Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
See - better at politics already. That's what we all wanted right?
More seriously triple lock is not a top priority to address.
If Burnham can use political capital on land tax/council tax reform as is being briefed, that is a much bigger prize.
One distinctive Burnham approach in Manchester is that he has regularly done radio phone ins. Unfortunately for him, a favourite subject has been the Manchester ULEZ, which he changed to a different strategy to meet the targets.
He'll be looking for something to keep in more direct touch with the public than a normal PM. Expect longish podcast interviews / conversations.
Reporters and Andrew Neil will have kittens, but that is probably a feature not a bug.
Sounds like Cameron Direct that David Cameron did, hardly an unheard of concept.
Did Dave keep doing them once he was in Downing Street? (Genuinely, I don't know.)
There are many things that seem like good politics until the "questions that nobody else can resolve" hosepipe is pointed at you 24/7.
As an aside for @TSE -- Speccie this weekend reports that Cameron has been helping school Kemi for PMQs.
Yup, Dave has my levels of self confidence and modesty.
Kemi Badenoch takes advice from Tory leaders to boost PMQs performance
The Tory leader has spoken to all her living predecessors — except one.
Boris Johnson made the case that Nigel Farage comes with the ‘whiff of sulphur’
Kemi Badenoch has taken advice from every former living Conservative leader, except Liz Truss, as she attempts to rebuild trust in the party.
Badenoch has held meetings with her predecessors including Sir John Major, Lord Hague of Richmond, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton, Baroness May of Maidenhead, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.
She is understood to have taken the most advice from Duncan Smith and Cameron, who is said to have told her: “There are only three living people who have gone from being leader of the opposition to being prime minister. I am the only one who wants to help you.”
The Spectator reported that Johnson spoke at the opening of the party’s new headquarters in London and has been in touch with Badenoch about how best to take on Nigel Farage.
He said: “Is it not wonderful, poetic, beautiful to see Reform being devoured, haemorrhaging votes on the right to this party called Restore, which sounds like a sort of hair-loss potion or something?”
Speccie also saying that Boris is gearing up to return to the front line fray having put sufficient "hay in the loft" for the family.
One of the things that differentiates Tories from Reformers is in their attitude to Ukraine. And one thing about Boris is his absolute commitment to Ukraine and anger at anyone who backslides on this. No Reformer he.
I think this goes some way to explaining the antagonism between him and Farage, a long-time repeater of Kremlin lines, and who has said he won't commit UK troops to Ukraine when the war ends. Will be interesting, not to say entertaining, if Boris returns to the fray.
JRM came on board with Kemi this week apparently
Oh dear. She can't win at everything.
On the subject of JRM, Viz Top Tips made me chuckle earlier.
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Fully agree with @turbotubbs. I called out @Roger years ago when he expressed the view that “Me Too” was a director’s perk.
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
See - better at politics already. That's what we all wanted right?
More seriously triple lock is not a top priority to address.
If Burnham can use political capital on land tax/council tax reform as is being briefed, that is a much bigger prize.
One distinctive Burnham approach in Manchester is that he has regularly done radio phone ins. Unfortunately for him, a favourite subject has been the Manchester ULEZ, which he changed to a different strategy to meet the targets.
He'll be looking for something to keep in more direct touch with the public than a normal PM. Expect longish podcast interviews / conversations.
Reporters and Andrew Neil will have kittens, but that is probably a feature not a bug.
Sounds like Cameron Direct that David Cameron did, hardly an unheard of concept.
Did Dave keep doing them once he was in Downing Street? (Genuinely, I don't know.)
There are many things that seem like good politics until the "questions that nobody else can resolve" hosepipe is pointed at you 24/7.
As an aside for @TSE -- Speccie this weekend reports that Cameron has been helping school Kemi for PMQs.
Yup, Dave has my levels of self confidence and modesty.
Kemi Badenoch takes advice from Tory leaders to boost PMQs performance
The Tory leader has spoken to all her living predecessors — except one.
Boris Johnson made the case that Nigel Farage comes with the ‘whiff of sulphur’
Kemi Badenoch has taken advice from every former living Conservative leader, except Liz Truss, as she attempts to rebuild trust in the party.
Badenoch has held meetings with her predecessors including Sir John Major, Lord Hague of Richmond, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton, Baroness May of Maidenhead, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.
She is understood to have taken the most advice from Duncan Smith and Cameron, who is said to have told her: “There are only three living people who have gone from being leader of the opposition to being prime minister. I am the only one who wants to help you.”
The Spectator reported that Johnson spoke at the opening of the party’s new headquarters in London and has been in touch with Badenoch about how best to take on Nigel Farage.
He said: “Is it not wonderful, poetic, beautiful to see Reform being devoured, haemorrhaging votes on the right to this party called Restore, which sounds like a sort of hair-loss potion or something?”
Speccie also saying that Boris is gearing up to return to the front line fray having put sufficient "hay in the loft" for the family.
One of the things that differentiates Tories from Reformers is in their attitude to Ukraine. And one thing about Boris is his absolute commitment to Ukraine and anger at anyone who backslides on this. No Reformer he.
I think this goes some way to explaining the antagonism between him and Farage, a long-time repeater of Kremlin lines, and who has said he won't commit UK troops to Ukraine when the war ends. Will be interesting, not to say entertaining, if Boris returns to the fray.
JRM came on board with Kemi this week apparently
Oh dear. She can't win at everything.
As @TSE has said Kemi involvement with all past conservative leaders and PMs, excluding Truss, is impressive and if they publically endorse her and campaign for her it will be quite a win
Would you mind if I borrowed your rose tinted spectacles? I still don't see the political genius you have detected.
Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
See - better at politics already. That's what we all wanted right?
More seriously triple lock is not a top priority to address.
If Burnham can use political capital on land tax/council tax reform as is being briefed, that is a much bigger prize.
One distinctive Burnham approach in Manchester is that he has regularly done radio phone ins. Unfortunately for him, a favourite subject has been the Manchester ULEZ, which he changed to a different strategy to meet the targets.
He'll be looking for something to keep in more direct touch with the public than a normal PM. Expect longish podcast interviews / conversations.
Reporters and Andrew Neil will have kittens, but that is probably a feature not a bug.
Sounds like Cameron Direct that David Cameron did, hardly an unheard of concept.
Did Dave keep doing them once he was in Downing Street? (Genuinely, I don't know.)
There are many things that seem like good politics until the "questions that nobody else can resolve" hosepipe is pointed at you 24/7.
As an aside for @TSE -- Speccie this weekend reports that Cameron has been helping school Kemi for PMQs.
Yup, Dave has my levels of self confidence and modesty.
Kemi Badenoch takes advice from Tory leaders to boost PMQs performance
The Tory leader has spoken to all her living predecessors — except one.
Boris Johnson made the case that Nigel Farage comes with the ‘whiff of sulphur’
Kemi Badenoch has taken advice from every former living Conservative leader, except Liz Truss, as she attempts to rebuild trust in the party.
Badenoch has held meetings with her predecessors including Sir John Major, Lord Hague of Richmond, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton, Baroness May of Maidenhead, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.
She is understood to have taken the most advice from Duncan Smith and Cameron, who is said to have told her: “There are only three living people who have gone from being leader of the opposition to being prime minister. I am the only one who wants to help you.”
The Spectator reported that Johnson spoke at the opening of the party’s new headquarters in London and has been in touch with Badenoch about how best to take on Nigel Farage.
He said: “Is it not wonderful, poetic, beautiful to see Reform being devoured, haemorrhaging votes on the right to this party called Restore, which sounds like a sort of hair-loss potion or something?”
Speccie also saying that Boris is gearing up to return to the front line fray having put sufficient "hay in the loft" for the family.
One of the things that differentiates Tories from Reformers is in their attitude to Ukraine. And one thing about Boris is his absolute commitment to Ukraine and anger at anyone who backslides on this. No Reformer he.
I think this goes some way to explaining the antagonism between him and Farage, a long-time repeater of Kremlin lines, and who has said he won't commit UK troops to Ukraine when the war ends. Will be interesting, not to say entertaining, if Boris returns to the fray.
JRM came on board with Kemi this week apparently
Oh dear. She can't win at everything.
As @TSE has said Kemi involvement with all past conservative leaders and PMs, excluding Truss, is impressive and if they publically endorse her and campaign for her it will be quite a win
Would you mind if I borrowed your rose tinted spectacles? I still don't see the political genius you have detected.
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
Stop this please. It's yucky.
Obviously folk are yearning for People’s Courts with summary execution as an option, pitchforks and burning torches requisite.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Don't let the buggers get you down.
This is the same individual who thinks Putin is justified in invading Ukraine as he has a claim over Ukraine.
He has an utterly broken moral compass. Being the antithesis of roger is a badge of honour.
I'm not sure somebody who reacted with "good" to the Gaza devastation should be tossing around 'utterly broken moral compass' accusations.
Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
See - better at politics already. That's what we all wanted right?
More seriously triple lock is not a top priority to address.
If Burnham can use political capital on land tax/council tax reform as is being briefed, that is a much bigger prize.
One distinctive Burnham approach in Manchester is that he has regularly done radio phone ins. Unfortunately for him, a favourite subject has been the Manchester ULEZ, which he changed to a different strategy to meet the targets.
He'll be looking for something to keep in more direct touch with the public than a normal PM. Expect longish podcast interviews / conversations.
Reporters and Andrew Neil will have kittens, but that is probably a feature not a bug.
Sounds like Cameron Direct that David Cameron did, hardly an unheard of concept.
Did Dave keep doing them once he was in Downing Street? (Genuinely, I don't know.)
There are many things that seem like good politics until the "questions that nobody else can resolve" hosepipe is pointed at you 24/7.
As an aside for @TSE -- Speccie this weekend reports that Cameron has been helping school Kemi for PMQs.
Yup, Dave has my levels of self confidence and modesty.
Kemi Badenoch takes advice from Tory leaders to boost PMQs performance
The Tory leader has spoken to all her living predecessors — except one.
Boris Johnson made the case that Nigel Farage comes with the ‘whiff of sulphur’
Kemi Badenoch has taken advice from every former living Conservative leader, except Liz Truss, as she attempts to rebuild trust in the party.
Badenoch has held meetings with her predecessors including Sir John Major, Lord Hague of Richmond, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton, Baroness May of Maidenhead, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.
She is understood to have taken the most advice from Duncan Smith and Cameron, who is said to have told her: “There are only three living people who have gone from being leader of the opposition to being prime minister. I am the only one who wants to help you.”
