Majorities – politicalbetting.com

System · 6:32AM

Majorities – politicalbetting.com

My view on this market is that a party winning an overall majority is underpriced, in 2024 Labour won a Brobdingnagian majority with just 33.7% of the vote.

Read the full story here

BatteryCorrectHorse · 6:34AM

BatteryCorrectHorse

TheScreamingEagles · 6:36AM

FPT

Benpointer said:
Just spotted the last line of the header. TSE is on holiday for five weeks?!

4 and a half weeks.

Wulfrun_Phil · 6:39AM

BatteryCorrectHorse said:
BatteryCorrectHorse

Not Peter

noneoftheabove · 6:41AM

I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.

TheScreamingEagles · 6:42AM

I see the whole world hates Scotland.

Last night's results couldn't have been any worse for Scotland plus we have a new Disgrace of Gijón, the Disgrace of San Francisco.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/live/c8d2e4geze2t

We should kick Australia out of the Commonwealth and stop sharing a monarch with them.

TheScreamingEagles · 6:43AM

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.

Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.

noneoftheabove · 6:51AM

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.

Sure but the issue is that the Tories are almost wiped out in swathes of the country, how do they regenerate there even if Reform and Labour aren't seen as good options?

Taz · 6:53AM

TheScreamingEagles said:
I see the whole world hates Scotland.

Last night's results couldn't have been any worse for Scotland plus we have a new Disgrace of Gijón, the Disgrace of San Francisco.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/live/c8d2e4geze2t

We should kick Australia out of the Commonwealth and stop sharing a monarch with them.

We should also refuse to share our cricket knowledge with them. That will show em.

TheScreamingEagles · 6:53AM

noneoftheabove said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
Sure but the issue is that the Tories are almost wiped out in swathes of the country, how do they regenerate there even if Reform and Labour aren't seen as good options?

They have over a hundred more MPs than Reform, they focus on that.

Taz · 6:53AM

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.

They seemed to do okay last night.

I’d also say it’s when, not if, Burnham proves meh.

AnneJGP · 6:55AM

25% of the vote giving a majority is quite a sobering prospect.

Taz · 6:57AM

A labour heavyweight comes out for Miliband as chancellor

Ed Miliband really does have some backing now and clearly a well organised campaign behind him.

‘ Ed Miliband should be Andy Burnham's chancellor, says Harriet Harman.’

https://x.com/skynews/status/2070288220248555731?s=61

IanB2 · 7:01AM

On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.

noneoftheabove · 7:01AM

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
Sure but the issue is that the Tories are almost wiped out in swathes of the country, how do they regenerate there even if Reform and Labour aren't seen as good options?
They have over a hundred more MPs than Reform, they focus on that.

Being the official opposition is worth quite a bit, as is that hundred MP base. Getting to 250 odd if Reform implode looks trivial, but its harder to see the path to a majority, for me at least.

Having said that, at the current prices I don't feel the need to see the path to be a backer when the other options are also difficult to see. I guess that is why the market favours the hung parliament but small shifts can be quite dramatic in this environment.

Gallowgate · 7:01AM

Re. @Taz’s discussion in the previous thread re. restrictive covenants. In my experience you just don’t ask and generally nobody cares with few exceptions where the person with the benefit of the covenant still has an interest in enforcing it, like a housing developer who is still building.

Morris_Dancer · 7:02AM

TheScreamingEagles said:
FPT

Benpointer said:
Just spotted the last line of the header. TSE is on holiday for five weeks?!
4 and a half weeks.

I wonder which country Trump will invade in the meantime. Cuba seems a good bet.

noneoftheabove · 7:03AM

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
FPT

Benpointer said:
Just spotted the last line of the header. TSE is on holiday for five weeks?!
4 and a half weeks.
I wonder which country Trump will invade in the meantime. Cuba seems a good bet.

Operation Cuba Libre.

Morris_Dancer · 7:04AM

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.

'...turns out to be meh'? That's like saying Lara Croft turns out to be hot, or GTA turns out to be overpriced and seemingly locking full-game content behind an additional fee.

Morris_Dancer · 7:05AM

noneoftheabove said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
FPT

Benpointer said:
Just spotted the last line of the header. TSE is on holiday for five weeks?!
4 and a half weeks.
I wonder which country Trump will invade in the meantime. Cuba seems a good bet.
Operation Cuba Libre.

At least that's funnier than the infantile megalomania of Epic Fury.

Edited: wait a minute, maybe Epic Fury wasn't the bombing campaign, but a Delphic assessment of the USA's general reaction to the peace terms.

TheScreamingEagles · 7:05AM

I've dreamt in French a few times, glad I'm not the only one.

Depending on who you ask, James Purnell is a Blairite social butterfly, a cross-factional pragmatist, a BBC hipster who dreams in French, a modernizer, a Whitehall machine operator — or all of the above

Most of all, though, he's just Andy Burnham's mate

My profile ⬇️

https://x.com/danbloom1/status/2070402514357252441

IanB2 · 7:07AM

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.

I think that scenario also requires improved credibility from the Tories themselves, and how that comes about isn't immediately obvious. It looks to me like Kemi has the Kinnock role, in the bigger scheme of things, and they still await their Blair or Cameron.

Taz · 7:07AM

Gallowgate said:
Re. @Taz’s discussion in the previous thread re. restrictive covenants. In my experience you just don’t ask and generally nobody cares with few exceptions where the person with the benefit of the covenant still has an interest in enforcing it, like a housing developer who is still building.

On the documents we had for my wife’s home sale from the vendors solicitor it was brought up when I responded to one of the questions which asked about alterations made.

I simply noted that she had had a porch added about 15 years ago. They already had a copy of the covenants from our solicitor so the question came directly from the vendors solicitor. I thought they just meant planning permission, which wasn’t needed.

I wouldn’t have volunteered it. But I was truthful in all responses to their questions.

As the original home builder was Yuill I don’t know who’d have enforced it.

Taz · 7:08AM

TheScreamingEagles said:
I've dreamt in French a few times, glad I'm not the only one.

Depending on who you ask, James Purnell is a Blairite social butterfly, a cross-factional pragmatist, a BBC hipster who dreams in French, a modernizer, a Whitehall machine operator — or all of the above

Most of all, though, he's just Andy Burnham's mate

My profile ⬇️

https://x.com/danbloom1/status/2070402514357252441

I hope one day you can join us

And the world will be as one.

