM, but are clearly capable of taking over if something... unfortunate... were to happen.
That's not Reeves, for all she has got a lot of flack for broadly doing the right things. It's not Cooper, either. I'm not sure who it is.
To think, Denis Healey was a Normandy Beachmaster. THAT'S what you need in the back pocket of your Chancellor.
Of course Lady Astor set an example to everybody with her wartime courage and heroism from her St James' mansion and huge Buckinghamshire country estate.
(Though in fairness wartime economy meant that she somehow made do with only 26 servants in the latter ...)
Just a thought -The Labour Party won 33.7% of the votes cast at the 2024 General election (That is 66.3% did NOT vote Labour) - 600,000 less actual votes than Jeremy Corbyn got in 2019. I think sometimes they need to be reminded of this.
The game of general elections is fought on two sets of rules: The rules over which parliament has power to fix how it operates in broad scope - ie 650 seats without gerrymandering and FPTP in which all can stand and all can vote. Secondly the rules decided by the pool of voters and their collective 'wisdom of crowds.' No establishment can control this. That pool of voters is like a jury. You can tell them, persuade the, cajole them but they will do what they like. So you are never comparing like with like. Corbyn lost, deservedly, and Starmer won, deservedly. (And has been ousted, deservedly!)
Was Starmer popular or just best placed to get rid of the Tories in the minds of the 9.7m who voted for him?
Two things jump out about Carns. One is his innate understanding of working-class ambition – both its power and its precariousness. I can’t think of anyone on the Labour benches more insistent about the need to address the disintegration of ordinary aspiration as social mobility collapses. Born in Aberdeen and raised on a council estate by a single mother, he is instinctively an aspirational conservative. He claims that he only stopped voting Tory following the austerity cuts to youth services.
Second, he grasps more than any other Labour politician the existential dangers facing Britain as it prevaricates over defence spending.
Just what Labour needs, a lifelong Tory voter who jumped to Labour as the best chance to become an MP. It's that kind of apolitical opportunism that the country is crying out for, despite already having had decades of it.
Perhaps the Tories should think about ditching Kemi in favour of an 'instinctive big state socialist'.
Aren't we continually told that the public sector is underfunded and unable to complete all the work which needs doing.
Whether that is local government, repairing the roads, NHS, HMRC, plods and courts and almost anything else that can be mentioned.
Surely then if five days work can be completed in four days then the consequence should be extra work is done on the fifth day.
Or is it the case that this 'do five days work in only four days so lets reduce the hours but not the pay' only applies to some office based middle and senior managers.
4 day weeks are the compromise that allows councils in some areas to actually recruit.
Mrs Eek works a 4 day week force her to work 5 days and she would retire and there wouldn’t be anyone to replace her (there is a continual job advert no one is willing to do it for the pay offered).
Two things jump out about Carns. One is his innate understanding of working-class ambition – both its power and its precariousness. I can’t think of anyone on the Labour benches more insistent about the need to address the disintegration of ordinary aspiration as social mobility collapses. Born in Aberdeen and raised on a council estate by a single mother, he is instinctively an aspirational conservative. He claims that he only stopped voting Tory following the austerity cuts to youth services.
Second, he grasps more than any other Labour politician the existential dangers facing Britain as it prevaricates over defence spending.
Just what Labour needs, a lifelong Tory voter who jumped to Labour as the best chance to become an MP. It's that kind of apolitical opportunism that the country is crying out for, despite already having had decades of it.
Perhaps the Tories should think about ditching Kemi in favour of an 'instinctive big state socialist'.
Burnham is a socialist, so Kemi offers a Thatcherite alternative
Just a thought -The Labour Party won 33.7% of the votes cast at the 2024 General election (That is 66.3% did NOT vote Labour) - 600,000 less actual votes than Jeremy Corbyn got in 2019. I think sometimes they need to be reminded of this.
Even in percentage terms, they only got 1.5% more than Corbyn in 2019. And a lot less than he got in 2017.
Just a thought -The Labour Party won 33.7% of the votes cast at the 2024 General election (That is 66.3% did NOT vote Labour) - 600,000 less actual votes than Jeremy Corbyn got in 2019. I think sometimes they need to be reminded of this.
Even in percentage terms, they only got 1.5% more than Corbyn in 2019. And a lot less than he got in 2017.
The main thing that Labour 2024 had over Labour in 2017/19 was that fewer people felt motivated to vote against them. And that's just as important in FPTP as having lots of people wanting to vote for you.
The pale white blokes who complain about there being too many pale white blokes elect another pale white bloke.
They may not but Labour do far better with female voters than male so I don't think it's the "gotcha" moment you want it to be.
I can guarantee that if Labour had chosen a black female leader you would be the first deriding it as "woke" gesture politics.
The "gotcha" isnt the one you think it is, its the blatant hypocrisy of Labour lecturing everyone else for something the dont do themselves.
As for a black female leader I'd quite happily vote for Kemi if it wasnt for the untrustworthy shits behing her.
A black female leader - look like the Tories live Labour values more than Labour
400 Labour MPs are looking for someone who can win in 2029/8. This easily trumps all other considerations SFAICS. No woman comes to mind who most of the public would think 'winner of the millions of centre ground voters'. If one did, we would in the last few weeks hear a lot about them. The very obvious fact that the gallant 400 have quietly decided that Rayner is not that person is significant. The 186 women Labour MPs acting collegiately would be an overwhelming force. But they have decided that no female candidate is currently suitable. I think they are right to conclude this, sadly.
With 400 MPs, there must be some amongst the latest intake who have impressed. I don't follow closely enough to be aware of them, but there must be some. (Men or women, to be clear.)
Two things jump out about Carns. One is his innate understanding of working-class ambition – both its power and its precariousness. I can’t think of anyone on the Labour benches more insistent about the need to address the disintegration of ordinary aspiration as social mobility collapses. Born in Aberdeen and raised on a council estate by a single mother, he is instinctively an aspirational conservative. He claims that he only stopped voting Tory following the austerity cuts to youth services.
Second, he grasps more than any other Labour politician the existential dangers facing Britain as it prevaricates over defence spending.
Just what Labour needs, a lifelong Tory voter who jumped to Labour as the best chance to become an MP. It's that kind of apolitical opportunism that the country is crying out for, despite already having had decades of it.
Perhaps the Tories should think about ditching Kemi in favour of an 'instinctive big state socialist'.
Burnham is a socialist, so Kemi offers a Thatcherite alternative
Pro Trump Pro Israel Pro Private Utilities Anti EU Anti Green Energy Former Tory Minister Defence Spending slasher Truss accolyte
Is not exactly on trend with anything right now is it?
Two things jump out about Carns. One is his innate understanding of working-class ambition – both its power and its precariousness. I can’t think of anyone on the Labour benches more insistent about the need to address the disintegration of ordinary aspiration as social mobility collapses. Born in Aberdeen and raised on a council estate by a single mother, he is instinctively an aspirational conservative. He claims that he only stopped voting Tory following the austerity cuts to youth services.
Second, he grasps more than any other Labour politician the existential dangers facing Britain as it prevaricates over defence spending.
...Thirdly, he doesn't know what to do about the existential dangers, other than throw money we haven't got at solutions that may be obsolete implemented by a MoD that doesn't work.
But he looks good in a beret, mind. Look, here is a picture of him in a pub. With a pint. Yay.
His current role is his current summit I'd suggest
Aren't we continually told that the public sector is underfunded and unable to complete all the work which needs doing.
Whether that is local government, repairing the roads, NHS, HMRC, plods and courts and almost anything else that can be mentioned.
Surely then if five days work can be completed in four days then the consequence should be extra work is done on the fifth day.
Or is it the case that this 'do five days work in only four days so lets reduce the hours but not the pay' only applies to some office based middle and senior managers.
4 day weeks are the compromise that allows councils in some areas to actually recruit.
Mrs Eek works a 4 day week force her to work 5 days and she would retire and there wouldn’t be anyone to replace her (there is a continual job advert no one is willing to do it for the pay offered).
Taylor pointed out that expecting productivity gains, if the benefit is not shared with the workforce, is stupid.
In the 19th century.