The Spectator reported that Johnson spoke at the opening of the party’s new headquarters in London and has been in touch with Badenoch about how best to take on Nigel Farage.
He said: “Is it not wonderful, poetic, beautiful to see Reform being devoured, haemorrhaging votes on the right to this party called Restore, which sounds like a sort of hair-loss potion or something?”
Speccie also saying that Boris is gearing up to return to the front line fray having put sufficient "hay in the loft" for the family.
One of the things that differentiates Tories from Reformers is in their attitude to Ukraine. And one thing about Boris is his absolute commitment to Ukraine and anger at anyone who backslides on this. No Reformer he.
I think this goes some way to explaining the antagonism between him and Farage, a long-time repeater of Kremlin lines, and who has said he won't commit UK troops to Ukraine when the war ends. Will be interesting, not to say entertaining, if Boris returns to the fray.
JRM came on board with Kemi this week apparently
Oh dear. She can't win at everything.
As @TSE has said Kemi involvement with all past conservative leaders and PMs, excluding Truss, is impressive and if they publically endorse her and campaign for her it will be quite a win
Would you mind if I borrowed your rose tinted spectacles? I still don't see the political genius you have detected.
Its like being chased by the bear. Kimi doesn't need to be a political genius, she needs to be better than the field. It's a seriously low bar right now. It remains to be seen if Burnham is able to raise it at all.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Don't let the buggers get you down.
This is the same individual who thinks Putin is justified in invading Ukraine as he has a claim over Ukraine.
He has an utterly broken moral compass. Being the antithesis of roger is a badge of honour.
I'm not sure somebody who reacted with "good" to the Gaza devastation should be tossing around 'utterly broken moral compass' accusations.
That's an utter misrepresentation but I am used to that by now.
Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
See - better at politics already. That's what we all wanted right?
More seriously triple lock is not a top priority to address.
If Burnham can use political capital on land tax/council tax reform as is being briefed, that is a much bigger prize.
One distinctive Burnham approach in Manchester is that he has regularly done radio phone ins. Unfortunately for him, a favourite subject has been the Manchester ULEZ, which he changed to a different strategy to meet the targets.
He'll be looking for something to keep in more direct touch with the public than a normal PM. Expect longish podcast interviews / conversations.
Reporters and Andrew Neil will have kittens, but that is probably a feature not a bug.
Sounds like Cameron Direct that David Cameron did, hardly an unheard of concept.
Did Dave keep doing them once he was in Downing Street? (Genuinely, I don't know.)
There are many things that seem like good politics until the "questions that nobody else can resolve" hosepipe is pointed at you 24/7.
As an aside for @TSE -- Speccie this weekend reports that Cameron has been helping school Kemi for PMQs.
Yup, Dave has my levels of self confidence and modesty.
Kemi Badenoch takes advice from Tory leaders to boost PMQs performance
The Tory leader has spoken to all her living predecessors — except one.
Boris Johnson made the case that Nigel Farage comes with the ‘whiff of sulphur’
Kemi Badenoch has taken advice from every former living Conservative leader, except Liz Truss, as she attempts to rebuild trust in the party.
Badenoch has held meetings with her predecessors including Sir John Major, Lord Hague of Richmond, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton, Baroness May of Maidenhead, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.
She is understood to have taken the most advice from Duncan Smith and Cameron, who is said to have told her: “There are only three living people who have gone from being leader of the opposition to being prime minister. I am the only one who wants to help you.”
The Spectator reported that Johnson spoke at the opening of the party’s new headquarters in London and has been in touch with Badenoch about how best to take on Nigel Farage.
He said: “Is it not wonderful, poetic, beautiful to see Reform being devoured, haemorrhaging votes on the right to this party called Restore, which sounds like a sort of hair-loss potion or something?”
Speccie also saying that Boris is gearing up to return to the front line fray having put sufficient "hay in the loft" for the family.
One of the things that differentiates Tories from Reformers is in their attitude to Ukraine. And one thing about Boris is his absolute commitment to Ukraine and anger at anyone who backslides on this. No Reformer he.
I think this goes some way to explaining the antagonism between him and Farage, a long-time repeater of Kremlin lines, and who has said he won't commit UK troops to Ukraine when the war ends. Will be interesting, not to say entertaining, if Boris returns to the fray.
JRM came on board with Kemi this week apparently
Oh dear. She can't win at everything.
As @TSE has said Kemi involvement with all past conservative leaders and PMs, excluding Truss, is impressive and if they publically endorse her and campaign for her it will be quite a win
Would you mind if I borrowed your rose tinted spectacles? I still don't see the political genius you have detected.
Its like being chased by the bear. Kimi doesn't need to be a political genius, she needs to be better than the field. It's a seriously low bar right now. It remains to be seen if Burnham is able to raise it at all.
The field is her shadow cabinet, not Burnham.
And yes, they do make her look good. Its like going on the pull with your ugliest mate, so you look handsome in comparison.
This game, for almost the first time in fairness, makes me wonder about the wisdom of a larger WC. Neither of these teams has any obvious quality, neither should be playing for a position in the last 16. Its been tedious in the extreme. Extra time was almost inevitable. The goal threat of both of them is miniscule.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Oh no, no Cyclefree please don't leave the site! You make an amazing contribution here with your detailed thoughtful and insightful articles as well as your comments in the threads. I don't always agree with your political stance here but I always respect it and take your point of view on board especially due to your incredible background knowledge of the law and how it plays out politically at our Westminster Parliament. What ever I am when it comes to being a tribal Scottish Conservative, I am a stronger supporter of that Parliament functioning as a collective body to hold the Government of the day to account who ever is in power.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
See - better at politics already. That's what we all wanted right?
More seriously triple lock is not a top priority to address.
If Burnham can use political capital on land tax/council tax reform as is being briefed, that is a much bigger prize.
One distinctive Burnham approach in Manchester is that he has regularly done radio phone ins. Unfortunately for him, a favourite subject has been the Manchester ULEZ, which he changed to a different strategy to meet the targets.
He'll be looking for something to keep in more direct touch with the public than a normal PM. Expect longish podcast interviews / conversations.
Reporters and Andrew Neil will have kittens, but that is probably a feature not a bug.
Sounds like Cameron Direct that David Cameron did, hardly an unheard of concept.
Did Dave keep doing them once he was in Downing Street? (Genuinely, I don't know.)
There are many things that seem like good politics until the "questions that nobody else can resolve" hosepipe is pointed at you 24/7.
As an aside for @TSE -- Speccie this weekend reports that Cameron has been helping school Kemi for PMQs.
Yup, Dave has my levels of self confidence and modesty.
Kemi Badenoch takes advice from Tory leaders to boost PMQs performance
The Tory leader has spoken to all her living predecessors — except one.
Boris Johnson made the case that Nigel Farage comes with the ‘whiff of sulphur’
Kemi Badenoch has taken advice from every former living Conservative leader, except Liz Truss, as she attempts to rebuild trust in the party.
Badenoch has held meetings with her predecessors including Sir John Major, Lord Hague of Richmond, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton, Baroness May of Maidenhead, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.
She is understood to have taken the most advice from Duncan Smith and Cameron, who is said to have told her: “There are only three living people who have gone from being leader of the opposition to being prime minister. I am the only one who wants to help you.”
The Spectator reported that Johnson spoke at the opening of the party’s new headquarters in London and has been in touch with Badenoch about how best to take on Nigel Farage.
He said: “Is it not wonderful, poetic, beautiful to see Reform being devoured, haemorrhaging votes on the right to this party called Restore, which sounds like a sort of hair-loss potion or something?”
Speccie also saying that Boris is gearing up to return to the front line fray having put sufficient "hay in the loft" for the family.
One of the things that differentiates Tories from Reformers is in their attitude to Ukraine. And one thing about Boris is his absolute commitment to Ukraine and anger at anyone who backslides on this. No Reformer he.
I think this goes some way to explaining the antagonism between him and Farage, a long-time repeater of Kremlin lines, and who has said he won't commit UK troops to Ukraine when the war ends. Will be interesting, not to say entertaining, if Boris returns to the fray.
JRM came on board with Kemi this week apparently
Oh dear. She can't win at everything.
As @TSE has said Kemi involvement with all past conservative leaders and PMs, excluding Truss, is impressive and if they publically endorse her and campaign for her it will be quite a win
Would you mind if I borrowed your rose tinted spectacles? I still don't see the political genius you have detected.
Its like being chased by the bear. Kimi doesn't need to be a political genius, she needs to be better than the field. It's a seriously low bar right now. It remains to be seen if Burnham is able to raise it at all.
The field is her shadow cabinet, not Burnham.
And yes, they do make her look good. Its like going on the pull with your ugliest mate, so you look handsome in comparison.
And then you go home alone and realise you were the ugly mate.
Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
See - better at politics already. That's what we all wanted right?
More seriously triple lock is not a top priority to address.
If Burnham can use political capital on land tax/council tax reform as is being briefed, that is a much bigger prize.
One distinctive Burnham approach in Manchester is that he has regularly done radio phone ins. Unfortunately for him, a favourite subject has been the Manchester ULEZ, which he changed to a different strategy to meet the targets.
He'll be looking for something to keep in more direct touch with the public than a normal PM. Expect longish podcast interviews / conversations.
Reporters and Andrew Neil will have kittens, but that is probably a feature not a bug.
Sounds like Cameron Direct that David Cameron did, hardly an unheard of concept.
Did Dave keep doing them once he was in Downing Street? (Genuinely, I don't know.)
There are many things that seem like good politics until the "questions that nobody else can resolve" hosepipe is pointed at you 24/7.
As an aside for @TSE -- Speccie this weekend reports that Cameron has been helping school Kemi for PMQs.
Yup, Dave has my levels of self confidence and modesty.
Kemi Badenoch takes advice from Tory leaders to boost PMQs performance
The Tory leader has spoken to all her living predecessors — except one.
Boris Johnson made the case that Nigel Farage comes with the ‘whiff of sulphur’
Kemi Badenoch has taken advice from every former living Conservative leader, except Liz Truss, as she attempts to rebuild trust in the party.
Badenoch has held meetings with her predecessors including Sir John Major, Lord Hague of Richmond, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton, Baroness May of Maidenhead, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.
She is understood to have taken the most advice from Duncan Smith and Cameron, who is said to have told her: “There are only three living people who have gone from being leader of the opposition to being prime minister. I am the only one who wants to help you.”
The Spectator reported that Johnson spoke at the opening of the party’s new headquarters in London and has been in touch with Badenoch about how best to take on Nigel Farage.