Gallowgate · 7:10AM

Taz said:

Gallowgate said:
Re. @Taz’s discussion in the previous thread re. restrictive covenants. In my experience you just don’t ask and generally nobody cares with few exceptions where the person with the benefit of the covenant still has an interest in enforcing it, like a housing developer who is still building.
On the documents we had for my wife’s home sale from the vendors solicitor it was brought up when I responded to one of the questions which asked about alterations made.

I simply noted that she had had a porch added about 15 years ago. They already had a copy of the covenants from our solicitor so the question came directly from the vendors solicitor. I thought they just meant planning permission, which wasn’t needed.

I wouldn’t have volunteered it. But I was truthful in all responses to their questions.

As the original home builder was Yuill I don’t know who’d have enforced it.

I understand that the new houses on the Lambton Estate are riddled with covenants. For example I was told that you can only paint your door with a specific brand of paint in a specific colour, which cannot be changed and you cannot install even a Ring doorbell without permission.

I wonder if AC would be permitted!!

MarqueeMark · 7:10AM

Morris_Dancer said:

noneoftheabove said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
FPT

Benpointer said:
Just spotted the last line of the header. TSE is on holiday for five weeks?!
4 and a half weeks.
I wonder which country Trump will invade in the meantime. Cuba seems a good bet.
Operation Cuba Libre.
At least that's funnier than the infantile megalomania of Epic Fury.

Edited: wait a minute, maybe Epic Fury wasn't the bombing campaign, but a Delphic assessment of the USA's general reaction to the peace terms.

An initial typo for Epic Fail

IanB2 · 7:10AM

noneoftheabove said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
Sure but the issue is that the Tories are almost wiped out in swathes of the country, how do they regenerate there even if Reform and Labour aren't seen as good options?
They have over a hundred more MPs than Reform, they focus on that.
Being the official opposition is worth quite a bit, as is that hundred MP base. Getting to 250 odd if Reform implode looks trivial, but its harder to see the path to a majority, for me at least.

Having said that, at the current prices I don't feel the need to see the path to be a backer when the other options are also difficult to see. I guess that is why the market favours the hung parliament but small shifts can be quite dramatic in this environment.

The oft advocated strategy of looking to lay the favourite generally works out very well on BFE, as you ride the swings of over-confidence that whatever looks most likely now will stay so when the betting event actually arrives. You can get badly stung - as I did laying Johnson as next PM when he did actually go on to be next PM - but on the current next PM market my lays at various times of Johnson, Farage, Lowe, Jenrick and Kemi (not all favourites tbf - just over-rated prosects assuming both that Starmer would stick around and also lose the next GE) has worked out exceptionally well.

TheScreamingEagles · 7:12AM

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
'...turns out to be meh'? That's like saying Lara Croft turns out to be hot, or GTA turns out to be overpriced and seemingly locking full-game content behind an additional fee.

Perhaps Andy Burnham surprises on the upside.

Taz · 7:12AM

Gallowgate said:

Taz said:

Gallowgate said:
Re. @Taz’s discussion in the previous thread re. restrictive covenants. In my experience you just don’t ask and generally nobody cares with few exceptions where the person with the benefit of the covenant still has an interest in enforcing it, like a housing developer who is still building.
On the documents we had for my wife’s home sale from the vendors solicitor it was brought up when I responded to one of the questions which asked about alterations made.

I simply noted that she had had a porch added about 15 years ago. They already had a copy of the covenants from our solicitor so the question came directly from the vendors solicitor. I thought they just meant planning permission, which wasn’t needed.

I wouldn’t have volunteered it. But I was truthful in all responses to their questions.

As the original home builder was Yuill I don’t know who’d have enforced it.
I understand that the new houses on the Lambton Estate are riddled with covenants. For example I was told that you can only paint your door with a specific brand of paint in a specific colour, which cannot be changed and you cannot install even a Ring doorbell without permission.

That’s fine until the paint manufacturer ceases production or obsoletes the colour.

So presumably they cannot whip the door out and replace it with a crap plastic one from some shitehawks like Pennine ?

Mind you they are lovely looking houses, for new builds.

Benpointer · 7:14AM

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
FPT

Benpointer said:
Just spotted the last line of the header. TSE is on holiday for five weeks?!
4 and a half weeks.
I wonder which country Trump will invade in the meantime. Cuba seems a good bet.

Can the US afford to win another war?

Morris_Dancer · 7:15AM

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
'...turns out to be meh'? That's like saying Lara Croft turns out to be hot, or GTA turns out to be overpriced and seemingly locking full-game content behind an additional fee.
Perhaps Andy Burnham surprises on the upside.

Mr. Eagles, that is not impossible. I may also win the lottery.

Stuartinromford · 7:17AM

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.

Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.

MarqueeMark · 7:18AM

Benpointer said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
FPT

Benpointer said:
Just spotted the last line of the header. TSE is on holiday for five weeks?!
4 and a half weeks.
I wonder which country Trump will invade in the meantime. Cuba seems a good bet.
Can the US afford to win another war?

Cuba needs a vast amount of investment.

No doubt the Mob will be happy to invest there.

DavidL · 7:19AM

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
'...turns out to be meh'? That's like saying Lara Croft turns out to be hot, or GTA turns out to be overpriced and seemingly locking full-game content behind an additional fee.
Perhaps Andy Burnham surprises on the upside.
Mr. Eagles, that is not impossible. I may also win the lottery.

Scotland may also qualify for the next round.

TheScreamingEagles · 7:20AM

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
'...turns out to be meh'? That's like saying Lara Croft turns out to be hot, or GTA turns out to be overpriced and seemingly locking full-game content behind an additional fee.
Perhaps Andy Burnham surprises on the upside.
Mr. Eagles, that is not impossible. I may also win the lottery.

Never underestimate the brilliance of an alumnus of the University of Cambridge.

MarqueeMark · 7:20AM

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.

The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.

Gallowgate · 7:24AM

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
'...turns out to be meh'? That's like saying Lara Croft turns out to be hot, or GTA turns out to be overpriced and seemingly locking full-game content behind an additional fee.
Perhaps Andy Burnham surprises on the upside.
Mr. Eagles, that is not impossible. I may also win the lottery.
Never underestimate the brilliance of an alumnus of the University of Cambridge.