Simply expecting people to do more work for the same pay, because they can work more efficiently? Good luck.
So you need to balance savings with “spending” some of it on the workforce.
Unless you really like strikes and replacing people who leave.
This is shameful from every single Labour MP, pissing about like this on the day the first Labour PM in 14 years stands down. Totally lacking class. Could’ve waited a day for such nonsense. I can see my MP on there and I’m embarrassed.
I'm highly amused this morning by the great sucking sound as newspapers find they suddenly may not have a 3-4 month succession process to use to try and create chaos in the Government, in order to complain about it.
The misleading framing of possible reforms to Council Tax are interesting. The Standard: "Londoners face £1,000 property tax rise." (Fact check: most Londoners will benefit, especially those who have not seen their house prices spiral so much since 1991). Also Telegraph: "Whoever the next chancellor is, they are coming for your home."
Those type of papers (ie nearly all of them) will be framing Council Tax as a Wealth Tax. Is there any limit to the black hole in the heads of readers of most of our newspapers?
My immediate thought is that if he is in, Burnham needs to do things quickly. A revaluation of Council Tax may possible and implemented in a year or two. I'm not sure about a proprty value tax (unfortunately).
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
Just a thought -The Labour Party won 33.7% of the votes cast at the 2024 General election (That is 66.3% did NOT vote Labour) - 600,000 less actual votes than Jeremy Corbyn got in 2019. I think sometimes they need to be reminded of this.
And a MoreinCommon poll last night for Preston had a Burnham led Labour receiving a bounce but still only getting 27%, 1% ahead of Reform on 26% and with the Conservatives up to 23%
Its possible for Labour to get fewer MPs than Corbyn did in 2019 but still have most MPs.
NEW: Police Scotland say they had “further questions” for Nicola Sturgeon after her no comment interview during her arrest. 🔺Senior cop says her written statement only answered “some points”. 🔺Sturgeon said she fully cooperated. Police say “people’s definition… is subjective”.
Its classic. Red warning in advance and our Uni has made decisions. As soon as they do the forecast moderates...
It is the Met Office who do the warnings not BBC's forecaster who iirc are Dutch.
I'm not blaming anyone - I just find it amusing that the actual forecasts (e.g. UKV) have moderated today compared to what it looked like being). You see this with other kinds of weather warning - a warning is something that might happen, its not guaranteed. Snow lovers get really wound up by warnings of snow that don't materialise...
Aren't we continually told that the public sector is underfunded and unable to complete all the work which needs doing.
Whether that is local government, repairing the roads, NHS, HMRC, plods and courts and almost anything else that can be mentioned.
Surely then if five days work can be completed in four days then the consequence should be extra work is done on the fifth day.
Or is it the case that this 'do five days work in only four days so lets reduce the hours but not the pay' only applies to some office based middle and senior managers.
4 day weeks are the compromise that allows councils in some areas to actually recruit.
Mrs Eek works a 4 day week force her to work 5 days and she would retire and there wouldn’t be anyone to replace her (there is a continual job advert no one is willing to do it for the pay offered).
I'm a big supporter of flexible working.
That flexibility has to benefit both sides though for it to work effectively.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
Sigh.
The problem is not energy efficiency improvements. These are virtually automatic, year on year, as the manufacturers compete on these.
The primary competition on A/C systems in in efficiency, quietness. In that order.
The issue I am talking about is the regulations making it very, very difficult (verging on impossible) to have A/C in new builds.
These regulations do not (and never have) consider the efficiency of the systems.
So you have huge numbers of properties where you don’t have A/C and, very often can’t have A/C. It’s very hard to retrofit for flats.
We are a few degrees away from temperatures that will start killing vulnerable people.
And before someone says hyperbole, such temperature spikes have killed (large numbers) in France, quite recently.
This is shameful from every single Labour MP, pissing about like this on the day the first Labour PM in 14 years stands down. Totally lacking class. Could’ve waited a day for such nonsense. I can see my MP on there and I’m embarrassed.
TBF that's a standard photo for a by-election win. But might have been tactful to delay for a day.
There has been fun* on Twitter about this Tesla crash into a house:
Car is on autopilot Driver hits throttle (presumably instead of brake) Car smashes into house at 73mph Cops tell media it was on "autopilot" which the media reports Tesla release data confirming car had AP engaged and the throttle engaged at 100%
Utter fury from the cult. Liars! Blood on their hands! It wasn't the car! IT WASN'T THE CAR! How dare they attack Full Self-Driving!
But nobody said it was. Autopilot was engaged as reported. I think there are two teeny problems for Tesla, and neither of them relate to the actual crash: 1. Product names overlap and are misleading. At first we had cultists confusing Autopilot and FSD. Then we had senior execs including Elon doing the same. 2. Tesla don't believe in PR. So nobody for the media to speak to about the crash. No company statements. No fact sheets. Nothing. But supposedly the media are to blame for not understanding the difference between Tesla products which the VP responsible for the product and the CEO also confuse in their response.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
Sigh.
The problem is not energy efficiency improvements. These are virtually automatic, year on year, as the manufacturers compete on these.
The primary competition on A/C systems in in efficiency, quietness. In that order.
The issue I am talking about is the regulations making it very, very difficult (verging on impossible) to have A/C in new builds.
These regulations do not (and never have) consider the efficiency of the systems.
So you have huge numbers of properties where you don’t have A/C and, very often can’t have A/C. It’s very hard to retrofit for flats.
We are a few degrees away from temperatures that will start killing vulnerable people.
And before someone says hyperbole, such temperature spikes have killed (large numbers) in France, quite recently.
Its ok though, we've saved them from dying in the cold of winter...
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
That strikes me as a very silly question. I do not understand why some people (who probably do not include you) suddenly stop thinking when it comes to energy supply.
Why would you want to be inefficient? Why would you want to build twice as much power capacity, and distribution capacity, of whatever sort, than you need? Why would you want 2 or 3x as many solar farms, or windmills, or mini-nuclear?
Water is just the same - what is the point of spending resources on making water safe and pure, when all Bufton-Tufton does is waste it on watering his garden when he can do rainwater harvesting for next to nothing. And then when it is suggested that he be a little more responsible, all that happens are Trump-style toddler tantrums. That's why I like regulated markets and price signals for scarce resources.
(I'm not aware of anyone who is practically stopping you installing A/C. I have it installed, and it is running now using about 1KW of my solar supply to keep the downstairs at a comfortable 23C, after I used cross-flow ventilation to keep it cool overnight.)
Ove rthe last week I have been swatting some of the "Ed Milliband is BANNING UNDERFLOOR HEATING" bollocks. It's astonishing how rabbit-holed ("mushroomed" may be a better word) some people have become on some of our more conspiracy-minded news platforms.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
Sigh.
The problem is not energy efficiency improvements. These are virtually automatic, year on year, as the manufacturers compete on these.
The primary competition on A/C systems in in efficiency, quietness. In that order.
The issue I am talking about is the regulations making it very, very difficult (verging on impossible) to have A/C in new builds.
These regulations do not (and never have) consider the efficiency of the systems.
So you have huge numbers of properties where you don’t have A/C and, very often can’t have A/C. It’s very hard to retrofit for flats.
We are a few degrees away from temperatures that will start killing vulnerable people.
And before someone says hyperbole, such temperature spikes have killed (large numbers) in France, quite recently.
Why not change the regs, you can have a/c if you have solar panels. Might be difficult for flats though.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
I'm not totally sure how this is done in Britain but an a/c unit is a heat pump which presumably can do heating as well, and in many cases it'll do the heating more efficiently than the thing you'd be using if you hadn't bought it. It'll tend to be used more when it's sunny, which is a good match for solar, so even if you're using more power for cooling than you saved on heating it may be a net saving.
That's in addition to not being sweaty and uncomfortable and smelling bad and possibly dying unnecessarily.
This is shameful from every single Labour MP, pissing about like this on the day the first Labour PM in 14 years stands down. Totally lacking class. Could’ve waited a day for such nonsense. I can see my MP on there and I’m embarrassed.
TBF that's a standard photo for a by-election win. But might have been tactful to delay for a day.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
AIUI, the noisy, rattling power hogs nowadays are the AI farms or whatever they're called.