He said: “Is it not wonderful, poetic, beautiful to see Reform being devoured, haemorrhaging votes on the right to this party called Restore, which sounds like a sort of hair-loss potion or something?”
Speccie also saying that Boris is gearing up to return to the front line fray having put sufficient "hay in the loft" for the family.
One of the things that differentiates Tories from Reformers is in their attitude to Ukraine. And one thing about Boris is his absolute commitment to Ukraine and anger at anyone who backslides on this. No Reformer he.
I think this goes some way to explaining the antagonism between him and Farage, a long-time repeater of Kremlin lines, and who has said he won't commit UK troops to Ukraine when the war ends. Will be interesting, not to say entertaining, if Boris returns to the fray.
JRM came on board with Kemi this week apparently
Oh dear. She can't win at everything.
As @TSE has said Kemi involvement with all past conservative leaders and PMs, excluding Truss, is impressive and if they publically endorse her and campaign for her it will be quite a win
Would you mind if I borrowed your rose tinted spectacles? I still don't see the political genius you have detected.
Its like being chased by the bear. Kimi doesn't need to be a political genius, she needs to be better than the field. It's a seriously low bar right now. It remains to be seen if Burnham is able to raise it at all.
The field is her shadow cabinet, not Burnham.
And yes, they do make her look good. Its like going on the pull with your ugliest mate, so you look handsome in comparison.
This pub furniture on the Thames path in Strand-on-the-Green is a story that could go on a bit, as it is culture war plus local councillors who really do not like each other, and local politics in Chiswick is quite vigorous anyway. I lived on Park Road down there for about 3 years in the early 2000s, in a slightly expensive but very enjoyable one bedroom flat.
(One note: take care not to confuse your Hiltons. I think the protagonist is Alistair Hilton, who is claiming the Green Councillor set the police on him and to my eye overegging his pudding a little - it could go legal, with Adrian Hilton, who is in the debate but is I think the former "Archbishop Cranmer" blogger.)
The basic issue is about unlawful obstructions (the pub outdoor tables and chairs) on a public highway - the Thames Path, which here is either a Public Footpath, or an Adopted Highway in the relevant places. Two pubs, as 'landowners', seem to feel that that, and that they have been doing it for some years, means they should be able to continue to do it without a pavement license.
The local Conservative Councillor (and the Telegraph and the Standard and GB News) have weighed in in support of the pubs (and their customers who like sitting on the Thames Path), and it was a Green Councillor who made a report to ask that it be looked at, around accessibility for less mobile pedestrians to Pass and Repass along the Thames Path unobstructed.
Given my penchant for removing obstructions from public highways so mobility aids can use them, it will be clear where I stand - as long as the path is fully accessible (and there are endless technicalities about how wide it is, and what type of highway it is in each place) and easily useable, they can put their tables there provided there is a license and no obstruction. IMO here the clear path should be 4m wide.
The Council Officers were abrupt in their demands for removal, and after a word from the local councillor have now backed down to say "you can keep your tables whilst we thin about it), which is how it should have been in the first place.
The various bits of media are trying to make this about authoritarian Councils and Councillors banning outside drinking (which is afaics a lie, not that that will stop them), and police vs freedom of speech (around Hilton's twitter comments).
This could run and run. My prediction is that the pubs will cathc up to what the law requires, and then the seating will continue with appropriate adjustments.
All the pubs are recommended. I used to go on riverside dates down there.
4m wide seems very wide for a pathway. Presumably that to allow (for example) two wheelchair users to pass each other, but wouldn’t it be better to have passing bays? Otherwise I doubt that any riverside path in the country will be compliant with your demands
I promise not to take you down a rabbit hole but I'll put a bit of information on the bone !
We have a disease in this country of taking pedestrian space down to the absolute minimum, which makes using footpaths unpleasant when there is a fair amount of foot traffic, and that causes conflict which no one wants. The attitude is nasty, and small minded, and I hate it.
But we have several different recommended widths (Inclusive Mobility, LTN 1/20 and others), depending on volume, transport mode, and purpose. As a matter of principle, the space on a public highway belongs to the public, not to a private business who want to put their stuff on it for their own benefit. Landowners are always trying to do that, and they need to be less selfish. 4m is roughly where it is for a high foot fall environment, and I am making it slightly wider than minimum because using a footpath includes stopping to take in the view, to sit on a bench for a rest, and so on, which I think are common in Strand-on-the-Green.
The required width for a mobility aid to travel safely and comfortably is 1.5m width unobstructed, since the things themselves are up to about 1.0m, sometimes 1.2m, and extra width is required simple eg wheelchairs require width for hands outside to do wheeling. For two way that is 3.0m, minimum. And I don't accept lamp posts, sign posts, pedestrian cages, litter bins, cross pathway advertising hoardings where phone boxes used to be, Horse's f*cking Brobdingnagian phone masts, and all the rest as not being obstructions; they should be off the clear footway - but that is a slightly different tack !
On passing places, I reject the idea out of hand - except for special circumstances such as a pre-existing constraint. We build our normal carriageways for vehicles to be 5.5m width, so two can pass, except where eg we need traffic calming because many drivers cannot control themselves. The principle is precisely the same for footpaths and footways - imo if we think it through, that is a very basic, unarguable implication of Equality Law. Why should we make wheelchair users use passing spaces in everyday travel, when we do not do so for people who are less marginalised, and the facilities for pedestrians cost such little money?
We had an interesting debate the other week about Delivery Robots, which I have been feeding back as "expect serious resistance if you try to prevent these without a very carefully argued case". The association has a new Chairman, who did a very interesting presentation about developing values and a strategy for their centenary, here - provocative, but not especially radical:
But just to focus on the passing places. Let’s say that you have a riverside path that is 5m wide. I’m guessing you need about 2.5m to accommodate a table and two chairs.
But under your approach that is unacceptable in case there is a scenario where two wheelchair users need to pass each other. So the vast majority of people don’t get to enjoy the path.
My approach represents a reasonable accommodation; create a passing place so wheelchairs don’t lose the ability to pass each other, but also enable to space to be shared by others. But apparently that is so unacceptable as to be “rejected out of hand”
Thanks for elaborating. I disagree with your suggestion, but finding an accommodation is why we have local licenses, laws, and committees and councillors to consider needs and the law, and to come up with such an accommodation - which can then be appealed (i think) or challenged in court by either side if it is thought problematic.
The primary value I try and think from in this is equality. We do no allow pubs to spread their tables and chairs across the public highway ie the carriageway on your road or my road, and make all the cars wait in a passing place to wait and squeeze through one by one. Why should we impose that on mobility aid users of the public highway? I see no difference in principle.
Practically a passing place will not work - outside a pub it will have half-drunk people standing in it much of the time. There will be some who think it funny to poke, prod, throw beer, call them a spaz or similar, or do other things. And even sober people are fairly often abusive or threatening or even violent when asked to accommodate. Try asking some selfish parents parking on the yellow zigzag lines outside a primary school to drop off children, putting the other children at risk, to stop doing it (school staff will be abused if they try to act), or ask someone blocking a Zebra zig-zags or a drop kerb to move, and see what the response is. Mobility aid users will not often do that, because they have been verbally abused before and cannot run away - they are vulnerable.
Yes - 4.5m is ambitious, albeit arguable from national guidelines, but one always gets less than asked for so it is good to start thinking from the actual recommendations for good practice. Often much more is possible by being innovative than one expects.
In the case of the City Barge in @Malmesbury 's photo there is 4.25m from the face of the pub wall to the railing on the river edge. The tables take up ~2m perhaps with an extra chair on the end, and I think a shelf on the railing, which would have 0.6-0.8m of people leaning on it. That leaves about 1.5m.
I'd say a practical answer here could be French style 0.8m round cafe tables against the pub wall, taking up 1.2m max, a clear 3m path marked with a line, no shelf on the railing, and moveable chairs and tables if wanted placed on the concrete (?) tidal apron when the tide is out - which in that part of Chiswick is a lot of the time.
But that’s exactly the point. On narrow roads we *do* use passing points for cars.
It’s simply a question of utility. Your suggestion is not a compromise. It’s an insistence on an outcome that gives you all you want and prevents anyone else sharing the space in a reasonable manner.
I was proposing a 4.5m pathway with 2.5m for the table and chairs and 2m to allow full mobility. The only constraint there is when two full width mobility devices need to pass each other. In reality how often does that happen?
In my view there are serious conceptual and legal problems with this idea.
The Thames Path is not analogous to an unclassified single track road somewhere in back end of Shropshire, or one of my backland routes into Derbyshire - it is the most important public footpath in London.
I think in my view you are proposing a compromise with a business that has no reasonable expectation of a compromise since their obstruction of the public highway is unlawful, and you therefore giving away far more than is reasonable. Why should a private business be able to annexe more than half of a public highway for their own purposes? We do not compromise with Travellers who want to camp in our parks, and I would not be allowed to extend my garden across 60% of the road outside because I want space for my children to have a trampoline.
And I don't see the difference - there is no "both sides" to this. This is pedestrian space - essentially full stop, and a pub obstructing it is in the same category as a farmer blocking a public footpath with his tractor or his haystack, or me blocking the road outside with an extension to my garden.
A pavement license is a limited and privileged exception to the legal rule, and I see no reason why there should be any compromise of the lawful public use of the ROW beyond the minimal, if any at all. I do take a moderately strong stance on this, since there is a hell of a long way to push the pendulum back to create a balanced culture around these questions.
We'll see where the Council come down.
PS You may enjoy this account of what happens if pavement tables go too far. A friend went into a shop in York after wheeling along the pavement, and by the time she came out the pavement in both directions was entirely blocked by cafe tables they had put out on both sides, and she was trapped.
This game, for almost the first time in fairness, makes me wonder about the wisdom of a larger WC. Neither of these teams has any obvious quality, neither should be playing for a position in the last 16. Its been tedious in the extreme. Extra time was almost inevitable. The goal threat of both of them is miniscule.
The winners will give Argentina an easy passage to the QF.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Oh no, no Cyclefree please don't leave the site! You make an amazing contribution here with your detailed thoughtful and insightful articles as well as your comments in the threads. I don't always agree with your political stance here but I always respect it and take your point of view on board especially due to your incredible background knowledge of the law and how it plays out politically at our Westminster Parliament. What ever I am when it comes to being a tribal Scottish Conservative, I am a stronger supporter of that Parliament functioning as a collective body to hold the Government of the day to account who ever is in power.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
- We cannot afford to lose any female contributors to this forum - there are only a few anyway
This game, for almost the first time in fairness, makes me wonder about the wisdom of a larger WC. Neither of these teams has any obvious quality, neither should be playing for a position in the last 16. Its been tedious in the extreme. Extra time was almost inevitable. The goal threat of both of them is miniscule.