How can you tell if someone went to Oxford or Cambridge? Don’t worry they wont shut up about it

DavidL · 7:24AM

Taz said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
I've dreamt in French a few times, glad I'm not the only one.

Depending on who you ask, James Purnell is a Blairite social butterfly, a cross-factional pragmatist, a BBC hipster who dreams in French, a modernizer, a Whitehall machine operator — or all of the above

Most of all, though, he's just Andy Burnham's mate

My profile ⬇️

https://x.com/danbloom1/status/2070402514357252441
I hope one day you can join us

And the world will be as one.

If I have understood that article correctly the first thing Burnham did after his "mate" went for his suicidal run over the top in an effort to topple Gordon Brown was volunteer to espouse his loyalty to said Brown. Thanks mate. Really appreciate that.

Morris_Dancer · 7:24AM

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.

Possibly. May depend on whether Labour and the Conservatives remain on such low figures.

Benpointer · 7:26AM

Gallowgate said:
Re. @Taz’s discussion in the previous thread re. restrictive covenants. In my experience you just don’t ask and generally nobody cares with few exceptions where the person with the benefit of the covenant still has an interest in enforcing it, like a housing developer who is still building.

One issue with covenants as far as I can see is that they persist. So A sells a house to B and puts a covenant on it (say: no motor homes on site). B sells to C and has no choice in the matter the covenant is still there; only A can remove it.

When we moved to Yorkshire the house we bought had a covenant placed on it by the builder, effectively no extensions allowed. Why? - No idea.

But as the builder had ceased trading our solicitor advised it was unenforceable, so we ignored it. When we sold we explained the situation and it was not a problem.

Although we refused to accept any new covenants on the plot we bought for our current house, there is an inherited one 'not to interrupt the water supply' to a nearby manor. As far as we can tell the manor no longer exists as an entity.

The whole world of covenants seems a bit of a mess. Great free money for people selling convenant insurance though.

Benpointer · 7:30AM

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
'...turns out to be meh'? That's like saying Lara Croft turns out to be hot, or GTA turns out to be overpriced and seemingly locking full-game content behind an additional fee.
Perhaps Andy Burnham surprises on the upside.

I'm glad you said that not Leon.

BatteryCorrectHorse · 7:33AM

I think Burnham will get a decent bounce and will have a very solid first few months with a Labour lead because expectations will be so low that just having a vaguely charismatic guy there who isn’t incompetent will surprise a lot of people.

TheScreamingEagles · 7:34AM

Labour plans automatic tax deductions from state pension

Basic rate to be applied to payments that exceed the tax-free allowance from next year, reports say

Income tax will be automatically deducted from state pensions for millions of retirees under plans being considered by Labour, The Telegraph understands.

Under the plans, the basic 20pc rate of tax could be applied to payments when the value of the state pension rises beyond the tax-free allowance of £12,570 next year.

It comes after Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, previously said retirees who live only on the state pension would not be forced to pay tax when their income crosses the threshold.

But research commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions, and circulated within Whitehall, proposes deducting the basic tax rate from all state pension payments before they are sent to retirees.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/state-pensions/income-tax-to-automatically-come-out-of-state-pension/

Eabhal · 7:35AM

Feels like a full eclipse here. Everyone turning their lights on.

Gallowgate · 7:35AM

Benpointer said:

Gallowgate said:
Re. @Taz’s discussion in the previous thread re. restrictive covenants. In my experience you just don’t ask and generally nobody cares with few exceptions where the person with the benefit of the covenant still has an interest in enforcing it, like a housing developer who is still building.
One issue with covenants as far as I can see is that they persist. So A sells a house to B and puts a covenant on it (say: no motor homes on site). B sells to C and has no choice in the matter the covenant is still there; only A can remove it.

When we moved to Yorkshire the house we bought had a covenant placed on it by the builder, effectively no extensions allowed. Why? - No idea.

But as the builder had ceased trading our solicitor advised it was unenforceable, so we ignored it. When we sold we explained the situation and it was not a problem.

Although we refused to accept any new covenants on the plot we bought for our current house, there is an inherited one 'not to interrupt the water supply' to a nearby manor. As far as we can tell the manor no longer exists as an entity.

The whole world of covenants seems a bit of a mess. Great free money for people selling convenant insurance though.

Behold, in all its glory, section 84 of the Law of Property Act 1925.

IanB2 · 7:36AM

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.

There are some they might easily pick up, as well, but if they do drop back a bit, if they just lose five or ten it doesn't really change the odds of majority v NOM. If the LibDems get wiped out, that's another matter - but with Labour now unpopular and the Green bubble already deflating, they ought to be well placed to pick up more tactical votes in their held seats than before - which could also tip seats like East Grinstead and North Dorset their way as gains.

Benpointer · 7:36AM

TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour plans automatic tax deductions from state pension

Basic rate to be applied to payments that exceed the tax-free allowance from next year, reports say

Income tax will be automatically deducted from state pensions for millions of retirees under plans being considered by Labour, The Telegraph understands.

Under the plans, the basic 20pc rate of tax could be applied to payments when the value of the state pension rises beyond the tax-free allowance of £12,570 next year.

It comes after Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, previously said retirees who live only on the state pension would not be forced to pay tax when their income crosses the threshold.

But research commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions, and circulated within Whitehall, proposes deducting the basic tax rate from all state pension payments before they are sent to retirees.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/state-pensions/income-tax-to-automatically-come-out-of-state-pension/

Sensible and fair surely.

Omnium · 7:37AM

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
'...turns out to be meh'? That's like saying Lara Croft turns out to be hot, or GTA turns out to be overpriced and seemingly locking full-game content behind an additional fee.
Perhaps Andy Burnham surprises on the upside.
Mr. Eagles, that is not impossible. I may also win the lottery.
Never underestimate the brilliance of an alumnus of the University of Cambridge.

I suspect we may have to adopt a minor exemption to the rule. English graduates beginning with B. Burgon has clearly carved out a niche exemption for himself, but I suspect we'll have to widen it to all the Bs.

IanB2 · 7:37AM

Benpointer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
'...turns out to be meh'? That's like saying Lara Croft turns out to be hot, or GTA turns out to be overpriced and seemingly locking full-game content behind an additional fee.
Perhaps Andy Burnham surprises on the upside.
I'm glad you said that not Leon.