The pale white blokes who complain about there being too many pale white blokes elect another pale white bloke.
They may not but Labour do far better with female voters than male so I don't think it's the "gotcha" moment you want it to be.
I can guarantee that if Labour had chosen a black female leader you would be the first deriding it as "woke" gesture politics.
The "gotcha" isnt the one you think it is, its the blatant hypocrisy of Labour lecturing everyone else for something the dont do themselves.
As for a black female leader I'd quite happily vote for Kemi if it wasnt for the untrustworthy shits behing her.
A black female leader - look like the Tories live Labour values more than Labour
400 Labour MPs are looking for someone who can win in 2029/8. This easily trumps all other considerations SFAICS. No woman comes to mind who most of the public would think 'winner of the millions of centre ground voters'. If one did, we would in the last few weeks hear a lot about them. The very obvious fact that the gallant 400 have quietly decided that Rayner is not that person is significant. The 186 women Labour MPs acting collegiately would be an overwhelming force. But they have decided that no female candidate is currently suitable. I think they are right to conclude this, sadly.
Alanbrooke is clearly rooting for Long Bailey, Reeves, or Powell (a Deputy Leader so forgettable I had to look her up)...
Its classic. Red warning in advance and our Uni has made decisions. As soon as they do the forecast moderates...
It is the Met Office who do the warnings not BBC's forecaster who iirc are Dutch.
I'm not blaming anyone - I just find it amusing that the actual forecasts (e.g. UKV) have moderated today compared to what it looked like being). You see this with other kinds of weather warning - a warning is something that might happen, its not guaranteed. Snow lovers get really wound up by warnings of snow that don't materialise...
As soon as they issued the red I knew it: jinxed.
Not that I'm actually there to experience it all. I'm in a very fresh Cappadocia today. Full of selfie-stick wielding couples in their late 20s.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
I'm not totally sure how this is done in Britain but an a/c unit is a heat pump which presumably can do heating as well, and in many cases it'll do the heating more efficiently than the thing you'd be using if you hadn't bought it. It'll tend to be used more when it's sunny, which is a good match for solar, so even if you're using more power for cooling than you saved on heating it may be a net saving.
That's in addition to not being sweaty and uncomfortable and smelling bad and possibly dying unnecessarily.
A heat pump doesn't use electrical energy to heat things. It uses it too pump a fluid around. The fluid due to thermodynamics carries heat energy. The amount depends on the temp difference. So heat pumps can in theory be up to 400% efficient.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
Sigh.
The problem is not energy efficiency improvements. These are virtually automatic, year on year, as the manufacturers compete on these.
The primary competition on A/C systems in in efficiency, quietness. In that order.
The issue I am talking about is the regulations making it very, very difficult (verging on impossible) to have A/C in new builds.
These regulations do not (and never have) consider the efficiency of the systems.
So you have huge numbers of properties where you don’t have A/C and, very often can’t have A/C. It’s very hard to retrofit for flats.
We are a few degrees away from temperatures that will start killing vulnerable people.
And before someone says hyperbole, such temperature spikes have killed (large numbers) in France, quite recently.
Why not change the regs, you can have a/c if you have solar panels. Might be difficult for flats though.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
I'm not totally sure how this is done in Britain but an a/c unit is a heat pump which presumably can do heating as well, and in many cases it'll do the heating more efficiently than the thing you'd be using if you hadn't bought it. It'll tend to be used more when it's sunny, which is a good match for solar, so even if you're using more power for cooling than you saved on heating it may be a net saving.
That's in addition to not being sweaty and uncomfortable and smelling bad and possibly dying unnecessarily.
In China where according to national regulation you have to wait until November 15 before getting any central heating, people just switch their a/c to the heat setting instead. It does work, if a bit pricey.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
I'm not totally sure how this is done in Britain but an a/c unit is a heat pump which presumably can do heating as well, and in many cases it'll do the heating more efficiently than the thing you'd be using if you hadn't bought it. It'll tend to be used more when it's sunny, which is a good match for solar, so even if you're using more power for cooling than you saved on heating it may be a net saving.
That's in addition to not being sweaty and uncomfortable and smelling bad and possibly dying unnecessarily.
I'm not against AC, malmesbury is just using it to derail the point about increasing energy efficiency.in general. I just made the point that AC will require additional power, so making everything more efficient more important.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
That strikes me as a very silly question. I do not understand why some people (who probably do not include you) suddenly stop thinking when it comes to energy supply.
Why would you want to be inefficient? Why would you want to build twice as much power capacity, and distribution capacity, of whatever sort, than you need? Why would you want 2 or 3x as many solar farms, or windmills, or mini-nuclear?
Water is just the same - what is the point of spending resources on making water safe and pure, when all Bufton-Tufton does is waste it on watering his garden when he can do rainwater harvesting for next to nothing. And then when it is suggested that he be a little more responsible, all that happens are Trump-style toddler tantrums. That's why I like regulated markets and price signals for scarce resources.
(I'm not aware of anyone who is practically stopping you installing A/C. I have it installed, and it is running now using about 1KW of my solar supply to keep the downstairs at a comfortable 23C, after I used cross-flow ventilation to keep it cool overnight.)
Ove rthe last week I have been swatting some of the "Ed Milliband is BANNING UNDERFLOOR HEATING" bollocks. It's astonishing how rabbit-holed ("mushroomed" may be a better word) some people have become on some of our more conspiracy-minded news platforms.
Regulations for new build (particularly flats) demands “natural ventilation” if at all possible.
This results in more complex designs which are less space efficient; to get the multiple aspect ventilation required.
Because the way the rules on insulation are written, many modern properties become heat traps.
Natural ventilation begins to stop working about 25c
Ironically, you get VAT off installing air source heat pumps in existing properties.
So one part of government is trying to stop A/C. The other is trying to encourage it.
So I have air conditioning. People living in new built flats can’t.
Keir, thank you for all our cooperation, your support, and the joint decisions that have helped make our Europe and our protection of life stronger.
The United Kingdom has been, is, and will remain among the world’s leaders. Here in Ukraine, we deeply value Britain, and every meeting and every conversation we have had has always been filled with real substance.
Thank you for always being in touch, always engaged, and always striving to do what is needed and what will truly help.
I wish the United Kingdom and all British people every success as well as realisation of your national goals. We have confidence in Britain.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
That strikes me as a very silly question. I do not understand why some people (who probably do not include you) suddenly stop thinking when it comes to energy supply.
Why would you want to be inefficient? Why would you want to build twice as much power capacity, and distribution capacity, of whatever sort, than you need? Why would you want 2 or 3x as many solar farms, or windmills, or mini-nuclear?
Water is just the same - what is the point of spending resources on making water safe and pure, when all Bufton-Tufton does is waste it on watering his garden when he can do rainwater harvesting for next to nothing. And then when it is suggested that he be a little more responsible, all that happens are Trump-style toddler tantrums. That's why I like regulated markets and price signals for scarce resources.
(I'm not aware of anyone who is practically stopping you installing A/C. I have it installed, and it is running now using about 1KW of my solar supply to keep the downstairs at a comfortable 23C, after I used cross-flow ventilation to keep it cool overnight.)
Ove rthe last week I have been swatting some of the "Ed Milliband is BANNING UNDERFLOOR HEATING" bollocks. It's astonishing how rabbit-holed ("mushroomed" may be a better word) some people have become on some of our more conspiracy-minded news platforms.
Regulations for new build (particularly flats) demands “natural ventilation” if at all possible.
This results in more complex designs which are less space efficient; to get the multiple aspect ventilation required.
Because the way the rules on insulation are written, many modern properties become heat traps.
Natural ventilation begins to stop working about 25c
Ironically, you get VAT off installing air source heat pumps in existing properties.
So one part of government is trying to stop A/C. The other is trying to encourage it.
So I have air conditioning. People living in new built flats can’t.
Aren't there already a number of heat sources systems on the market than can reverse and extract heat from the house effectively cooling it in warm weatherr?
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
I'm not totally sure how this is done in Britain but an a/c unit is a heat pump which presumably can do heating as well, and in many cases it'll do the heating more efficiently than the thing you'd be using if you hadn't bought it. It'll tend to be used more when it's sunny, which is a good match for solar, so even if you're using more power for cooling than you saved on heating it may be a net saving.