Well, Aussies only scored 2 goals in the group matches, but Egypt scored 5.
Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
See - better at politics already. That's what we all wanted right?
More seriously triple lock is not a top priority to address.
If Burnham can use political capital on land tax/council tax reform as is being briefed, that is a much bigger prize.
One distinctive Burnham approach in Manchester is that he has regularly done radio phone ins. Unfortunately for him, a favourite subject has been the Manchester ULEZ, which he changed to a different strategy to meet the targets.
He'll be looking for something to keep in more direct touch with the public than a normal PM. Expect longish podcast interviews / conversations.
Reporters and Andrew Neil will have kittens, but that is probably a feature not a bug.
Sounds like Cameron Direct that David Cameron did, hardly an unheard of concept.
Did Dave keep doing them once he was in Downing Street? (Genuinely, I don't know.)
There are many things that seem like good politics until the "questions that nobody else can resolve" hosepipe is pointed at you 24/7.
I think he did.
The format was that he would go into a location - say a small factory - and the workers there would get to ask him questions.
One interesting reaction to the Cameron Directs was from the media - who refused to cover them, unless *they* controlled the audience. Salted with activists with "interesting questions", was the main demand. Apparently, the questions and answers from normal people were too bland for the broadcasters taste.
This, ultimately, is why things like YouTube are good and why the traditional broadcasters hate it for weakening their power and control.
I was more interested in the way they said the quiet bit out loud.
That ordinary people are too polite and sensible to make “proper” political broadcasts.
They wanted angry attacks, applauded by an audience. Not people asking “what would you do about X?”, and then listening to the answer. And then asking a polite follow up.
They wanted division, strife, attacks.
The echo of what we have now, with social media, is very strong.
I'm very interested in that as a move towards a new "media", going around the "mainstream media". It has potential.
Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
See - better at politics already. That's what we all wanted right?
More seriously triple lock is not a top priority to address.
If Burnham can use political capital on land tax/council tax reform as is being briefed, that is a much bigger prize.
One distinctive Burnham approach in Manchester is that he has regularly done radio phone ins. Unfortunately for him, a favourite subject has been the Manchester ULEZ, which he changed to a different strategy to meet the targets.
He'll be looking for something to keep in more direct touch with the public than a normal PM. Expect longish podcast interviews / conversations.
Reporters and Andrew Neil will have kittens, but that is probably a feature not a bug.
Sounds like Cameron Direct that David Cameron did, hardly an unheard of concept.
Did Dave keep doing them once he was in Downing Street? (Genuinely, I don't know.)
There are many things that seem like good politics until the "questions that nobody else can resolve" hosepipe is pointed at you 24/7.
As an aside for @TSE -- Speccie this weekend reports that Cameron has been helping school Kemi for PMQs.
Yup, Dave has my levels of self confidence and modesty.
Kemi Badenoch takes advice from Tory leaders to boost PMQs performance
The Tory leader has spoken to all her living predecessors — except one.
Boris Johnson made the case that Nigel Farage comes with the ‘whiff of sulphur’
Kemi Badenoch has taken advice from every former living Conservative leader, except Liz Truss, as she attempts to rebuild trust in the party.
Badenoch has held meetings with her predecessors including Sir John Major, Lord Hague of Richmond, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton, Baroness May of Maidenhead, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.
She is understood to have taken the most advice from Duncan Smith and Cameron, who is said to have told her: “There are only three living people who have gone from being leader of the opposition to being prime minister. I am the only one who wants to help you.”
The Spectator reported that Johnson spoke at the opening of the party’s new headquarters in London and has been in touch with Badenoch about how best to take on Nigel Farage.
He said: “Is it not wonderful, poetic, beautiful to see Reform being devoured, haemorrhaging votes on the right to this party called Restore, which sounds like a sort of hair-loss potion or something?”
Speccie also saying that Boris is gearing up to return to the front line fray having put sufficient "hay in the loft" for the family.
One of the things that differentiates Tories from Reformers is in their attitude to Ukraine. And one thing about Boris is his absolute commitment to Ukraine and anger at anyone who backslides on this. No Reformer he.
I think this goes some way to explaining the antagonism between him and Farage, a long-time repeater of Kremlin lines, and who has said he won't commit UK troops to Ukraine when the war ends. Will be interesting, not to say entertaining, if Boris returns to the fray.
JRM came on board with Kemi this week apparently
Oh dear. She can't win at everything.
As @TSE has said Kemi involvement with all past conservative leaders and PMs, excluding Truss, is impressive and if they publically endorse her and campaign for her it will be quite a win
Would you mind if I borrowed your rose tinted spectacles? I still don't see the political genius you have detected.
Its like being chased by the bear. Kimi doesn't need to be a political genius, she needs to be better than the field. It's a seriously low bar right now. It remains to be seen if Burnham is able to raise it at all.
The field is her shadow cabinet, not Burnham.
And yes, they do make her look good. Its like going on the pull with your ugliest mate, so you look handsome in comparison.
And then you go home alone and realise you were the ugly mate.
Or it could be that asking a prospective partner's views on the relative merits of AV, STV and d'Hondt isn't the best chat up line going.
This game, for almost the first time in fairness, makes me wonder about the wisdom of a larger WC. Neither of these teams has any obvious quality, neither should be playing for a position in the last 16. Its been tedious in the extreme. Extra time was almost inevitable. The goal threat of both of them is miniscule.
The winners will give Argentina an easy passage to the QF.
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
Stop this please. It's yucky.
Obviously folk are yearning for People’s Courts with summary execution as an option, pitchforks and burning torches requisite.
There's certainly an interesting dynamic going on. PB is a bit like Lord Of The Flies sometimes.
Thames Water should not be nationalised. It should be allowed to go bankrupt, and the Government should then step in to buy the assets from the Receiver for a nominal £1.00 Going bankrupt is the great discipline of the capitalist system, and Thames Water deserves it.
Just to show how serious they are, the Government should make a statement (as soon as possible) that anyone working for Thames Water when it goes bankrupt will have their jobs and salaries guatanteed by the state for three months. HMG can then reassess the situation once they have put new managemnt in charge.
"Nationalisation" means that the bond holders and shareholders will be rewarded for running the company into the ground. That's a non-starter as far as I am concerned.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Oh no, no Cyclefree please don't leave the site! You make an amazing contribution here with your detailed thoughtful and insightful articles as well as your comments in the threads. I don't always agree with your political stance here but I always respect it and take your point of view on board especially due to your incredible background knowledge of the law and how it plays out politically at our Westminster Parliament. What ever I am when it comes to being a tribal Scottish Conservative, I am a stronger supporter of that Parliament functioning as a collective body to hold the Government of the day to account who ever is in power.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
- We cannot afford to lose any female contributors to this forum - there are only a few anyway
This game, for almost the first time in fairness, makes me wonder about the wisdom of a larger WC. Neither of these teams has any obvious quality, neither should be playing for a position in the last 16. Its been tedious in the extreme. Extra time was almost inevitable. The goal threat of both of them is miniscule.
It looked like a bit of a rubbish Man U v Norwich FA Cup match with the strips. Luckily as there was no water pouring into the stadium it was clear I had made a mistake.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Oh no, no Cyclefree please don't leave the site! You make an amazing contribution here with your detailed thoughtful and insightful articles as well as your comments in the threads. I don't always agree with your political stance here but I always respect it and take your point of view on board especially due to your incredible background knowledge of the law and how it plays out politically at our Westminster Parliament. What ever I am when it comes to being a tribal Scottish Conservative, I am a stronger supporter of that Parliament functioning as a collective body to hold the Government of the day to account who ever is in power.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
- We cannot afford to lose any female contributors to this forum - there are only a few anyway
I have no idea why this is flagged
Maybe someone can tell me
I flagged it by error and unflagged it trying to see who had done so as I cannot see what the issue with it was
Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
See - better at politics already. That's what we all wanted right?
More seriously triple lock is not a top priority to address.
If Burnham can use political capital on land tax/council tax reform as is being briefed, that is a much bigger prize.
One distinctive Burnham approach in Manchester is that he has regularly done radio phone ins. Unfortunately for him, a favourite subject has been the Manchester ULEZ, which he changed to a different strategy to meet the targets.
He'll be looking for something to keep in more direct touch with the public than a normal PM. Expect longish podcast interviews / conversations.
Reporters and Andrew Neil will have kittens, but that is probably a feature not a bug.
Sounds like Cameron Direct that David Cameron did, hardly an unheard of concept.
Did Dave keep doing them once he was in Downing Street? (Genuinely, I don't know.)
There are many things that seem like good politics until the "questions that nobody else can resolve" hosepipe is pointed at you 24/7.
As an aside for @TSE -- Speccie this weekend reports that Cameron has been helping school Kemi for PMQs.
Yup, Dave has my levels of self confidence and modesty.
Kemi Badenoch takes advice from Tory leaders to boost PMQs performance
The Tory leader has spoken to all her living predecessors — except one.
Boris Johnson made the case that Nigel Farage comes with the ‘whiff of sulphur’
Kemi Badenoch has taken advice from every former living Conservative leader, except Liz Truss, as she attempts to rebuild trust in the party.
Badenoch has held meetings with her predecessors including Sir John Major, Lord Hague of Richmond, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton, Baroness May of Maidenhead, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.
She is understood to have taken the most advice from Duncan Smith and Cameron, who is said to have told her: “There are only three living people who have gone from being leader of the opposition to being prime minister. I am the only one who wants to help you.”
The Spectator reported that Johnson spoke at the opening of the party’s new headquarters in London and has been in touch with Badenoch about how best to take on Nigel Farage.
He said: “Is it not wonderful, poetic, beautiful to see Reform being devoured, haemorrhaging votes on the right to this party called Restore, which sounds like a sort of hair-loss potion or something?”
Speccie also saying that Boris is gearing up to return to the front line fray having put sufficient "hay in the loft" for the family.
One of the things that differentiates Tories from Reformers is in their attitude to Ukraine. And one thing about Boris is his absolute commitment to Ukraine and anger at anyone who backslides on this. No Reformer he.
I think this goes some way to explaining the antagonism between him and Farage, a long-time repeater of Kremlin lines, and who has said he won't commit UK troops to Ukraine when the war ends. Will be interesting, not to say entertaining, if Boris returns to the fray.
JRM came on board with Kemi this week apparently
Oh dear. She can't win at everything.