Indeed; that was the guy who said Farage would be next PM, thereby making that bet a guaranteed lay

Mortimer · 7:39AM

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.

I agree. They've absolutely blown their opportunity to be the 'alternative choice' - eclipsed as the third party by both Reform and Greens.

Sandpit · 7:41AM

Don’t see too much of Russia on fire this morning, so instead have the 15km queue of thousands of vehicles waiting to get over the Kerch Bridge out of Crimea.

https://x.com/maria_drutska/status/2070403688372269522

Ukraine is telling everyone on the peninsula, civilian and military, to leave as soon as possible, and the Kerch Bridge is now the only reliable way out still left, for light vehicles only. There’s extensive disruption to power and water already, with the promise of more disruption to come.

Eabhal · 7:43AM

Eabhal said:
Feels like a full eclipse here. Everyone turning their lights on.

Look at Teesside on the weather maps!

Morris_Dancer · 7:43AM

Mortimer said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.
I agree. They've absolutely blown their opportunity to be the 'alternative choice' - eclipsed as the third party by both Reform and Greens.

Aye, too fixated on having agreeable opinions for Waitrose shoppers. Don't want to sully themselves with things that might offend WASPI fools or get votes from the Great Unwashed.

Selebian · 7:44AM

noneoftheabove said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
Sure but the issue is that the Tories are almost wiped out in swathes of the country, how do they regenerate there even if Reform and Labour aren't seen as good options?

The Tory King Over The Water (Ben Houchen) returns to claim his throne?

Sandpit · 7:46AM

TheScreamingEagles said:
I see the whole world hates Scotland.

Last night's results couldn't have been any worse for Scotland plus we have a new Disgrace of Gijón, the Disgrace of San Francisco.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/live/c8d2e4geze2t

We should kick Australia out of the Commonwealth and stop sharing a monarch with them.

The Americans in Boston and Miami are absolutely loving the tens of thousands of Scots, who had a brilliant party, drank their bars dry, but generally behaved themselves really well.

In fact there’s remarkably few reports of any incidents involving the various European fan bases in the US, perhaps the price of the trip filters out the less savoury fans that travel within Europe?

Have tens of thousands of German fans singing “99 Luftballons” after their match.
https://x.com/simonebett/status/2070182172787347613

Sandpit · 7:48AM

The Red Arrows have turned up in the US for the 4th July 250 celebrations.

Here they are doing the flypast for DC’s baseball team, ahead of their match yesterday.
https://x.com/newsairshow/status/2070289519778173401

Taz · 7:48AM

Eabhal said:

Eabhal said:
Feels like a full eclipse here. Everyone turning their lights on.
Look at Teesside on the weather maps!

I’m a little further north. Heavy rain here and even with the windows open I’m sweating like Jimmy Savile in a morgue. I’ve also had to clean the kitchen with white wine vinegar due to ants !!

HYUFD · 7:48AM

Interesting that Labour is now seen as having slightly more chance than Reform or the Tories of an overall majority. I think with Burnham that is a possibility in a way it would not have been with Starmer. Burnham could get a small majority given his higher favourable ratings than Farage or Badenoch, helped by anti Reform tactical votes in Labour v Reform marginal seats, though that would likely still see around 100 Labour MPs lose their seats.

If that was the case, then another Labour majority and a clear defeat for both Reform and the Tories would clearly see both Farage and Kemi resign. In which case as long as we keep FPTP a new figure would be needed to unite the right as clearly the division between Reform and the Tories would have played a big part in re electing Labour given on the MiC poll this week while a Burnham led Labour leads Reform by just 1% and the Tories by just 4% the Tories and Reform combined are still on 49% of the vote even against Burnham. Who could that figure be? Only one I can see who could do that is Jacob Rees Mogg if he wins back his seat, The Mogg could reunite the right in the same way Corbyn united the left

Selebian · 7:48AM

Gallowgate said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
'...turns out to be meh'? That's like saying Lara Croft turns out to be hot, or GTA turns out to be overpriced and seemingly locking full-game content behind an additional fee.
Perhaps Andy Burnham surprises on the upside.
Mr. Eagles, that is not impossible. I may also win the lottery.
Never underestimate the brilliance of an alumnus of the University of Cambridge.
How can you tell if someone went to Oxford or Cambridge? Don’t worry they wont shut up about it

I've been to both. Several times.

Taz · 7:49AM

So Covenant consent isn’t utter gibberish as claimed yesterday by the resident Joey 🤔

DavidL · 7:49AM

Eabhal said:
Feels like a full eclipse here. Everyone turning their lights on.

Is that Edinburgh? We were out for a walk this morning in glorious sunshine. Still nice although it is clouding over a bit.

Roger · 7:50AM

Andy's first big test. Will he fire the dreadful Shabana Mahmood?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj9g7w0xnnjo

Taz · 7:50AM

Morris_Dancer said:

Mortimer said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.
I agree. They've absolutely blown their opportunity to be the 'alternative choice' - eclipsed as the third party by both Reform and Greens.
Aye, too fixated on having agreeable opinions for Waitrose shoppers. Don't want to sully themselves with things that might offend WASPI fools or get votes from the Great Unwashed.

I suspect next GE will be the Lib Dem’s defending not attacking.

They are a party whose only principle seems to be to say what people want to hear.

The daft thing is up here, if they bothered, in Durham, Gateshead and Newcastle they could do really well in some seats and be challengers. But they put no effort in and show no interest.

JohnLilburne · 7:51AM

Benpointer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour plans automatic tax deductions from state pension

Basic rate to be applied to payments that exceed the tax-free allowance from next year, reports say

Income tax will be automatically deducted from state pensions for millions of retirees under plans being considered by Labour, The Telegraph understands.

Under the plans, the basic 20pc rate of tax could be applied to payments when the value of the state pension rises beyond the tax-free allowance of £12,570 next year.

It comes after Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, previously said retirees who live only on the state pension would not be forced to pay tax when their income crosses the threshold.

But research commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions, and circulated within Whitehall, proposes deducting the basic tax rate from all state pension payments before they are sent to retirees.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/state-pensions/income-tax-to-automatically-come-out-of-state-pension/
Sensible and fair surely.