That's in addition to not being sweaty and uncomfortable and smelling bad and possibly dying unnecessarily.
I'm not against AC, malmesbury is just using it to derail the point about increasing energy efficiency.in general. I just made the point that AC will require additional power, so making everything more efficient more important.
Although AC demand peaks along side solar generation, so the "additional power" isn't that hard.
Keir, thank you for all our cooperation, your support, and the joint decisions that have helped make our Europe and our protection of life stronger.
The United Kingdom has been, is, and will remain among the world’s leaders. Here in Ukraine, we deeply value Britain, and every meeting and every conversation we have had has always been filled with real substance.
Thank you for always being in touch, always engaged, and always striving to do what is needed and what will truly help.
I wish the United Kingdom and all British people every success as well as realisation of your national goals. We have confidence in Britain.
Its a really important decision because it will do so much to shape his government. He also needs a Chancellor who can survive the buffeting that is coming from both the markets and from inside the party as so many have to learn yet again that austerity was not a choice but a necessity.
I would be very concerned if it was Ed Miliband. He has some relevant experience but the policies he has promoted in Environment through both net zero and in the North Sea have been hugely damaging and anti-growth.
Louise Haigh, in my opinion, has neither the skills or experience for it but its not unusual for the person who has run a successful campaign for the leader to get it. I suspect she is undervalued.
Streeting has shown he is quick and robust in the way he has faced down the most powerful unions in the country at Health. His problem, and the reason he is not a candidate, is that he has very little of a following in the party (like Reeves in that respect) so he doesn't add any great strength to the ticket. He's probably rightly favourite though and I suspect the markets would like it.
I don't think that Yvette Cooper has the stamina for it given her health problems.
Mahmood would be a possibility, especially if Burnham wanted another woman in the role.
Do you think it would be appropriate to have someone who has pleaded guilty to fraud serve as chancellor? Might that not send the wrong message?
No I don't but I'm not the one making the decision here.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
I'm not totally sure how this is done in Britain but an a/c unit is a heat pump which presumably can do heating as well, and in many cases it'll do the heating more efficiently than the thing you'd be using if you hadn't bought it. It'll tend to be used more when it's sunny, which is a good match for solar, so even if you're using more power for cooling than you saved on heating it may be a net saving.
That's in addition to not being sweaty and uncomfortable and smelling bad and possibly dying unnecessarily.
I'm not against AC, malmesbury is just using it to derail the point about increasing energy efficiency.in general. I just made the point that AC will require additional power, so making everything more efficient more important.
Although AC demand peaks along side solar generation, so the "additional power" isn't that hard.
That's a fair point, though banning it until we're a lot further along the road to decarbonisation does have the advantage of keeping people uncomfortably hot and motivated to keep supporting the process rather than becoming complacent and opposing it because they haven't got sweaty underwear.
I'm highly amused this morning by the great sucking sound as newspapers find they suddenly may not have a 3-4 month succession process to use to try and create chaos in the Government, in order to complain about it.
The misleading framing of possible reforms to Council Tax are interesting. The Standard: "Londoners face £1,000 property tax rise." (Fact check: most Londoners will benefit, especially those who have not seen their house prices spiral so much since 1991). Also Telegraph: "Whoever the next chancellor is, they are coming for your home."
Those type of papers (ie nearly all of them) will be framing Council Tax as a Wealth Tax. Is there any limit to the black hole in the heads of readers of most of our newspapers?
My immediate thought is that if he is in, Burnham needs to do things quickly. A revaluation of Council Tax may possible and implemented in a year or two. I'm not sure about a proprty value tax (unfortunately).
Slight problem is a wealth tax is popular with left wing voters. Heck most people will be happy to pay more than others in their friends because well their house is worth more and they are doing better than them.
My council / wealth tax is now £6000 - that’s going to be a humble brag for a lot of people
As for a council tax revaluation - not a chance in hell on less than 4 years, the people don’t exist and they are already fire fighting on multiple other changes including just dealing with a pointless merger into HMRC
Keir, thank you for all our cooperation, your support, and the joint decisions that have helped make our Europe and our protection of life stronger.
The United Kingdom has been, is, and will remain among the world’s leaders. Here in Ukraine, we deeply value Britain, and every meeting and every conversation we have had has always been filled with real substance.
Thank you for always being in touch, always engaged, and always striving to do what is needed and what will truly help.
I wish the United Kingdom and all British people every success as well as realisation of your national goals. We have confidence in Britain.
NEW: Police Scotland say they had “further questions” for Nicola Sturgeon after her no comment interview during her arrest. 🔺Senior cop says her written statement only answered “some points”. 🔺Sturgeon said she fully cooperated. Police say “people’s definition… is subjective”.
Well then arrest her again and ask her. What is this trying to achieve?
Both sides are being evasive. No-one is under an obligation to incriminate themselves and everyone is allowed to remain silent. OTOH Sturgeon has not, as she claims, been exonerated. All we know is that the Scottish prosecutors don't believe there is evidence sufficient to pass the threshold. It is perfectly possible of course that her silence has contributed to the lack of sufficient evidence.
(In general those most experienced in the wrong end of police investigations don't comment at all. Though it doesn't always help. The trio given whole life orders last week for a murder in prison, all experienced in the ways of police and courts, offered nothing at all in interview, and didn't give evidence at their trial.)
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
I'm not totally sure how this is done in Britain but an a/c unit is a heat pump which presumably can do heating as well, and in many cases it'll do the heating more efficiently than the thing you'd be using if you hadn't bought it. It'll tend to be used more when it's sunny, which is a good match for solar, so even if you're using more power for cooling than you saved on heating it may be a net saving.
That's in addition to not being sweaty and uncomfortable and smelling bad and possibly dying unnecessarily.
I'm not against AC, malmesbury is just using it to derail the point about increasing energy efficiency.in general. I just made the point that AC will require additional power, so making everything more efficient more important.
Although AC demand peaks along side solar generation, so the "additional power" isn't that hard.
That's a fair point, though banning it until we're a lot further along the road to decarbonisation does have the advantage of keeping people uncomfortably hot and motivated to keep supporting the process rather than becoming complacent and opposing it because they haven't got sweaty underwear.
Government now allows subsidies for heat pumps that heat and cool:
There's a potential criminal investigation in this. It's not just the court of public opinion. He's right to be worried.
The striking thing about this is the sheer, unsophisticated stupidity of Big Nige. Nobody's going to turn down 5 mil but there must have been a better way to obscure both the origin and destination. Charitable Foundation or something. The Nigel Farage Foundation for Kids Who Don't Read Good.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
That strikes me as a very silly question. I do not understand why some people (who probably do not include you) suddenly stop thinking when it comes to energy supply.
Why would you want to be inefficient? Why would you want to build twice as much power capacity, and distribution capacity, of whatever sort, than you need? Why would you want 2 or 3x as many solar farms, or windmills, or mini-nuclear?
Water is just the same - what is the point of spending resources on making water safe and pure, when all Bufton-Tufton does is waste it on watering his garden when he can do rainwater harvesting for next to nothing. And then when it is suggested that he be a little more responsible, all that happens are Trump-style toddler tantrums. That's why I like regulated markets and price signals for scarce resources.
(I'm not aware of anyone who is practically stopping you installing A/C. I have it installed, and it is running now using about 1KW of my solar supply to keep the downstairs at a comfortable 23C, after I used cross-flow ventilation to keep it cool overnight.)
Ove rthe last week I have been swatting some of the "Ed Milliband is BANNING UNDERFLOOR HEATING" bollocks. It's astonishing how rabbit-holed ("mushroomed" may be a better word) some people have become on some of our more conspiracy-minded news platforms.
Regulations for new build (particularly flats) demands “natural ventilation” if at all possible.
This results in more complex designs which are less space efficient; to get the multiple aspect ventilation required.
Because the way the rules on insulation are written, many modern properties become heat traps.
Natural ventilation begins to stop working about 25c
Ironically, you get VAT off installing air source heat pumps in existing properties.
So one part of government is trying to stop A/C. The other is trying to encourage it.