As @TSE has said Kemi involvement with all past conservative leaders and PMs, excluding Truss, is impressive and if they publically endorse her and campaign for her it will be quite a win
Would you mind if I borrowed your rose tinted spectacles? I still don't see the political genius you have detected.
Its like being chased by the bear. Kimi doesn't need to be a political genius, she needs to be better than the field. It's a seriously low bar right now. It remains to be seen if Burnham is able to raise it at all.
The field is her shadow cabinet, not Burnham.
And yes, they do make her look good. Its like going on the pull with your ugliest mate, so you look handsome in comparison.
And then you go home alone and realise you were the ugly mate.
Or it could be that asking a prospective partner's views on the relative merits of AV, STV and d'Hondt isn't the best chat up line going.
Unless she’s a big fan of The Human League and you dance together to “d’Hont you want me baby” and then you are in.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Oh no, no Cyclefree please don't leave the site! You make an amazing contribution here with your detailed thoughtful and insightful articles as well as your comments in the threads. I don't always agree with your political stance here but I always respect it and take your point of view on board especially due to your incredible background knowledge of the law and how it plays out politically at our Westminster Parliament. What ever I am when it comes to being a tribal Scottish Conservative, I am a stronger supporter of that Parliament functioning as a collective body to hold the Government of the day to account who ever is in power.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
- We cannot afford to lose any female contributors to this forum - there are only a few anyway
I have no idea why this is flagged
Maybe someone can tell me
I can tell you, young Big G, that you are almost always the paragon of calm and cool posting that I rather admire.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Oh no, no Cyclefree please don't leave the site! You make an amazing contribution here with your detailed thoughtful and insightful articles as well as your comments in the threads. I don't always agree with your political stance here but I always respect it and take your point of view on board especially due to your incredible background knowledge of the law and how it plays out politically at our Westminster Parliament. What ever I am when it comes to being a tribal Scottish Conservative, I am a stronger supporter of that Parliament functioning as a collective body to hold the Government of the day to account who ever is in power.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
- We cannot afford to lose any female contributors to this forum - there are only a few anyway
I have no idea why this is flagged
Maybe someone can tell me
I flagged it by error and unflagged it trying to see who had done so as I cannot see what the issue with it was
If someone flags a post on female representation on this forum then they should explain why or if accidental then that's fair enough
Thames Water should not be nationalised. It should be allowed to go bankrupt, and the Government should then step in to buy the assets from the Receiver for a nominal £1.00 Going bankrupt is the great discipline of the capitalist system, and Thames Water deserves it.
Just to show how serious they are, the Government should make a statement (as soon as possible) that anyone working for Thames Water when it goes bankrupt will have their jobs and salaries guatanteed by the state for three months. HMG can then reassess the situation once they have put new managemnt in charge.
"Nationalisation" means that the bond holders and shareholders will be rewarded for running the company into the ground. That's a non-starter as far as I am concerned.
This is kind of Fergal Sharkey's plan. Alter the audit regulations so that Thames Water has to include the costs of fixing the water system in its liabilities. It will immediately fail the going concern test and the Government by law must step in and take over over the company without having to pay a penny to share holders.
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
Stop this please. It's yucky.
Do you even know what he accused her of ?
Yes I've seen the whole thing. I recall many of their previous spats too. It's my gift and curse that I remember so much PB dialogue.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Oh no, no Cyclefree please don't leave the site! You make an amazing contribution here with your detailed thoughtful and insightful articles as well as your comments in the threads. I don't always agree with your political stance here but I always respect it and take your point of view on board especially due to your incredible background knowledge of the law and how it plays out politically at our Westminster Parliament. What ever I am when it comes to being a tribal Scottish Conservative, I am a stronger supporter of that Parliament functioning as a collective body to hold the Government of the day to account who ever is in power.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
- We cannot afford to lose any female contributors to this forum - there are only a few anyway
Totally agree Big_G_Wales, sadly we have lost too many female contributers on this site due to ill health and I am now only in contact with one former regular here who has no desire to return. But its up to this site and the now regular contributors here to decide if they are man enough to cope with even a few more women contributers here to shake things up. But judging by their dismissive attitude to Kemi Badenoch, I suspect not, and they are in their boring comfort zone and want to keep this a left leaning blinkered Dad-centric mans shed when it comes to politics with a dismissive attitude to powerful women in general despite their many talents....
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Don't let the buggers get you down.
This is the same individual who thinks Putin is justified in invading Ukraine as he has a claim over Ukraine.
He has an utterly broken moral compass. Being the antithesis of roger is a badge of honour.
You’re misrepresenting him. It was a claim over Crimea not Ukraine.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Fully agree with @turbotubbs. I called out @Roger years ago when he expressed the view that “Me Too” was a director’s perk.
What is this buy a tv licence appearing on the football ?
I cancelled my TV licence payment a while back and am now getting quite a lot of aggressive, 'vague threat' messages from them via SMS, email etc. It's really quite deliberately fine-tuned oppressive and grim. I can't imagine how they land with someone who had anxiety issues, or was on the borderline of making ends-meet. I'm sure the BBC will investigate...
What is this buy a tv licence appearing on the football ?
I cancelled my TV licence payment a while back and am now getting quite a lot of aggressive, 'vague threat' messages from them via SMS, email etc. It's really quite deliberately fine-tuned oppressive and grim. I can't imagine how they land with someone who had anxiety issues, or was on the borderline of making ends-meet. I'm sure the BBC will investigate...
I have a stack of at least 60 nastygrams in my 'harassment file'.
I am, however, considering whether to pay for 1 month to watch the rest of the WC.
Not had a licence for at least a decade, and watched live sport with Flatlander Sr, but sadly he is no longer with us.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Don't let the buggers get you down.
This is the same individual who thinks Putin is justified in invading Ukraine as he has a claim over Ukraine.
He has an utterly broken moral compass. Being the antithesis of roger is a badge of honour.
You’re misrepresenting him. It was a claim over Crimea not Ukraine.
Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
See - better at politics already. That's what we all wanted right?
More seriously triple lock is not a top priority to address.
If Burnham can use political capital on land tax/council tax reform as is being briefed, that is a much bigger prize.
One distinctive Burnham approach in Manchester is that he has regularly done radio phone ins. Unfortunately for him, a favourite subject has been the Manchester ULEZ, which he changed to a different strategy to meet the targets.
He'll be looking for something to keep in more direct touch with the public than a normal PM. Expect longish podcast interviews / conversations.
Reporters and Andrew Neil will have kittens, but that is probably a feature not a bug.
Sounds like Cameron Direct that David Cameron did, hardly an unheard of concept.
Did Dave keep doing them once he was in Downing Street? (Genuinely, I don't know.)
There are many things that seem like good politics until the "questions that nobody else can resolve" hosepipe is pointed at you 24/7.
As an aside for @TSE -- Speccie this weekend reports that Cameron has been helping school Kemi for PMQs.
Yup, Dave has my levels of self confidence and modesty.
Kemi Badenoch takes advice from Tory leaders to boost PMQs performance
The Tory leader has spoken to all her living predecessors — except one.
Boris Johnson made the case that Nigel Farage comes with the ‘whiff of sulphur’
Kemi Badenoch has taken advice from every former living Conservative leader, except Liz Truss, as she attempts to rebuild trust in the party.
Badenoch has held meetings with her predecessors including Sir John Major, Lord Hague of Richmond, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton, Baroness May of Maidenhead, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.
She is understood to have taken the most advice from Duncan Smith and Cameron, who is said to have told her: “There are only three living people who have gone from being leader of the opposition to being prime minister. I am the only one who wants to help you.”
The Spectator reported that Johnson spoke at the opening of the party’s new headquarters in London and has been in touch with Badenoch about how best to take on Nigel Farage.
He said: “Is it not wonderful, poetic, beautiful to see Reform being devoured, haemorrhaging votes on the right to this party called Restore, which sounds like a sort of hair-loss potion or something?”
Speccie also saying that Boris is gearing up to return to the front line fray having put sufficient "hay in the loft" for the family.
One of the things that differentiates Tories from Reformers is in their attitude to Ukraine. And one thing about Boris is his absolute commitment to Ukraine and anger at anyone who backslides on this. No Reformer he.
I think this goes some way to explaining the antagonism between him and Farage, a long-time repeater of Kremlin lines, and who has said he won't commit UK troops to Ukraine when the war ends. Will be interesting, not to say entertaining, if Boris returns to the fray.
JRM came on board with Kemi this week apparently
Oh dear. She can't win at everything.
As @TSE has said Kemi involvement with all past conservative leaders and PMs, excluding Truss, is impressive and if they publically endorse her and campaign for her it will be quite a win
Would you mind if I borrowed your rose tinted spectacles? I still don't see the political genius you have detected.
Its like being chased by the bear. Kimi doesn't need to be a political genius, she needs to be better than the field. It's a seriously low bar right now. It remains to be seen if Burnham is able to raise it at all.
The field is her shadow cabinet, not Burnham.
And yes, they do make her look good. Its like going on the pull with your ugliest mate, so you look handsome in comparison.
And then you go home alone and realise you were the ugly mate.
Or it could be that asking a prospective partner's views on the relative merits of AV, STV and d'Hondt isn't the best chat up line going.
Unless she’s a big fan of The Human League and you dance together to “d’Hont you want me baby” and then you are in.
And then you run after her singing "D'Hondt Leave Me This Way!"
This pub furniture on the Thames path in Strand-on-the-Green is a story that could go on a bit, as it is culture war plus local councillors who really do not like each other, and local politics in Chiswick is quite vigorous anyway. I lived on Park Road down there for about 3 years in the early 2000s, in a slightly expensive but very enjoyable one bedroom flat.
(One note: take care not to confuse your Hiltons. I think the protagonist is Alistair Hilton, who is claiming the Green Councillor set the police on him and to my eye overegging his pudding a little - it could go legal, with Adrian Hilton, who is in the debate but is I think the former "Archbishop Cranmer" blogger.)
The basic issue is about unlawful obstructions (the pub outdoor tables and chairs) on a public highway - the Thames Path, which here is either a Public Footpath, or an Adopted Highway in the relevant places. Two pubs, as 'landowners', seem to feel that that, and that they have been doing it for some years, means they should be able to continue to do it without a pavement license.
The local Conservative Councillor (and the Telegraph and the Standard and GB News) have weighed in in support of the pubs (and their customers who like sitting on the Thames Path), and it was a Green Councillor who made a report to ask that it be looked at, around accessibility for less mobile pedestrians to Pass and Repass along the Thames Path unobstructed.