The only really practicable alternative would be to increase the allowance in line with pension increase. But while I think that would be a good idea, and they should continue to increase the TFA and increase the rate if they need to take more tax, it would be a hostage to fortune in the future.

However State Pension isn't set up to be taxable, to be operated through PAYE or to a cept tax codes so could lead to overpayment issues for those who are already taxed on private/employer pensions.

They could also do with moving it onto a monthly payment schedule rather than the current 4-weekly

MarqueeMark · 7:51AM

Mortimer said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.
I agree. They've absolutely blown their opportunity to be the 'alternative choice' - eclipsed as the third party by both Reform and Greens.

They need some fresh blood as Leader.

Mexicanpete · 7:51AM

HYUFD said:
Interesting that Labour is now seen as having slightly more chance than Reform or the Tories of an overall majority. I think with Burnham that is a possibility in a way it would not have been with Starmer. Burnham could get a small majority given his higher favourable ratings than Farage or Badenoch, helped by anti Reform tactical votes in Labour v Reform marginal seats, though that would likely still see around 100 Labour MPs lose their seats.

If that was the case, then another Labour majority and a clear defeat for both Reform and the Tories would clearly see both Farage and Kemi resign. In which case as long as we keep FPTP a new figure would be needed to unite the right as clearly the division between Reform and the Tories would have played a big part in re electing Labour given on the MiC poll this week while a Burnham led Labour leads Reform by just 1% and the Tories by just 4% the Tories and Reform combined are still on 49% of the vote even against Burnham. Who could that figure be? Only one I can see who could do that is Jacob Rees Mogg if he wins back his seat, The Mogg could reunite the right in the same way Corbyn united the left

I blame the heat.

Theuniondivvie · 7:52AM

Morris_Dancer said:

Mortimer said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.
I agree. They've absolutely blown their opportunity to be the 'alternative choice' - eclipsed as the third party by both Reform and Greens.
Aye, too fixated on having agreeable opinions for Waitrose shoppers. Don't want to sully themselves with things that might offend WASPI fools or get votes from the Great Unwashed.

I wouldn’t vote LD if you paid me, but I’d read on here that the Greens and Reform are ghastly populists. No brownie points for the LDs avoiding descending to their level?

Sandpit · 7:52AM

Benpointer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour plans automatic tax deductions from state pension

Basic rate to be applied to payments that exceed the tax-free allowance from next year, reports say

Income tax will be automatically deducted from state pensions for millions of retirees under plans being considered by Labour, The Telegraph understands.

Under the plans, the basic 20pc rate of tax could be applied to payments when the value of the state pension rises beyond the tax-free allowance of £12,570 next year.

It comes after Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, previously said retirees who live only on the state pension would not be forced to pay tax when their income crosses the threshold.

But research commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions, and circulated within Whitehall, proposes deducting the basic tax rate from all state pension payments before they are sent to retirees.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/state-pensions/income-tax-to-automatically-come-out-of-state-pension/
Sensible and fair surely.

The obvious solution there is to hold the basic state pension and income tax personal allowance at the same level. Force future governments to budget for them both together.

kinabalu · 7:52AM

I retain my view that NOM is just about hardcoded in. The Cons can't do it because of the LD block in the South. Reform can't do it because they just can't. Lab can, if Burnham can put their red wall / metro left / non racist floater coalition back together, but that's a tall order indeed even if (which it very well might) the economy upswings.

HYUFD · 7:52AM

Mortimer said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.
I agree. They've absolutely blown their opportunity to be the 'alternative choice' - eclipsed as the third party by both Reform and Greens.

On seats though the LDs are still projected to be well ahead of the Greens

geoffw · 7:52AM

DavidL said:

Eabhal said:
Feels like a full eclipse here. Everyone turning their lights on.
Is that Edinburgh? We were out for a walk this morning in glorious sunshine. Still nice although it is clouding over a bit.

Overcast and gloomy with rumbling thunder in Edinburgh right now.

Casino_Royale · 7:53AM

Mortimer said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.
I agree. They've absolutely blown their opportunity to be the 'alternative choice' - eclipsed as the third party by both Reform and Greens.

They did well last time due to a desire to eject the Tories.

If the desire is to eject Labour instead, then the deal fractures and they're down to a focus leaflet defence.

Foxy · 7:54AM

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.

Under current polling it is the Tories that are losing seats.

HYUFD · 7:54AM

Omnium said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
'...turns out to be meh'? That's like saying Lara Croft turns out to be hot, or GTA turns out to be overpriced and seemingly locking full-game content behind an additional fee.
Perhaps Andy Burnham surprises on the upside.
Mr. Eagles, that is not impossible. I may also win the lottery.
Never underestimate the brilliance of an alumnus of the University of Cambridge.
I suspect we may have to adopt a minor exemption to the rule. English graduates beginning with B. Burgon has clearly carved out a niche exemption for himself, but I suspect we'll have to widen it to all the Bs.

Burnham will be the first English grad we have ever had as PM. We have had plenty of History, Law, PPE, Classics and Greats graduates of course and even a Geographer in Theresa May, a Chemistry grad in Thatcher and an Oriental Languages grad in Eden and Gladstone studied Mathematics alongside Classics getting a double first in both but never an English graduate entering No 10

JohnLilburne · 7:56AM

I'm the meantime, a local weather station reports it is significantly warmer at 8am than either yesterday or Wednesday so I am slightly sceptical about the heat backing off a bit. Unless it clouds over or something. 29 degrees at 8:50 is ridiculous, and the overnight temperature didn't go below 21°. I have managed to make sleeping possible though, by deciding to screw security and open all the windows, and had a cool shower before going to bed. Having said that, I'm still not sleeping but I think I am just going through one of my insomniac periods.

Big_G_NorthWales · 7:57AM

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.
Under current polling it is the Tories that are losing seats.

Good morning

https://x.com/i/status/2070396953158930711

https://x.com/i/status/2070298348460835093

HYUFD · 7:58AM

TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour plans automatic tax deductions from state pension

Basic rate to be applied to payments that exceed the tax-free allowance from next year, reports say

Income tax will be automatically deducted from state pensions for millions of retirees under plans being considered by Labour, The Telegraph understands.

Under the plans, the basic 20pc rate of tax could be applied to payments when the value of the state pension rises beyond the tax-free allowance of £12,570 next year.

It comes after Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, previously said retirees who live only on the state pension would not be forced to pay tax when their income crosses the threshold.