So I have air conditioning. People living in new built flats can’t.
Aren't there already a number of heat sources systems on the market than can reverse and extract heat from the house effectively cooling it in warm weatherr?
Peter.
Yes, but you don't get a grant to install them and nor are they required for new builds, because the government thinks A/C is bad eco-vibes.
Running in reverse is (theoretically) less efficient than heating - the Coefficient of Performance will be roughly 3 instead of 4 (ie you take out 3 times more heat energy than the electric energy put in) - but it still works well.
If we are going to declare a climate emergency, we'd better prepare for it.
Edit: Looks like some grants _are_ available re: Ydoethur's link. No standards for new builds though?
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
That sounds like a very good reason for not choosing him. If Burnham has to "buy off" the Millibands, etc, then he might as well not bother trying to be PM.
I think Ed M should be left where he is. He's doing a good job, generally speaking, and shuffling people about every five minutes was one of the reasons the Conservatives made such a bog of being in government over the past years.
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
I'm not totally sure how this is done in Britain but an a/c unit is a heat pump which presumably can do heating as well, and in many cases it'll do the heating more efficiently than the thing you'd be using if you hadn't bought it. It'll tend to be used more when it's sunny, which is a good match for solar, so even if you're using more power for cooling than you saved on heating it may be a net saving.
That's in addition to not being sweaty and uncomfortable and smelling bad and possibly dying unnecessarily.
I'm not against AC, malmesbury is just using it to derail the point about increasing energy efficiency.in general. I just made the point that AC will require additional power, so making everything more efficient more important.
Although AC demand peaks along side solar generation, so the "additional power" isn't that hard.
That's a fair point, though banning it until we're a lot further along the road to decarbonisation does have the advantage of keeping people uncomfortably hot and motivated to keep supporting the process rather than becoming complacent and opposing it because they haven't got sweaty underwear.
Government now allows subsidies for heat pumps that heat and cool:
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
I'm not totally sure how this is done in Britain but an a/c unit is a heat pump which presumably can do heating as well, and in many cases it'll do the heating more efficiently than the thing you'd be using if you hadn't bought it. It'll tend to be used more when it's sunny, which is a good match for solar, so even if you're using more power for cooling than you saved on heating it may be a net saving.
That's in addition to not being sweaty and uncomfortable and smelling bad and possibly dying unnecessarily.
And when you combine them with modern insulation, it takes very little power to get the temperature down or up.
I don’t even have radiators in my loft conversion. They aren’t required.
NEW: Police Scotland say they had “further questions” for Nicola Sturgeon after her no comment interview during her arrest. 🔺Senior cop says her written statement only answered “some points”. 🔺Sturgeon said she fully cooperated. Police say “people’s definition… is subjective”.
Well then arrest her again and ask her. What is this trying to achieve?
What is this trying to achieve?
Keep it going as long as possible and do as much damage to your opponents as you can. It's the game.
They Must resign! We need an Equity, there's more to learn, no smoke without fire, the public have a right to know!
As people pointed out in the last few threads, who where are all the Labour MP's calling for a general Election when Tory PM's stood down.
SNP internal checks and balances were between abysmal and no existent.
Too many people let rivalries and petty jealousies get in the way so whistleblowers were dismissed as trouble makers. Learn the lesson of 9/11 or Trump/Russia, it doesn't matter if the information is weak even tainted, you still follow it up.
Ironically what we did in Scottish Government to check complaiints about Alex Salmond we abjectly failed to do about Party finances.
A lot of people who should have done betetr are keeping their heads down because to admit failings is a political death sentence.
We are a "Cause" organisation, so like Churches and Charities we tend to assume that everyone is dedicated to the cause and so welcome people to the fold too easily and aren't suspicious of their motives, which makes the lack of checks even worse, because "Cause!" organisations need them most!
All in all the failings of an Organisation that grew too big to fast had it's eyes externally on the cause and was woefully lax internally and all hugely embarrassing.
What it isn't is a good reason to keep it going or dig deeper.
But that's not what our opponents want or the press so we just have to grin and bear it.
In Scotland a person sentenced to 63 months imprisonment - must serve at least half (31 1/2 months) before he can apply for parole - but has no legal right to be released until he has served 57 months
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
He was also at the Treasury when GB4GB was CotE so is well placed to save the World
If it's not Miliband it'll be some spineless idiot who caves on decarbonisation and renewables, I know that the extreme hear has melted some PBers brains, but even the renowned greens at the International Energy Agency have determined that decarbonisation, electrification and energy efficiency is the correct path.
If we decarbonise the grid, why energy efficiency?
This is the thinking, for example, that we must not install A/C. Despite solar being a perfect fit for the demand.
If you want to install AC that requires a lot of energy, so you either have to install far more generation or you become more efficient. Plus being energy efficient is cheaper long-term. Or are you still driving a Jenson that does 8mpg?
The regulations that discourage/block A/C make no reference to efficiency.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
Does it run as perpetual motion against all the laws of physics or do you plug it in and it draws a current? The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC. So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
I'm not totally sure how this is done in Britain but an a/c unit is a heat pump which presumably can do heating as well, and in many cases it'll do the heating more efficiently than the thing you'd be using if you hadn't bought it. It'll tend to be used more when it's sunny, which is a good match for solar, so even if you're using more power for cooling than you saved on heating it may be a net saving.
That's in addition to not being sweaty and uncomfortable and smelling bad and possibly dying unnecessarily.
And when you combine them with modern insulation, it takes very little power to get the temperature down or up.
I don’t even have radiators in my loft conversion. They aren’t required.
Use the air pump to heat maybe twice in a year.
My aunt and uncle, who hilariously moved from their ricketty country house they never renovated to a new state of the art energy efficient house, just rely on the insulation because their heatpump (air to water radiators) is always on the blink.
Aren't we continually told that the public sector is underfunded and unable to complete all the work which needs doing.
Whether that is local government, repairing the roads, NHS, HMRC, plods and courts and almost anything else that can be mentioned.
Surely then if five days work can be completed in four days then the consequence should be extra work is done on the fifth day.
Or is it the case that this 'do five days work in only four days so lets reduce the hours but not the pay' only applies to some office based middle and senior managers.
4 day weeks are the compromise that allows councils in some areas to actually recruit.
Mrs Eek works a 4 day week force her to work 5 days and she would retire and there wouldn’t be anyone to replace her (there is a continual job advert no one is willing to do it for the pay offered).
does not negate that giving the lazy sods 5 days pay for 4 days is anything other than mental. Services are shit as it is without making them worse so public workers can laze about. Should be a poker up the posterior and make them work for 5 days instead of the couple they do now.
Kemi Badenoch thinks it's a 'disgrace' that Rachel Reeves snubbed the PM's resignation speech to go and take selfies with Andy Burnham
Does she not understand this politics stuff? Sometimes less (on Twitter) is more.
Kemi is having a disastrous Starmer resignation period.
Frankly near hysterical rant in Commons yesterday linking it to defence spending, when the Tories are in denial about reducing it from 2.5%of GDP to 2% of GDP whilst Labour have increased to 2.6% with record investment in arms, pay and living conditions and then saying its to do with Oil and Gas in Aberdeen when vast majority of under 50s prefer switch to renewable.
Now this gaffe.
She's utterly irrelevant, desperate for attention and a danger to herself on Twatter
U.S. President Donald Trump privately told President Volodymyr Zelensky to act "more boldly," a senior Ukrainian official told the Kyiv Independent.
The message comes as Kyiv intensifies efforts to secure a meeting between Zelensky and Putin — an idea Trump has endorsed but one the Kremlin continues to avoid.
"Trump says he doesn't really believe (Vladimir) Putin will do anything without pressure," the official, briefed on the recent Trump-Zelensky meeting, added.
Aren't we continually told that the public sector is underfunded and unable to complete all the work which needs doing.
Whether that is local government, repairing the roads, NHS, HMRC, plods and courts and almost anything else that can be mentioned.
Surely then if five days work can be completed in four days then the consequence should be extra work is done on the fifth day.
Or is it the case that this 'do five days work in only four days so lets reduce the hours but not the pay' only applies to some office based middle and senior managers.