Given my penchant for removing obstructions from public highways so mobility aids can use them, it will be clear where I stand - as long as the path is fully accessible (and there are endless technicalities about how wide it is, and what type of highway it is in each place) and easily useable, they can put their tables there provided there is a license and no obstruction. IMO here the clear path should be 4m wide.
The Council Officers were abrupt in their demands for removal, and after a word from the local councillor have now backed down to say "you can keep your tables whilst we thin about it), which is how it should have been in the first place.
The various bits of media are trying to make this about authoritarian Councils and Councillors banning outside drinking (which is afaics a lie, not that that will stop them), and police vs freedom of speech (around Hilton's twitter comments).
This could run and run. My prediction is that the pubs will cathc up to what the law requires, and then the seating will continue with appropriate adjustments.
All the pubs are recommended. I used to go on riverside dates down there.
4m wide seems very wide for a pathway. Presumably that to allow (for example) two wheelchair users to pass each other, but wouldn’t it be better to have passing bays? Otherwise I doubt that any riverside path in the country will be compliant with your demands
I promise not to take you down a rabbit hole but I'll put a bit of information on the bone !
We have a disease in this country of taking pedestrian space down to the absolute minimum, which makes using footpaths unpleasant when there is a fair amount of foot traffic, and that causes conflict which no one wants. The attitude is nasty, and small minded, and I hate it.
But we have several different recommended widths (Inclusive Mobility, LTN 1/20 and others), depending on volume, transport mode, and purpose. As a matter of principle, the space on a public highway belongs to the public, not to a private business who want to put their stuff on it for their own benefit. Landowners are always trying to do that, and they need to be less selfish. 4m is roughly where it is for a high foot fall environment, and I am making it slightly wider than minimum because using a footpath includes stopping to take in the view, to sit on a bench for a rest, and so on, which I think are common in Strand-on-the-Green.
The required width for a mobility aid to travel safely and comfortably is 1.5m width unobstructed, since the things themselves are up to about 1.0m, sometimes 1.2m, and extra width is required simple eg wheelchairs require width for hands outside to do wheeling. For two way that is 3.0m, minimum. And I don't accept lamp posts, sign posts, pedestrian cages, litter bins, cross pathway advertising hoardings where phone boxes used to be, Horse's f*cking Brobdingnagian phone masts, and all the rest as not being obstructions; they should be off the clear footway - but that is a slightly different tack !
On passing places, I reject the idea out of hand - except for special circumstances such as a pre-existing constraint. We build our normal carriageways for vehicles to be 5.5m width, so two can pass, except where eg we need traffic calming because many drivers cannot control themselves. The principle is precisely the same for footpaths and footways - imo if we think it through, that is a very basic, unarguable implication of Equality Law. Why should we make wheelchair users use passing spaces in everyday travel, when we do not do so for people who are less marginalised, and the facilities for pedestrians cost such little money?
We had an interesting debate the other week about Delivery Robots, which I have been feeding back as "expect serious resistance if you try to prevent these without a very carefully argued case". The association has a new Chairman, who did a very interesting presentation about developing values and a strategy for their centenary, here - provocative, but not especially radical:
But just to focus on the passing places. Let’s say that you have a riverside path that is 5m wide. I’m guessing you need about 2.5m to accommodate a table and two chairs.
But under your approach that is unacceptable in case there is a scenario where two wheelchair users need to pass each other. So the vast majority of people don’t get to enjoy the path.
My approach represents a reasonable accommodation; create a passing place so wheelchairs don’t lose the ability to pass each other, but also enable to space to be shared by others. But apparently that is so unacceptable as to be “rejected out of hand”
Thanks for elaborating. I disagree with your suggestion, but finding an accommodation is why we have local licenses, laws, and committees and councillors to consider needs and the law, and to come up with such an accommodation - which can then be appealed (i think) or challenged in court by either side if it is thought problematic.
The primary value I try and think from in this is equality. We do no allow pubs to spread their tables and chairs across the public highway ie the carriageway on your road or my road, and make all the cars wait in a passing place to wait and squeeze through one by one. Why should we impose that on mobility aid users of the public highway? I see no difference in principle.
Practically a passing place will not work - outside a pub it will have half-drunk people standing in it much of the time. There will be some who think it funny to poke, prod, throw beer, call them a spaz or similar, or do other things. And even sober people are fairly often abusive or threatening or even violent when asked to accommodate. Try asking some selfish parents parking on the yellow zigzag lines outside a primary school to drop off children, putting the other children at risk, to stop doing it (school staff will be abused if they try to act), or ask someone blocking a Zebra zig-zags or a drop kerb to move, and see what the response is. Mobility aid users will not often do that, because they have been verbally abused before and cannot run away - they are vulnerable.
Yes - 4.5m is ambitious, albeit arguable from national guidelines, but one always gets less than asked for so it is good to start thinking from the actual recommendations for good practice. Often much more is possible by being innovative than one expects.
In the case of the City Barge in @Malmesbury 's photo there is 4.25m from the face of the pub wall to the railing on the river edge. The tables take up ~2m perhaps with an extra chair on the end, and I think a shelf on the railing, which would have 0.6-0.8m of people leaning on it. That leaves about 1.5m.
I'd say a practical answer here could be French style 0.8m round cafe tables against the pub wall, taking up 1.2m max, a clear 3m path marked with a line, no shelf on the railing, and moveable chairs and tables if wanted placed on the concrete (?) tidal apron when the tide is out - which in that part of Chiswick is a lot of the time.
But that’s exactly the point. On narrow roads we *do* use passing points for cars.
It’s simply a question of utility. Your suggestion is not a compromise. It’s an insistence on an outcome that gives you all you want and prevents anyone else sharing the space in a reasonable manner.
I was proposing a 4.5m pathway with 2.5m for the table and chairs and 2m to allow full mobility. The only constraint there is when two full width mobility devices need to pass each other. In reality how often does that happen?
In my view there are serious conceptual and legal problems with this idea.
The Thames Path is not analogous to an unclassified single track road somewhere in back end of Shropshire, or one of my backland routes into Derbyshire - it is the most important public footpath in London.
I think in my view you are proposing a compromise with a business that has no reasonable expectation of a compromise since their obstruction of the public highway is unlawful, and you therefore giving away far more than is reasonable. Why should a private business be able to annexe more than half of a public highway for their own purposes? We do not compromise with Travellers who want to camp in our parks, and I would not be allowed to extend my garden across 60% of the road outside because I want space for my children to have a trampoline.
And I don't see the difference - there is no "both sides" to this. This is pedestrian space - essentially full stop, and a pub obstructing it is in the same category as a farmer blocking a public footpath with his tractor or his haystack, or me blocking the road outside with an extension to my garden.
A pavement license is a limited and privileged exception to the legal rule, and I see no reason why there should be any compromise of the lawful public use of the ROW beyond the minimal, if any at all. I do take a moderately strong stance on this, since there is a hell of a long way to push the pendulum back to create a balanced culture around these questions.
We'll see where the Council come down.
PS You may enjoy this account of what happens if pavement tables go too far. A friend went into a shop in York after wheeling along the pavement, and by the time she came out the pavement in both directions was entirely blocked by cafe tables they had put out on both sides, and she was trapped.
Point of order, the Thames Path is a public footpath but it is not a public highway in the way you are intimating. As such the rules about blocking it do not apply as they do on the road. There are rules about maintaining access including disabled access but the analogy with blocking either a road or a pavement alongside a road is not correct. There are different rules for each
Big stooshie in Inverness over a decision by the licensing board to grant a taxi operators licence to a convicted rapist.
Note this is for the vehicle to operate as a taxi with a licence under his name, not for the convicted man to drive the taxi personally. Decision widely criticised and a few councillors who voted for it have resigned
Right, I know that there is a collective of left leaning shed TV leaning Dads on this site that are absolute doomsayers when it comes to Kemi Badenoch, keep on underestimating her now regular cut through on the doorsteps while the Scottish Conservatives in Aberdeen South certainly experienced it on the doorsteps. As Douglas Lumsden pointed out on the Holyrood Sources podcast it was refreshing to have a Westminster leader who was cutting through and was popular on the doorsteps in Aberdeen!
Some regulars on here who know sod all about regional Scottish politics even patronisingly suggested that the Scottish Conservatives would only manage to hang onto their deposits in Aberdeen South and Arbroath and Broughty Ferry based on their brief glance and dismissive view of the overall performance of the party in Scotland back in May, especially on the List vote without taking into account their strong performance in the constituency votes in their strongest areas outside the borders like the North East of Scotland back in May...
Well the Scottish Conservatives went from third place in 2024 to win comfortable in Aberdeen South, and they came from literally no where in third place to come second in Arbroath and Broughty Ferry as well! Kemi you go girl despite the doubters on here! I would bet now that Kemi Badenoch will still be there as Conservative leader at the next GE while Nigel Farage will not be leader of Reform.
Now we know that Andy Burnham is going to be crowned the new Labour Leader and PM in a few weeks despite being out of Westminster Politics for years and with a pi** poor back record and political platform and a rumoured Cabinet that is going to see the House of Lords doing the heavy lifting while he brings back the Blair/Brown boys overiding the 400+ Labour MPs already sitting in this Parliament.
So here is a thought, who now is no longer on resignation watch in the current Labour Government under Keir Starmer but who now maybe becomes a suprise Conservative defector from the Labour backbenches under Andy Burnham before the next GE if their seat was a previous surprise win in a Conservative safe seat, especially a rural one?! Something tells me that the same doomsayers on here will still dismiss a Labour or Libdem defector to the Conservatives under Kemi Badenoch's leadership as a flash in the pan....
Its not Reform or Restore defectors that will make the future news for Kemi Badenoch, they will continue to do her spring cleaning for her, no, its going to be defections from the left that will help her build her centre right party and make the Conservatives electable again in key seats where it matters in the UK.
Well, from a Conservative perspective, a hugely positive update.
You'll forgive me as a non Conservative for not being as joyful about your party's prospects. The Conservatives have become like the Liberal Democrats - islands of strength surrounded by large areas of weakness. We see, week after week in local council by-elections, some dramatic falls in Conservative vote shares often but not exclusively to Reform.
Burnham will be a more combative and difficult opponent than Starmer and I think he will do the day-to-day cut and thrust of politics much better and that will make life harder for Badenoch.
Of course, the Conservatives are happy to have Labour as the main opponent - Reform are the big challenge and while some seem to think Reform and Farage are somehow going to wither and die (with the accompanying vote switch to the Conservatives), the actual evidence is flimsy.