But research commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions, and circulated within Whitehall, proposes deducting the basic tax rate from all state pension payments before they are sent to retirees.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/state-pensions/income-tax-to-automatically-come-out-of-state-pension/

Another Labour attack on higher earning and wealthy pensioners after the WFA cut

Morris_Dancer · 7:58AM

Theuniondivvie said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mortimer said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.
I agree. They've absolutely blown their opportunity to be the 'alternative choice' - eclipsed as the third party by both Reform and Greens.
Aye, too fixated on having agreeable opinions for Waitrose shoppers. Don't want to sully themselves with things that might offend WASPI fools or get votes from the Great Unwashed.
I wouldn’t vote LD if you paid me, but I’d read on here that the Greens and Reform are ghastly populists. No brownie points for the LDs avoiding descending to their level?

Mr. Divvie, supporting WASPI nonsense might be argued to be populist.

Just because someone's currently indicating they'll vote Reform/Green doesn't make them a lunatic whose vote can never be regained by a more sensible party.

geoffw · 7:59AM

HYUFD said:

Omnium said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
'...turns out to be meh'? That's like saying Lara Croft turns out to be hot, or GTA turns out to be overpriced and seemingly locking full-game content behind an additional fee.
Perhaps Andy Burnham surprises on the upside.
Mr. Eagles, that is not impossible. I may also win the lottery.
Never underestimate the brilliance of an alumnus of the University of Cambridge.
I suspect we may have to adopt a minor exemption to the rule. English graduates beginning with B. Burgon has clearly carved out a niche exemption for himself, but I suspect we'll have to widen it to all the Bs.
Burnham will be the first English grad we have ever had as PM. We have had plenty of History, Law, PPE, Classics and Greats graduates of course and even a Geographer in Theresa May, a Chemistry grad in Thatcher and an Oriental Languages grad in Eden but never an English graduate entering No 10

We'll pay special attention to his grammar and literary allusions

JohnLilburne · 7:59AM

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour plans automatic tax deductions from state pension

Basic rate to be applied to payments that exceed the tax-free allowance from next year, reports say

Income tax will be automatically deducted from state pensions for millions of retirees under plans being considered by Labour, The Telegraph understands.

Under the plans, the basic 20pc rate of tax could be applied to payments when the value of the state pension rises beyond the tax-free allowance of £12,570 next year.

It comes after Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, previously said retirees who live only on the state pension would not be forced to pay tax when their income crosses the threshold.

But research commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions, and circulated within Whitehall, proposes deducting the basic tax rate from all state pension payments before they are sent to retirees.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/state-pensions/income-tax-to-automatically-come-out-of-state-pension/
Another Labour attack on higher earning and wealthy pensioners after the WFA cut

Idiot. They already pay tax, it just has to be taken from other sources of income.

DavidL · 7:59AM

Sandpit said:
Don’t see too much of Russia on fire this morning, so instead have the 15km queue of thousands of vehicles waiting to get over the Kerch Bridge out of Crimea.

https://x.com/maria_drutska/status/2070403688372269522

Ukraine is telling everyone on the peninsula, civilian and military, to leave as soon as possible, and the Kerch Bridge is now the only reliable way out still left, for light vehicles only. There’s extensive disruption to power and water already, with the promise of more disruption to come.

Said a couple of weeks ago that Russian control of Crimea was on the point of collapsing. If anything, I have been surprised with the speed of developments since then.

HYUFD · 8:00AM

TheScreamingEagles said:
I see the whole world hates Scotland.

Last night's results couldn't have been any worse for Scotland plus we have a new Disgrace of Gijón, the Disgrace of San Francisco.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/live/c8d2e4geze2t

We should kick Australia out of the Commonwealth and stop sharing a monarch with them.

The King is proudly King of Australia and Scotland the Aussies playing well can hardly be played for Scotland's poor performance against Brazil

Casino_Royale · 8:01AM

On topic, you have to factor in whether you think Burnham will go early or not.

If he does, he will go soon (in October, say) and Labour Majority will be value.

If he goes long, then it's a mix-up.

HYUFD · 8:03AM

noneoftheabove said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

noneoftheabove said:
I am a big backer of a Tory majority. No idea how we get there, in quite a short space of time, but after all it is the natural order of British politics and there are strong reasons to oppose the other options.
Reform implode and Burnham proves to be meh.
Sure but the issue is that the Tories are almost wiped out in swathes of the country, how do they regenerate there even if Reform and Labour aren't seen as good options?

Where Reform and Labour aren't seen as good options the Kemi Tories are doing well actually eg Scotland and London and patches of the Home Counties. Basically ironically the Tories under Kemi are polling best in Remain areas where the LDs aren't strong and Reform are weak and the Tories are the main alternative to Labour or the SNP

Big_G_NorthWales · 8:03AM

Gallowgate said:
Re. @Taz’s discussion in the previous thread re. restrictive covenants. In my experience you just don’t ask and generally nobody cares with few exceptions where the person with the benefit of the covenant still has an interest in enforcing it, like a housing developer who is still building.

That is true and why insurance against enforcement is relatively cheap

HYUFD · 8:06AM

JohnLilburne said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour plans automatic tax deductions from state pension

Basic rate to be applied to payments that exceed the tax-free allowance from next year, reports say

Income tax will be automatically deducted from state pensions for millions of retirees under plans being considered by Labour, The Telegraph understands.

Under the plans, the basic 20pc rate of tax could be applied to payments when the value of the state pension rises beyond the tax-free allowance of £12,570 next year.

It comes after Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, previously said retirees who live only on the state pension would not be forced to pay tax when their income crosses the threshold.

But research commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions, and circulated within Whitehall, proposes deducting the basic tax rate from all state pension payments before they are sent to retirees.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/state-pensions/income-tax-to-automatically-come-out-of-state-pension/
Another Labour attack on higher earning and wealthy pensioners after the WFA cut
Idiot. They already pay tax, it just has to be taken from other sources of income.

So would hit those only receiving a state pension too then

eek · 8:06AM

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour plans automatic tax deductions from state pension

Basic rate to be applied to payments that exceed the tax-free allowance from next year, reports say

Income tax will be automatically deducted from state pensions for millions of retirees under plans being considered by Labour, The Telegraph understands.