4 day weeks are the compromise that allows councils in some areas to actually recruit.
Mrs Eek works a 4 day week force her to work 5 days and she would retire and there wouldn’t be anyone to replace her (there is a continual job advert no one is willing to do it for the pay offered).
does not negate that giving the lazy sods 5 days pay for 4 days is anything other than mental. Services are shit as it is without making them worse so public workers can laze about. Should be a poker up the posterior and make them work for 5 days instead of the couple they do now.
Work four days get paid for four days is fine. Work five days hours in four is fine. Get a massive pay increase for doing five days work in four (when really that’s a symptom over over employing people) at our expense isn’t,
Public sectors jobs have also increased considerably in number since Covid
AI needs to look at lots of admin and middle management roles
There's a potential criminal investigation in this. It's not just the court of public opinion. He's right to be worried.
Imagine British politics with Farage behind bars for a £5m bung.
So much for Refrom being the shiny new better tomorrow.
(I do wonder how much has been accumulated by the security services on Farage. Can't imagine Prime Minister Burnham would be remotely squeamih about it all coming out. Whereas a former DPP who was so interested in process...)
Then if that doesn't work out well maybe let Ed Miliband have a go.
It will be Ed Miliband imo. Ed has said he wants to be Chancellor, and has previously bested Burnham in a leadership contest so needs to be bought off kept onside.
That sounds like a very good reason for not choosing him. If Burnham has to "buy off" the Millibands, etc, then he might as well not bother trying to be PM.
I think Ed M should be left where he is. He's doing a good job, generally speaking, and shuffling people about every five minutes was one of the reasons the Conservatives made such a bog of being in government over the past years.
Kemi Badenoch thinks it's a 'disgrace' that Rachel Reeves snubbed the PM's resignation speech to go and take selfies with Andy Burnham
Does she not understand this politics stuff? Sometimes less (on Twitter) is more.
Kemi is having a disastrous Starmer resignation period.
Frankly near hysterical rant in Commons yesterday linking it to defence spending, when the Tories are in denial about reducing it from 2.5%of GDP to 2% of GDP whilst Labour have increased to 2.6% with record investment in arms, pay and living conditions and then saying its to do with Oil and Gas in Aberdeen when vast majority of under 50s prefer switch to renewable.
Now this gaffe.
She's utterly irrelevant, desperate for attention and a danger to herself on Twatter
I'm highly amused this morning by the great sucking sound as newspapers find they suddenly may not have a 3-4 month succession process to use to try and create chaos in the Government, in order to complain about it.
The misleading framing of possible reforms to Council Tax are interesting. The Standard: "Londoners face £1,000 property tax rise." (Fact check: most Londoners will benefit, especially those who have not seen their house prices spiral so much since 1991). Also Telegraph: "Whoever the next chancellor is, they are coming for your home."
Those type of papers (ie nearly all of them) will be framing Council Tax as a Wealth Tax. Is there any limit to the black hole in the heads of readers of most of our newspapers?
My immediate thought is that if he is in, Burnham needs to do things quickly. A revaluation of Council Tax may possible and implemented in a year or two. I'm not sure about a proprty value tax (unfortunately).
I think that is all completely untrue. Of course it all depends on what level PVT s set at. But yesterday the discussion was on a 1% levy.
Given the median council tax in London is currently £2200 and the median house price is £50000, a 1% PVT would see the median property tax burden more than double.
The suggestion made yesterday that people can simply move to a cheaper property is so ludicrous in the London context that it doesn’t even deserve a response
The other suggestion to make the PVT only 0.5% works better for London but would slash the amount being raised across the rest of the country.
A national one size fits all PVT simply doesn't work.
The bung story will never go away - as it’s really simple for people to understand and asking the question reminds people about it.
Hey I would then follow it up with the house where the money used to pay for it is still in his company’s bank account
It was just resting there.
Farage and Reform's current situation is not survivable, despite still leading in the polls. There are several grounds for thinking this:
1) The £5m 2) The inescapable association with a far right that most people cannot stomach because of its brutal unkindness to others 3) The contradictions between being the party of megabucks libertarian supporters allied to the wants of Clacton's complaining welfarists 4) The by-election losses 5) The 60+% 'Not Reform' voting pool 6) The ousting of Starmer 7) The recycled deeply unliked Tory retreads.
Accenture’s crash shows the consultancy racket is finished Smart chatbots have exposed just how shallow much of the industry has become ... ... There are already signs of a wider downturn in the consulting industry. KPMG is laying off about 4pc of its American workforce, and 600 jobs in Britain. McKinsey has considered a 10pc reduction in its staff numbers, according to a Bloomberg report.
Here in the UK, PwC cut 2,000 people from its payroll last year and has reduced its graduate intake this year. We can assume there is a lot more “natural wastage” behind the scenes, as people who leave aren’t replaced. One by one, the major consulting firms are all starting to cut the number of people they employ.
For the British economy, that is likely to be especially bad news. Depending on the metric used, the consulting industry generates between £14bn and £20bn in annual revenues in this country and also accounts for close to £6bn a year in exports.
Classic broken window fallacy. I can’t see how this isn’t absolutely brilliant news for the economy in the long run, while appreciating that there will be some short term costs.
Consider tax advisory - that only exists because of the mad complexity of the tax system and the need for experts to guide a firm through it. If you can circumvent those costs via either AI or, better, a simpler system, that’s a good thing.
We can only hope that many of the graduates who might have been employed by consultancies get employed by the businesses who previously used the consultancy instead. If so, they may well contribute more to UK plc. I wouldn't overstate it though. My son graduated last year and most of his friends are working for either consultancy firms or quant firms.
I find this kind of question fascinating, and I think economic history proves that it’s impossible to predict. What industries will be borne from massive but intermittent electricity generation? If 50% of the UK’s service economy gets supplanted by AI, what’s everyone going to do?
At the top end, you’ll still have some consultants in the same way 1% of the population are still farmers. But otherwise…
I share your interest and lack of certainty about what the future holds. I think that AI and automation are more likely to destroy more jobs than they create and full employment may very soon become unattainable, if it is not already.
The key breakthroughs I see are in driving and care. If white van/delivery man is replaced then full employment is gone forever. If we get used to the idea that machines can provide care and company for our elderly and disabled so much work is going to disappear. Higher up the pay scale more jobs will survive but there will still be many fewer than there are today. How such a system produces an adequate surplus to provide even our current standard of living is still unclear to me.
I don’t think lack of employment is an issue as long as returns to labour overall remain a significant percentage of output (or capital is shared more equally).
Remember that something like 50% of the gains from productivity growth in the 20th century was absorbed by better standards of living. 5 day week, 9 to 5, holidays etc etc. One thing I’m fairly certain of is a 3/4 day week standard by the time I retire.
You can have it now.
Problem is public sector parasites expect it for five days full time pay but they can do the same work in four days.
Lazy bastards simply string out the work.
That betrays a complete ignorance of how productivity growth materialises - and explains why we have such a problem with it in UK.
If a worker can produce the same in 4 days what previously was done in 5, then they shouldn’t get a pay cut for not working on the Friday. Frankly they should get a pay rise to recognise their innovation.
If they can do the same work in four days they currently do in five they are lazy and stringing the work out.
It’s hardly innovation. They’re doing the same job with no different tools or resources just putting more effort in
If they can do in four days the work of five give them more
Typical useless public sector leech. The world owes you a living and a good salary.
This is just incoherent. Of course they would string the work out if they are forced to come in for 5 days a week.
You’re not unique though - presenteeism is embedded and going to be very difficult to eradicate.
malcolmg
This public sector retard thinks public sector workers are ‘innovative’ and deserve a pay rise if they do four days at a normal workrate instead of stretching four days work out to five 🤣🤣
You’re more interested in servitude than actually getting the job done.
Bit pathetic you require Malcolmg to back you up. The sort of coward who starts a fight in the playground and relies on others to finish it.
No. Get the job done is fine. If you’ve enough work for four days do it in four days get paid for four days.
I’ve never thrown a punch in anger at anyone since I left school.
You’re an entitled public sector leech justifying the unjustifiable.