One good by-election doesn't make a summer - ask the LDs. Outside some parts of London, the May local elections were very poor for the Conservatives - holding the elections in the likes of Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex in 2026 rather than 2025 masked the scale of the losses to some extent (or accentuated them).
The Conservatives need to be clearly established as the primary repository for an anti-Labour vote - that's how they won in 1970 and 1979 and advanced in 2010 but at the moment in many parts of the country, that role is filled by other parties.
We are still three years from a General Election and a lot of water has to flow under a lot of bridges. Scotland will do what Scotland does - the Holyrood results give the lie to the euphoria from the Aberdeen South win. In much of the country, beyond the areas of activity, the Conservative Party is irrelevant - they may win 100 seats next time, they may do better, they may do worse - the problem is their fate isn't wholly in their hands.
Rugbys new Nations Championship starts tomorrow. Loads of games all through the day. Checked Sky Sports - nothing. Thought damn, it’s on bloody TNT. Nope. It’s on ITV! Hours and hours of glorious free to air rugby! Amazing.
And then remembered I m supposed to be out all day doing ‘things’.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Oh no, no Cyclefree please don't leave the site! You make an amazing contribution here with your detailed thoughtful and insightful articles as well as your comments in the threads. I don't always agree with your political stance here but I always respect it and take your point of view on board especially due to your incredible background knowledge of the law and how it plays out politically at our Westminster Parliament. What ever I am when it comes to being a tribal Scottish Conservative, I am a stronger supporter of that Parliament functioning as a collective body to hold the Government of the day to account who ever is in power.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
- We cannot afford to lose any female contributors to this forum - there are only a few anyway
Totally agree Big_G_Wales, sadly we have lost too many female contributers on this site due to ill health and I am now only in contact with one former regular here who has no desire to return. But its up to this site and the now regular contributors here to decide if they are man enough to cope with even a few more women contributers here to shake things up. But judging by their dismissive attitude to Kemi Badenoch, I suspect not, and they are in their boring comfort zone and want to keep this a left leaning blinkered Dad-centric mans shed when it comes to politics with a dismissive attitude to powerful women in general despite their many talents....
I agree more F on here would be good, and that some of the tone isn't welcoming to women, but I don't buy the rest of what you're saying. It isn't that left leaning. There's loads of right wing posters. And it isn't particularly down on Kemi Badenoch. Compared to the vitriol about Keir Starmer she gets an easy ride.
And with Cyclefree, she may be outnumbered by the blokes but she receives (rightly) a great deal of respect and appreciation. She's the Killer Queen of PB and imo does not need 'the board' rising up to slag off other posters in order to make her stay. She'll continue to post if she wants to and I very much hope she does.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Oh no, no Cyclefree please don't leave the site! You make an amazing contribution here with your detailed thoughtful and insightful articles as well as your comments in the threads. I don't always agree with your political stance here but I always respect it and take your point of view on board especially due to your incredible background knowledge of the law and how it plays out politically at our Westminster Parliament. What ever I am when it comes to being a tribal Scottish Conservative, I am a stronger supporter of that Parliament functioning as a collective body to hold the Government of the day to account who ever is in power.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
- We cannot afford to lose any female contributors to this forum - there are only a few anyway
Totally agree Big_G_Wales, sadly we have lost too many female contributers on this site due to ill health and I am now only in contact with one former regular here who has no desire to return. But its up to this site and the now regular contributors here to decide if they are man enough to cope with even a few more women contributers here to shake things up. But judging by their dismissive attitude to Kemi Badenoch, I suspect not, and they are in their boring comfort zone and want to keep this a left leaning blinkered Dad-centric mans shed when it comes to politics with a dismissive attitude to powerful women in general despite their many talents....
No, not at all.
It's perfectly appropriate to criticise Kemi Badenoch if she says or does something deserving of criticism without you or other Conservative sympathisers claiming it is a "dismissive attitude to powerful woman".
She has no immunity from criticism of the party's policies and when she makes a misstep.
Subbing the Aussie keeper for the penalties is...a choice.
2 misses from the Aussies!
Now all we need is for the Aussies to be beaten in Rugby, Rugby League, Cricket and everything they are competing in in the Commonwealth Games and they can concentrate on what they do best, making good red wine.
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Oh no, no Cyclefree please don't leave the site! You make an amazing contribution here with your detailed thoughtful and insightful articles as well as your comments in the threads. I don't always agree with your political stance here but I always respect it and take your point of view on board especially due to your incredible background knowledge of the law and how it plays out politically at our Westminster Parliament. What ever I am when it comes to being a tribal Scottish Conservative, I am a stronger supporter of that Parliament functioning as a collective body to hold the Government of the day to account who ever is in power.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
- We cannot afford to lose any female contributors to this forum - there are only a few anyway
Totally agree Big_G_Wales, sadly we have lost too many female contributers on this site due to ill health and I am now only in contact with one former regular here who has no desire to return. But its up to this site and the now regular contributors here to decide if they are man enough to cope with even a few more women contributers here to shake things up. But judging by their dismissive attitude to Kemi Badenoch, I suspect not, and they are in their boring comfort zone and want to keep this a left leaning blinkered Dad-centric mans shed when it comes to politics with a dismissive attitude to powerful women in general despite their many talents....
I agree more F on here would be good, and that some of the tone isn't welcoming to women, but I don't buy the rest of what you're saying. It isn't that left leaning. There's loads of right wing posters. And it isn't particularly down on Kemi Badenoch. Compared to the vitriol about Keir Starmer she gets an easy ride.
And with Cyclefree, she may be outnumbered by the blokes but she receives (rightly) a great deal of respect and appreciation. She's the Killer Queen of PB and imo does not need 'the board' rising up to slag off other posters in order to make her stay. She'll continue to post if she wants to and I very much hope she does.
I don’t need to slag off Roger to make Cyclefree stay I do it because he’s a total prick. I could imagine him sending Mandelson a note saying ‘don’t let the huggers grind you down’. His attitude on Me too was extraordinary. And while I have some sympathy for his passion around Gaza, he seems unable to see anything beyond Israel being evil.
Subbing the Aussie keeper for the penalties is...a choice.
2 misses from the Aussies!
Now all we need is for the Aussies to be beaten in Rugby, Rugby League, Cricket and everything they are competing in in the Commonwealth Games and they can concentrate on what they do best, making good red wine.
20 days left, according to the big clock in Glasgow Central!
Subbing the Aussie keeper for the penalties is...a choice.
2 misses from the Aussies!
Now all we need is for the Aussies to be beaten in Rugby, Rugby League, Cricket and everything they are competing in in the Commonwealth Games and they can concentrate on what they do best, making good red wine.
It's nice that we're better than Australia at their fourth favourite type of football.
This pub furniture on the Thames path in Strand-on-the-Green is a story that could go on a bit, as it is culture war plus local councillors who really do not like each other, and local politics in Chiswick is quite vigorous anyway. I lived on Park Road down there for about 3 years in the early 2000s, in a slightly expensive but very enjoyable one bedroom flat.
(One note: take care not to confuse your Hiltons. I think the protagonist is Alistair Hilton, who is claiming the Green Councillor set the police on him and to my eye overegging his pudding a little - it could go legal, with Adrian Hilton, who is in the debate but is I think the former "Archbishop Cranmer" blogger.)
The basic issue is about unlawful obstructions (the pub outdoor tables and chairs) on a public highway - the Thames Path, which here is either a Public Footpath, or an Adopted Highway in the relevant places. Two pubs, as 'landowners', seem to feel that that, and that they have been doing it for some years, means they should be able to continue to do it without a pavement license.
The local Conservative Councillor (and the Telegraph and the Standard and GB News) have weighed in in support of the pubs (and their customers who like sitting on the Thames Path), and it was a Green Councillor who made a report to ask that it be looked at, around accessibility for less mobile pedestrians to Pass and Repass along the Thames Path unobstructed.
Given my penchant for removing obstructions from public highways so mobility aids can use them, it will be clear where I stand - as long as the path is fully accessible (and there are endless technicalities about how wide it is, and what type of highway it is in each place) and easily useable, they can put their tables there provided there is a license and no obstruction. IMO here the clear path should be 4m wide.
The Council Officers were abrupt in their demands for removal, and after a word from the local councillor have now backed down to say "you can keep your tables whilst we thin about it), which is how it should have been in the first place.
The various bits of media are trying to make this about authoritarian Councils and Councillors banning outside drinking (which is afaics a lie, not that that will stop them), and police vs freedom of speech (around Hilton's twitter comments).
This could run and run. My prediction is that the pubs will cathc up to what the law requires, and then the seating will continue with appropriate adjustments.
All the pubs are recommended. I used to go on riverside dates down there.
4m wide seems very wide for a pathway. Presumably that to allow (for example) two wheelchair users to pass each other, but wouldn’t it be better to have passing bays? Otherwise I doubt that any riverside path in the country will be compliant with your demands
I promise not to take you down a rabbit hole but I'll put a bit of information on the bone !
We have a disease in this country of taking pedestrian space down to the absolute minimum, which makes using footpaths unpleasant when there is a fair amount of foot traffic, and that causes conflict which no one wants. The attitude is nasty, and small minded, and I hate it.
But we have several different recommended widths (Inclusive Mobility, LTN 1/20 and others), depending on volume, transport mode, and purpose. As a matter of principle, the space on a public highway belongs to the public, not to a private business who want to put their stuff on it for their own benefit. Landowners are always trying to do that, and they need to be less selfish. 4m is roughly where it is for a high foot fall environment, and I am making it slightly wider than minimum because using a footpath includes stopping to take in the view, to sit on a bench for a rest, and so on, which I think are common in Strand-on-the-Green.
The required width for a mobility aid to travel safely and comfortably is 1.5m width unobstructed, since the things themselves are up to about 1.0m, sometimes 1.2m, and extra width is required simple eg wheelchairs require width for hands outside to do wheeling. For two way that is 3.0m, minimum. And I don't accept lamp posts, sign posts, pedestrian cages, litter bins, cross pathway advertising hoardings where phone boxes used to be, Horse's f*cking Brobdingnagian phone masts, and all the rest as not being obstructions; they should be off the clear footway - but that is a slightly different tack !
On passing places, I reject the idea out of hand - except for special circumstances such as a pre-existing constraint. We build our normal carriageways for vehicles to be 5.5m width, so two can pass, except where eg we need traffic calming because many drivers cannot control themselves. The principle is precisely the same for footpaths and footways - imo if we think it through, that is a very basic, unarguable implication of Equality Law. Why should we make wheelchair users use passing spaces in everyday travel, when we do not do so for people who are less marginalised, and the facilities for pedestrians cost such little money?