Under the plans, the basic 20pc rate of tax could be applied to payments when the value of the state pension rises beyond the tax-free allowance of £12,570 next year.

It comes after Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, previously said retirees who live only on the state pension would not be forced to pay tax when their income crosses the threshold.

But research commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions, and circulated within Whitehall, proposes deducting the basic tax rate from all state pension payments before they are sent to retirees.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/state-pensions/income-tax-to-automatically-come-out-of-state-pension/
Another Labour attack on higher earning and wealthy pensioners after the WFA cut

Um what are you talking about - it’s just applying PAYE logic to state pension payments so that the £4.20 in tax is taken monthly at source in the same way normal work and pension payments work

The thing is pensions are taxable income, the personal allowance is once again below the state pension so tax needs to be paid on the bit above the personal allowance

DougSeal · 8:07AM

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour plans automatic tax deductions from state pension

Basic rate to be applied to payments that exceed the tax-free allowance from next year, reports say

Income tax will be automatically deducted from state pensions for millions of retirees under plans being considered by Labour, The Telegraph understands.

Under the plans, the basic 20pc rate of tax could be applied to payments when the value of the state pension rises beyond the tax-free allowance of £12,570 next year.

It comes after Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, previously said retirees who live only on the state pension would not be forced to pay tax when their income crosses the threshold.

But research commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions, and circulated within Whitehall, proposes deducting the basic tax rate from all state pension payments before they are sent to retirees.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/state-pensions/income-tax-to-automatically-come-out-of-state-pension/
Another Labour attack on higher earning and wealthy pensioners after the WFA cut

How? This applies only to the state pension. I’m not sure it makes all that much difference to wealthy pensioners who are already taxed on their personal pensions.

Sandpit · 8:10AM

DavidL said:

Sandpit said:
Don’t see too much of Russia on fire this morning, so instead have the 15km queue of thousands of vehicles waiting to get over the Kerch Bridge out of Crimea.

https://x.com/maria_drutska/status/2070403688372269522

Ukraine is telling everyone on the peninsula, civilian and military, to leave as soon as possible, and the Kerch Bridge is now the only reliable way out still left, for light vehicles only. There’s extensive disruption to power and water already, with the promise of more disruption to come.
Said a couple of weeks ago that Russian control of Crimea was on the point of collapsing. If anything, I have been surprised with the speed of developments since then.

Yep, as soon as they had fire control on the main road through the Donbas down towards Crimea, this was always going to happen. Then they started taking out the bridges to the North of Crimea and it was obvious what was about to happen.

It will be Putin’s ultimate humiliation to lose what he’s held since 2014, the jewel in the crown of the occupation.

JohnLilburne · 8:11AM

HYUFD said:

JohnLilburne said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour plans automatic tax deductions from state pension

Basic rate to be applied to payments that exceed the tax-free allowance from next year, reports say

Income tax will be automatically deducted from state pensions for millions of retirees under plans being considered by Labour, The Telegraph understands.

Under the plans, the basic 20pc rate of tax could be applied to payments when the value of the state pension rises beyond the tax-free allowance of £12,570 next year.

It comes after Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, previously said retirees who live only on the state pension would not be forced to pay tax when their income crosses the threshold.

But research commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions, and circulated within Whitehall, proposes deducting the basic tax rate from all state pension payments before they are sent to retirees.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/state-pensions/income-tax-to-automatically-come-out-of-state-pension/
Another Labour attack on higher earning and wealthy pensioners after the WFA cut
Idiot. They already pay tax, it just has to be taken from other sources of income.
So would hit those only receiving a state pension too then

Yes, because they will be earning over the tax free allowance threshold, so will be treated the same as everyone else. It's really a hit on all lower-paid taxpayers, due to the TFA being repeatedly frozen

Cicero · 8:12AM

Morris_Dancer said:

Mortimer said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

IanB2 said:
On topic, I've laid a Reform majority down to 4.2 (available Jan-Feb - its now out to 10.0), and backed NOM previously, so I'm quite green on NOM. TSE is right that this might be a good time to consider laying off some NOM as a trading position, but if the LDs are solid in most of their 70 seats, and the SNP continues to dominate in Scotland, at least a few PC and Green gains looking credible, and of course Reform high in the polls - if you discount a Reform majority - as I would, the bar for achieving a majority by Tory or Labour looks pretty high.

So nevertheless I've laid off some NOM and am now green on all outcomes except a Reform majority, which is a comfortable position to be in.
Yes, the key thing is those 70 or so Lib Dem seats (and then add on another 20ish plausibles?). On most winning maps for the Conservatives, they need to be blue not yellow. Getting to 326 without them isn't impossible, but the Conservatives need to win pretty much everywhere else that they have a nanochance.

First trouble is that the Yellow Peril are famously hard to shift until the election after they become a junior coalition partner.

Second one is that Kemi and Ed aren't Dave and Nick.
The Lin=bDems will be on defence come the next election. I expect them to lose seats.
I agree. They've absolutely blown their opportunity to be the 'alternative choice' - eclipsed as the third party by both Reform and Greens.
Aye, too fixated on having agreeable opinions for Waitrose shoppers. Don't want to sully themselves with things that might offend WASPI fools or get votes from the Great Unwashed.

Well their MPs get things done and are often experts in their fields. The policies are not timorous: abolition of the Treasury being just one plank of a well thought out programme of reform of public administration. The problem is that large chunks of the media think that Farage is a grave statesman, even though his corruption grows more manifest every day and that Davey is a clown, even though he has led his party to the best result in a century. I note that the polls quoted on headers in the last week do not even ask the question about the Lib dems, which maybe tells you something about the bias that is certainly out there.

The Lib Dems are working on it, and the advent of Burnham and the coming failure of Farage will shake the political kaleidoscope up quite a bit in the coming months. I would not be writing off the Lib Dems just yet- Gails is still expanding.

Sandpit · 8:12AM

Casino_Royale said:
On topic, you have to factor in whether you think Burnham will go early or not.

If he does, he will go soon (in October, say) and Labour Majority will be value.

If he goes long, then it's a mix-up.

One newspaper has been going back to 2022 Twitter…

Dura_Ace · 8:12AM

Sandpit said:
The Red Arrows have turned up in the US for the 4th July 250 celebrations.

Here they are doing the flypast for DC’s baseball team, ahead of their match yesterday.
https://x.com/newsairshow/status/2070289519778173401

MoD needs more money apparently.