My issue is not working four days it’s being paid five days to work four. Especially at the largesse of the taxpayer
Hopefully AI will do away with loads of you.
The right approach isn’t to pay them less but it’s to allocate them more work
It is if they want to go from five to four days
Better to reduce the number of staff - there are fixed costs associated with headcount regardless of whether they are working 4 or 5 days
Kemi Badenoch thinks it's a 'disgrace' that Rachel Reeves snubbed the PM's resignation speech to go and take selfies with Andy Burnham
Does she not understand this politics stuff? Sometimes less (on Twitter) is more.
Kemi is having a disastrous Starmer resignation period.
Frankly near hysterical rant in Commons yesterday linking it to defence spending, when the Tories are in denial about reducing it from 2.5%of GDP to 2% of GDP whilst Labour have increased to 2.6% with record investment in arms, pay and living conditions and then saying its to do with Oil and Gas in Aberdeen when vast majority of under 50s prefer switch to renewable.
Now this gaffe.
She's utterly irrelevant, desperate for attention and a danger to herself on Twatter
But she's seen off Starmer.
That's gotta hurt.
"The trick, William Potter, is not minding that it hurts."
The pale white blokes who complain about there being too many pale white blokes elect another pale white bloke.
They may not but Labour do far better with female voters than male so I don't think it's the "gotcha" moment you want it to be.
I can guarantee that if Labour had chosen a black female leader you would be the first deriding it as "woke" gesture politics.
The "gotcha" isnt the one you think it is, its the blatant hypocrisy of Labour lecturing everyone else for something the dont do themselves.
As for a black female leader I'd quite happily vote for Kemi if it wasnt for the untrustworthy shits behing her.
A black female leader - look like the Tories live Labour values more than Labour
400 Labour MPs are looking for someone who can win in 2029/8. This easily trumps all other considerations SFAICS. No woman comes to mind who most of the public would think 'winner of the millions of centre ground voters'. If one did, we would in the last few weeks hear a lot about them. The very obvious fact that the gallant 400 have quietly decided that Rayner is not that person is significant. The 186 women Labour MPs acting collegiately would be an overwhelming force. But they have decided that no female candidate is currently suitable. I think they are right to conclude this, sadly.
Alanbrooke is clearly rooting for Long Bailey, Reeves, or Powell (a Deputy Leader so forgettable I had to look her up)...
Long Bailey is just about the most useless self indulgent up herself female politician in any Party
I'm highly amused this morning by the great sucking sound as newspapers find they suddenly may not have a 3-4 month succession process to use to try and create chaos in the Government, in order to complain about it.
The misleading framing of possible reforms to Council Tax are interesting. The Standard: "Londoners face £1,000 property tax rise." (Fact check: most Londoners will benefit, especially those who have not seen their house prices spiral so much since 1991). Also Telegraph: "Whoever the next chancellor is, they are coming for your home."
Those type of papers (ie nearly all of them) will be framing Council Tax as a Wealth Tax. Is there any limit to the black hole in the heads of readers of most of our newspapers?
My immediate thought is that if he is in, Burnham needs to do things quickly. A revaluation of Council Tax may possible and implemented in a year or two. I'm not sure about a proprty value tax (unfortunately).
I think that is all completely untrue. Of course it all depends on what level PVT s set at. But yesterday the discussion was on a 1% levy.
Given the median council tax in London is currently £2200 and the median house price is £50000, a 1% PVT would see the median property tax burden more than double.
The suggestion made yesterday that people can simply move to a cheaper property is so ludicrous in the London context that it doesn’t even deserve a response
The other suggestion to make the PVT only 0.5% works better for London but would slash the amount being raised across the rest of the country.
A national one size fits all PVT simply doesn't work.
You have the Maths/policy wrong.
The proposal nationwide routinely talked about is 0.5% (actually slightly less) and that does work nationwide.
1% has been proposed by some as a surcharge rate for second homes etc not as the standard rate.
Comments
Freedom of choice for ALL is key
Quality of Choice is more important.
I would not touch Kemi Badenoch in the same way I would not touch Diane Abbott with a political bargepole, not du to colour, gender, looks , faith . I would not touch either because they are dangerous extremists whose policies i simply cannot agree with or endorse.
I could voote for Shabana Mahmood , Lisa Nandy who are women and of mixed race and I could vote for Penny Mordaunt who is a woman, bt the question has to be ability and policy first second third fourth fifth to infinity.
The Carbon / Oil / Coal / Gas freaks sit like King Canute on the shore of complete and utter disaster for the Climate, The Planet and any hope beyond 2100 (if not appreciably sooner)
The modelling has picked up that there will be a slight E/NE breeze off the North Sea and this is set to knock a few degrees off the maximum temperatures on Weds and Thurs for all except the south coast and perhaps the Severn valley. Yesterday's storm will also knock the maximums a bit (but not the humidity, which is why the red warning will stay).
There will also be a slower progression, so Friday may become the hottest day in the east.
40C looks rather less likely, but the June record will still go.
🔺Senior cop says her written statement only answered “some points”.
🔺Sturgeon said she fully cooperated. Police say “people’s definition… is subjective”.
https://x.com/ConnorGillies/status/2069349157941256689
Edit - I actually think the extremes that prompted the red are now unlikely.
Make that 2,109,000 actual votes less than in 2017
But they are totally blinded to facts due to their apoplectic rage that Corbyn was still leader in 2017 despite all their best efforts to remove him.
Modern units are highly efficient, anyway.
The problem is obsolete regulatory thinking - that A/C is the noisy, rattling, power hog from old American movies.
It’s not 1968 anymore.
@bbcnickrobinsonasks Business Secretary Peter Kyle about the public's faith in the PM following Labour's losses in the elections.
https://x.com/BBCr4today/status/2053754461378482271
Starmer told me he'd met every challenge. But things look bad right now - very bad
https://x.com/BBCNews/status/1941012973100683727
(Jul 2025)
(Though in fairness wartime economy meant that she somehow made do with only 26 servants in the latter ...)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/2643743
Mrs Eek works a 4 day week force her to work 5 days and she would retire and there wouldn’t be anyone to replace her (there is a continual job advert no one is willing to do it for the pay offered).
As Reform are beginning to discover.
It will still be exceptionally humid with record minima.
Pro Israel
Pro Private Utilities
Anti EU
Anti Green Energy
Former Tory Minister
Defence Spending slasher
Truss accolyte
Is not exactly on trend with anything right now is it?
Dan Jarvis is well ahead of him on all metrics.
https://x.com/lbc/status/2069343452181954933
"I felt sorry for Keir Starmer, to be honest."
Kemi Badenoch thinks it's a 'disgrace' that Rachel Reeves snubbed the PM's resignation speech to go and take selfies with Andy Burnham
In the 19th century.
Simply expecting people to do more work for the same pay, because they can work more efficiently? Good luck.
So you need to balance savings with “spending” some of it on the workforce.
Unless you really like strikes and replacing people who leave.
https://x.com/LastBlairite/status/2069155979032137817
This is shameful from every single Labour MP, pissing about like this on the day the first Labour PM in 14 years stands down. Totally lacking class. Could’ve waited a day for such nonsense. I can see my MP on there and I’m embarrassed.
Ugh ... just back from the dentist.
I'm highly amused this morning by the great sucking sound as newspapers find they suddenly may not have a 3-4 month succession process to use to try and create chaos in the Government, in order to complain about it.
The misleading framing of possible reforms to Council Tax are interesting. The Standard: "Londoners face £1,000 property tax rise." (Fact check: most Londoners will benefit, especially those who have not seen their house prices spiral so much since 1991). Also Telegraph: "Whoever the next chancellor is, they are coming for your home."
Those type of papers (ie nearly all of them) will be framing Council Tax as a Wealth Tax. Is there any limit to the black hole in the heads of readers of most of our newspapers?
My immediate thought is that if he is in, Burnham needs to do things quickly. A revaluation of Council Tax may possible and implemented in a year or two. I'm not sure about a proprty value tax (unfortunately).
The latter therefore it requires additional energy over no AC.
So more generating capacity required, there is no downside to making things more efficient.
That flexibility has to benefit both sides though for it to work effectively.