Mortimer · 8:12AM

JohnLilburne said:
I'm the meantime, a local weather station reports it is significantly warmer at 8am than either yesterday or Wednesday so I am slightly sceptical about the heat backing off a bit. Unless it clouds over or something. 29 degrees at 8:50 is ridiculous, and the overnight temperature didn't go below 21°. I have managed to make sleeping possible though, by deciding to screw security and open all the windows, and had a cool shower before going to bed. Having said that, I'm still not sleeping but I think I am just going through one of my insomniac periods.

Down to 20 here in Dorset - with a lovely cool breeze too. Just opened everything to get the hot air out....

Selebian · 8:13AM

kinabalu said:
I retain my view that NOM is just about hardcoded in. The Cons can't do it because of the LD block in the South. Reform can't do it because they just can't. Lab can, if Burnham can put their red wall / metro left / non racist floater coalition back together, but that's a tall order indeed even if (which it very well might) the economy upswings.

It's an interesting point - what does success at the next GE look like for Burnham. From here, any majority would look like a big win, but that's still a bad night for a hell of a lot of Labour MPs and a big step back from the win of Starmer (pbuh)

Big_G_NorthWales · 8:13AM

HYUFD said:
Interesting that Labour is now seen as having slightly more chance than Reform or the Tories of an overall majority. I think with Burnham that is a possibility in a way it would not have been with Starmer. Burnham could get a small majority given his higher favourable ratings than Farage or Badenoch, helped by anti Reform tactical votes in Labour v Reform marginal seats, though that would likely still see around 100 Labour MPs lose their seats.

If that was the case, then another Labour majority and a clear defeat for both Reform and the Tories would clearly see both Farage and Kemi resign. In which case as long as we keep FPTP a new figure would be needed to unite the right as clearly the division between Reform and the Tories would have played a big part in re electing Labour given on the MiC poll this week while a Burnham led Labour leads Reform by just 1% and the Tories by just 4% the Tories and Reform combined are still on 49% of the vote even against Burnham. Who could that figure be? Only one I can see who could do that is Jacob Rees Mogg if he wins back his seat, The Mogg could reunite the right in the same way Corbyn united the left

World class 'havering' as the Scots would say

Rees Mogg to unite the right is a weird dream of yours

HYUFD · 8:14AM

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:
Interesting that Labour is now seen as having slightly more chance than Reform or the Tories of an overall majority. I think with Burnham that is a possibility in a way it would not have been with Starmer. Burnham could get a small majority given his higher favourable ratings than Farage or Badenoch, helped by anti Reform tactical votes in Labour v Reform marginal seats, though that would likely still see around 100 Labour MPs lose their seats.

If that was the case, then another Labour majority and a clear defeat for both Reform and the Tories would clearly see both Farage and Kemi resign. In which case as long as we keep FPTP a new figure would be needed to unite the right as clearly the division between Reform and the Tories would have played a big part in re electing Labour given on the MiC poll this week while a Burnham led Labour leads Reform by just 1% and the Tories by just 4% the Tories and Reform combined are still on 49% of the vote even against Burnham. Who could that figure be? Only one I can see who could do that is Jacob Rees Mogg if he wins back his seat, The Mogg could reunite the right in the same way Corbyn united the left
I blame the heat.

After the Tories won an unexpected majority against Ed Miliband in 2015, arguably Labour's Kemi, who was it who replaced Ed Miliband as Labour leader? Jeremy Corbyn, who of course beat Burnham who was runner up when he ran that time. Who is the Tories Jeremy Corbyn? Jacob Rees Mogg. Everyone laughed at Labour and wrote off Corbyn completely but they weren't laughing in 2017 when Corbyn Labour got 40% and a hung parliament and May only just scraped home with most seats

Mortimer · 8:14AM

Casino_Royale said:
On topic, you have to factor in whether you think Burnham will go early or not.

If he does, he will go soon (in October, say) and Labour Majority will be value.

If he goes long, then it's a mix-up.

Lots of Labour MPs will lose their seats either way - I can't see him being welcomed with open arms only to lose their cushy incomes even sooner than they would have done with Starmer.

Much like Cabinet Ministers not liking to resign, one suspects there will be immense PLP pressure to not go early.

eek · 8:14AM

Sandpit said:

Casino_Royale said:
On topic, you have to factor in whether you think Burnham will go early or not.

If he does, he will go soon (in October, say) and Labour Majority will be value.

If he goes long, then it's a mix-up.
One newspaper has been going back to 2022 Twitter…

The response will be that oppositions will use any excuse to try and get an election. Truss / Rishi didn’t so I don’t need to.

See you in 2.5 years time

Got to say having wasted 2 years Labour had given Andy a lot of work to do

Sandpit · 8:15AM

Dura_Ace said:

Sandpit said:
The Red Arrows have turned up in the US for the 4th July 250 celebrations.

Here they are doing the flypast for DC’s baseball team, ahead of their match yesterday.
https://x.com/newsairshow/status/2070289519778173401
MoD needs more money apparently.

I know you hate RAFAT, but they cost almost nothing in the context of the overall MoD budget, project fcukloads of soft power wherever they go abroad, and do a great job of helping with recruitment back at home.

Oh, and they put on a damn good show, which makes millions of people happy every year.

Worth every penny.

Big_G_NorthWales · 8:15AM

JohnLilburne said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:
Labour plans automatic tax deductions from state pension

Basic rate to be applied to payments that exceed the tax-free allowance from next year, reports say

Income tax will be automatically deducted from state pensions for millions of retirees under plans being considered by Labour, The Telegraph understands.

Under the plans, the basic 20pc rate of tax could be applied to payments when the value of the state pension rises beyond the tax-free allowance of £12,570 next year.

It comes after Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, previously said retirees who live only on the state pension would not be forced to pay tax when their income crosses the threshold.

But research commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions, and circulated within Whitehall, proposes deducting the basic tax rate from all state pension payments before they are sent to retirees.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/state-pensions/income-tax-to-automatically-come-out-of-state-pension/
Another Labour attack on higher earning and wealthy pensioners after the WFA cut
Idiot. They already pay tax, it just has to be taken from other sources of income.

My tax is taken from my private pension which is paid net of tax

Majorities – politicalbetting.com

Comments