The problem is not energy efficiency improvements. These are virtually automatic, year on year, as the manufacturers compete on these.
The primary competition on A/C systems in in efficiency, quietness. In that order.
The issue I am talking about is the regulations making it very, very difficult (verging on impossible) to have A/C in new builds.
These regulations do not (and never have) consider the efficiency of the systems.
So you have huge numbers of properties where you don’t have A/C and, very often can’t have A/C. It’s very hard to retrofit for flats.
We are a few degrees away from temperatures that will start killing vulnerable people.
And before someone says hyperbole, such temperature spikes have killed (large numbers) in France, quite recently.
Major fraud in the open is completely normal in the US now. Multiple people should go to jail for this, but of course they won't.
Car is on autopilot
Driver hits throttle (presumably instead of brake)
Car smashes into house at 73mph
Cops tell media it was on "autopilot" which the media reports
Tesla release data confirming car had AP engaged and the throttle engaged at 100%
Utter fury from the cult. Liars! Blood on their hands! It wasn't the car! IT WASN'T THE CAR! How dare they attack Full Self-Driving!
But nobody said it was. Autopilot was engaged as reported. I think there are two teeny problems for Tesla, and neither of them relate to the actual crash:
1. Product names overlap and are misleading. At first we had cultists confusing Autopilot and FSD. Then we had senior execs including Elon doing the same.
2. Tesla don't believe in PR. So nobody for the media to speak to about the crash. No company statements. No fact sheets. Nothing. But supposedly the media are to blame for not understanding the difference between Tesla products which the VP responsible for the product and the CEO also confuse in their response.
I have to laugh
#zerosumgame?
Why would you want to be inefficient? Why would you want to build twice as much power capacity, and distribution capacity, of whatever sort, than you need? Why would you want 2 or 3x as many solar farms, or windmills, or mini-nuclear?
Water is just the same - what is the point of spending resources on making water safe and pure, when all Bufton-Tufton does is waste it on watering his garden when he can do rainwater harvesting for next to nothing. And then when it is suggested that he be a little more responsible, all that happens are Trump-style toddler tantrums. That's why I like regulated markets and price signals for scarce resources.
(I'm not aware of anyone who is practically stopping you installing A/C. I have it installed, and it is running now using about 1KW of my solar supply to keep the downstairs at a comfortable 23C, after I used cross-flow ventilation to keep it cool overnight.)
Ove rthe last week I have been swatting some of the "Ed Milliband is BANNING UNDERFLOOR HEATING" bollocks. It's astonishing how rabbit-holed ("mushroomed" may be a better word) some people have become on some of our more conspiracy-minded news platforms.
That's in addition to not being sweaty and uncomfortable and smelling bad and possibly dying unnecessarily.
A warning for the next two big IPO’s assuming they happen.
Not that I'm actually there to experience it all. I'm in a very fresh Cappadocia today. Full of selfie-stick wielding couples in their late 20s.
This results in more complex designs which are less space efficient; to get the multiple aspect ventilation required.
Because the way the rules on insulation are written, many modern properties become heat traps.
Natural ventilation begins to stop working about 25c
Ironically, you get VAT off installing air source heat pumps in existing properties.
So one part of government is trying to stop A/C. The other is trying to encourage it.
So I have air conditioning. People living in new built flats can’t.
https://x.com/donmcgowan/status/2069338671375867994
The bung story is not going away.
Peter.
Hopefully he will see the opportunity for a morale-boosting victory by increasing support for Ukraine.
My council / wealth tax is now £6000 - that’s going to be a humble brag for a lot of people
As for a council tax revaluation - not a chance in hell on less than 4 years, the people don’t exist and they are already fire fighting on multiple other changes including just dealing with a pointless merger into HMRC
(In general those most experienced in the wrong end of police investigations don't comment at all. Though it doesn't always help. The trio given whole life orders last week for a murder in prison, all experienced in the ways of police and courts, offered nothing at all in interview, and didn't give evidence at their trial.)
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/discounts-for-families-to-keep-warm-in-winter-and-cool-in-summer
That was an expensive camper van!
Running in reverse is (theoretically) less efficient than heating - the Coefficient of Performance will be roughly 3 instead of 4 (ie you take out 3 times more heat energy than the electric energy put in) - but it still works well.
If we are going to declare a climate emergency, we'd better prepare for it.
Edit: Looks like some grants _are_ available re: Ydoethur's link. No standards for new builds though?
I don’t even have radiators in my loft conversion. They aren’t required.
Use the air pump to heat maybe twice in a year.
Hey I would then follow it up with the house where the money used to pay for it is still in his company’s bank account
Keep it going as long as possible and do as much damage to your opponents as you can. It's the game.
They Must resign! We need an Equity, there's more to learn, no smoke without fire, the public have a right to know!
As people pointed out in the last few threads, who where are all the Labour MP's calling for a general Election when Tory PM's stood down.
SNP internal checks and balances were between abysmal and no existent.
Too many people let rivalries and petty jealousies get in the way so whistleblowers were dismissed as trouble makers. Learn the lesson of 9/11 or Trump/Russia, it doesn't matter if the information is weak even tainted, you still follow it up.
Ironically what we did in Scottish Government to check complaiints about Alex Salmond we abjectly failed to do about Party finances.
A lot of people who should have done betetr are keeping their heads down because to admit failings is a political death sentence.
We are a "Cause" organisation, so like Churches and Charities we tend to assume that everyone is dedicated to the cause and so welcome people to the fold too easily and aren't suspicious of their motives, which makes the lack of checks even worse, because "Cause!" organisations need them most!
All in all the failings of an Organisation that grew too big to fast had it's eyes externally on the cause and was woefully lax internally and all hugely embarrassing.
What it isn't is a good reason to keep it going or dig deeper.
But that's not what our opponents want or the press so we just have to grin and bear it.
Peter.
https://x.com/GlasgowAdvocate/status/2069362556024615152
Frankly near hysterical rant in Commons yesterday linking it to defence spending, when the Tories are in denial about reducing it from 2.5%of GDP to 2% of GDP whilst Labour have increased to 2.6% with record investment in arms, pay and living conditions and then saying its to do with Oil and Gas in Aberdeen when vast majority of under 50s prefer switch to renewable.
Now this gaffe.
She's utterly irrelevant, desperate for attention and a danger to herself on Twatter
U.S. President Donald Trump privately told President Volodymyr Zelensky to act "more boldly," a senior Ukrainian official told the Kyiv Independent.
The message comes as Kyiv intensifies efforts to secure a meeting between Zelensky and Putin — an idea Trump has endorsed but one the Kremlin continues to avoid.
"Trump says he doesn't really believe (Vladimir) Putin will do anything without pressure," the official, briefed on the recent Trump-Zelensky meeting, added.
Public sectors jobs have also increased considerably in number since Covid
AI needs to look at lots of admin and middle management roles
So much for Refrom being the shiny new better tomorrow.
(I do wonder how much has been accumulated by the security services on Farage. Can't imagine Prime Minister Burnham would be remotely squeamih about it all coming out. Whereas a former DPP who was so interested in process...)
The highest growth sector in the economy
Putting right 14 years of neglect
He's doing a great job
I must be missing something as the PB brains trust claimed there was no scrutiny and the press ignored it
That's gotta hurt.
Given the median council tax in London is currently £2200 and the median house price is £50000, a 1% PVT would see the median property tax burden more than double.
The suggestion made yesterday that people can simply move to a cheaper property is so ludicrous in the London context that it doesn’t even deserve a response
The other suggestion to make the PVT only 0.5% works better for London but would slash the amount being raised across the rest of the country.
A national one size fits all PVT simply doesn't work.
1) The £5m
2) The inescapable association with a far right that most people cannot stomach because of its brutal unkindness to others
3) The contradictions between being the party of megabucks libertarian supporters allied to the wants of Clacton's complaining welfarists
4) The by-election losses
5) The 60+% 'Not Reform' voting pool
6) The ousting of Starmer
7) The recycled deeply unliked Tory retreads.
Bar none left or Right
Awful
The proposal nationwide routinely talked about is 0.5% (actually slightly less) and that does work nationwide.
1% has been proposed by some as a surcharge rate for second homes etc not as the standard rate.