We had an interesting debate the other week about Delivery Robots, which I have been feeding back as "expect serious resistance if you try to prevent these without a very carefully argued case". The association has a new Chairman, who did a very interesting presentation about developing values and a strategy for their centenary, here - provocative, but not especially radical:
But just to focus on the passing places. Let’s say that you have a riverside path that is 5m wide. I’m guessing you need about 2.5m to accommodate a table and two chairs.
But under your approach that is unacceptable in case there is a scenario where two wheelchair users need to pass each other. So the vast majority of people don’t get to enjoy the path.
My approach represents a reasonable accommodation; create a passing place so wheelchairs don’t lose the ability to pass each other, but also enable to space to be shared by others. But apparently that is so unacceptable as to be “rejected out of hand”
Thanks for elaborating. I disagree with your suggestion, but finding an accommodation is why we have local licenses, laws, and committees and councillors to consider needs and the law, and to come up with such an accommodation - which can then be appealed (i think) or challenged in court by either side if it is thought problematic.
The primary value I try and think from in this is equality. We do no allow pubs to spread their tables and chairs across the public highway ie the carriageway on your road or my road, and make all the cars wait in a passing place to wait and squeeze through one by one. Why should we impose that on mobility aid users of the public highway? I see no difference in principle.
Practically a passing place will not work - outside a pub it will have half-drunk people standing in it much of the time. There will be some who think it funny to poke, prod, throw beer, call them a spaz or similar, or do other things. And even sober people are fairly often abusive or threatening or even violent when asked to accommodate. Try asking some selfish parents parking on the yellow zigzag lines outside a primary school to drop off children, putting the other children at risk, to stop doing it (school staff will be abused if they try to act), or ask someone blocking a Zebra zig-zags or a drop kerb to move, and see what the response is. Mobility aid users will not often do that, because they have been verbally abused before and cannot run away - they are vulnerable.
Yes - 4.5m is ambitious, albeit arguable from national guidelines, but one always gets less than asked for so it is good to start thinking from the actual recommendations for good practice. Often much more is possible by being innovative than one expects.
In the case of the City Barge in @Malmesbury 's photo there is 4.25m from the face of the pub wall to the railing on the river edge. The tables take up ~2m perhaps with an extra chair on the end, and I think a shelf on the railing, which would have 0.6-0.8m of people leaning on it. That leaves about 1.5m.
I'd say a practical answer here could be French style 0.8m round cafe tables against the pub wall, taking up 1.2m max, a clear 3m path marked with a line, no shelf on the railing, and moveable chairs and tables if wanted placed on the concrete (?) tidal apron when the tide is out - which in that part of Chiswick is a lot of the time.
But that’s exactly the point. On narrow roads we *do* use passing points for cars.
It’s simply a question of utility. Your suggestion is not a compromise. It’s an insistence on an outcome that gives you all you want and prevents anyone else sharing the space in a reasonable manner.
I was proposing a 4.5m pathway with 2.5m for the table and chairs and 2m to allow full mobility. The only constraint there is when two full width mobility devices need to pass each other. In reality how often does that happen?
In my view there are serious conceptual and legal problems with this idea.
The Thames Path is not analogous to an unclassified single track road somewhere in back end of Shropshire, or one of my backland routes into Derbyshire - it is the most important public footpath in London.
I think in my view you are proposing a compromise with a business that has no reasonable expectation of a compromise since their obstruction of the public highway is unlawful, and you therefore giving away far more than is reasonable. Why should a private business be able to annexe more than half of a public highway for their own purposes? We do not compromise with Travellers who want to camp in our parks, and I would not be allowed to extend my garden across 60% of the road outside because I want space for my children to have a trampoline.
And I don't see the difference - there is no "both sides" to this. This is pedestrian space - essentially full stop, and a pub obstructing it is in the same category as a farmer blocking a public footpath with his tractor or his haystack, or me blocking the road outside with an extension to my garden.
A pavement license is a limited and privileged exception to the legal rule, and I see no reason why there should be any compromise of the lawful public use of the ROW beyond the minimal, if any at all. I do take a moderately strong stance on this, since there is a hell of a long way to push the pendulum back to create a balanced culture around these questions.
We'll see where the Council come down.
PS You may enjoy this account of what happens if pavement tables go too far. A friend went into a shop in York after wheeling along the pavement, and by the time she came out the pavement in both directions was entirely blocked by cafe tables they had put out on both sides, and she was trapped.
Point of order, the Thames Path is a public footpath but it is not a public highway in the way you are intimating. As such the rules about blocking it do not apply as they do on the road. There are rules about maintaining access including disabled access but the analogy with blocking either a road or a pavement alongside a road is not correct. There are different rules for each
Surely a public footpath is a public highway in all but name, it is for pedestrians and wheelchair/scooter users but similar rules apply as per blocking it. You just can't use motor vehicles on it
Subbing the Aussie keeper for the penalties is...a choice.
2 misses from the Aussies!
Now all we need is for the Aussies to be beaten in Rugby, Rugby League, Cricket and everything they are competing in in the Commonwealth Games and they can concentrate on what they do best, making good red wine.
20 days left, according to the big clock in Glasgow Central!
Thames Water should not be nationalised. It should be allowed to go bankrupt, and the Government should then step in to buy the assets from the Receiver for a nominal £1.00 Going bankrupt is the great discipline of the capitalist system, and Thames Water deserves it.
Just to show how serious they are, the Government should make a statement (as soon as possible) that anyone working for Thames Water when it goes bankrupt will have their jobs and salaries guatanteed by the state for three months. HMG can then reassess the situation once they have put new managemnt in charge.
"Nationalisation" means that the bond holders and shareholders will be rewarded for running the company into the ground. That's a non-starter as far as I am concerned.
This is kind of Fergal Sharkey's plan. Alter the audit regulations so that Thames Water has to include the costs of fixing the water system in its liabilities. It will immediately fail the going concern test and the Government by law must step in and take over over the company without having to pay a penny to share holders.
Thanks, Richard - glad to hear that. People in positions of responsibility listen to Fergal Sharkey - they don't listen to me.
Subbing the Aussie keeper for the penalties is...a choice.
2 misses from the Aussies!
Now all we need is for the Aussies to be beaten in Rugby, Rugby League, Cricket and everything they are competing in in the Commonwealth Games and they can concentrate on what they do best, making good red wine.
20 days left, according to the big clock in Glasgow Central!
What a tip it is around Central right now. Had to walk an extra half mile to get to McDonald's on Argyle st last week. At least the Scottie dogs are brightening the city centre up
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Oh no, no Cyclefree please don't leave the site! You make an amazing contribution here with your detailed thoughtful and insightful articles as well as your comments in the threads. I don't always agree with your political stance here but I always respect it and take your point of view on board especially due to your incredible background knowledge of the law and how it plays out politically at our Westminster Parliament. What ever I am when it comes to being a tribal Scottish Conservative, I am a stronger supporter of that Parliament functioning as a collective body to hold the Government of the day to account who ever is in power.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
- We cannot afford to lose any female contributors to this forum - there are only a few anyway
Totally agree Big_G_Wales, sadly we have lost too many female contributers on this site due to ill health and I am now only in contact with one former regular here who has no desire to return. But its up to this site and the now regular contributors here to decide if they are man enough to cope with even a few more women contributers here to shake things up. But judging by their dismissive attitude to Kemi Badenoch, I suspect not, and they are in their boring comfort zone and want to keep this a left leaning blinkered Dad-centric mans shed when it comes to politics with a dismissive attitude to powerful women in general despite their many talents....
I agree more F on here would be good, and that some of the tone isn't welcoming to women, but I don't buy the rest of what you're saying. It isn't that left leaning. There's loads of right wing posters. And it isn't particularly down on Kemi Badenoch. Compared to the vitriol about Keir Starmer she gets an easy ride.
And with Cyclefree, she may be outnumbered by the blokes but she receives (rightly) a great deal of respect and appreciation. She's the Killer Queen of PB and imo does not need 'the board' rising up to slag off other posters in order to make her stay. She'll continue to post if she wants to and I very much hope she does.
I don’t need to slag off Roger to make Cyclefree stay I do it because he’s a total prick. I could imagine him sending Mandelson a note saying ‘don’t let the huggers grind you down’. His attitude on Me too was extraordinary. And while I have some sympathy for his passion around Gaza, he seems unable to see anything beyond Israel being evil.
Indeed. He's an obvious anti-semite and misogynist.
Subbing the Aussie keeper for the penalties is...a choice.
2 misses from the Aussies!
Now all we need is for the Aussies to be beaten in Rugby, Rugby League, Cricket and everything they are competing in in the Commonwealth Games and they can concentrate on what they do best, making good red wine.
20 days left, according to the big clock in Glasgow Central!
What a tip it is around Central right now. Had to walk an extra half mile to get to McDonald's on Argyle st last week. At least the Scottie dogs are brightening the city centre up
I believe that Union Street is due to be opened before the Commonwealth Games starts, but, Glasgow City Council, so who knows.
Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
See - better at politics already. That's what we all wanted right?
More seriously triple lock is not a top priority to address.
If Burnham can use political capital on land tax/council tax reform as is being briefed, that is a much bigger prize.
One distinctive Burnham approach in Manchester is that he has regularly done radio phone ins. Unfortunately for him, a favourite subject has been the Manchester ULEZ, which he changed to a different strategy to meet the targets.
He'll be looking for something to keep in more direct touch with the public than a normal PM. Expect longish podcast interviews / conversations.
Reporters and Andrew Neil will have kittens, but that is probably a feature not a bug.
Sounds like Cameron Direct that David Cameron did, hardly an unheard of concept.
Did Dave keep doing them once he was in Downing Street? (Genuinely, I don't know.)
There are many things that seem like good politics until the "questions that nobody else can resolve" hosepipe is pointed at you 24/7.
As an aside for @TSE -- Speccie this weekend reports that Cameron has been helping school Kemi for PMQs.
Yup, Dave has my levels of self confidence and modesty.
Kemi Badenoch takes advice from Tory leaders to boost PMQs performance
The Tory leader has spoken to all her living predecessors — except one.
Boris Johnson made the case that Nigel Farage comes with the ‘whiff of sulphur’
Kemi Badenoch has taken advice from every former living Conservative leader, except Liz Truss, as she attempts to rebuild trust in the party.
Badenoch has held meetings with her predecessors including Sir John Major, Lord Hague of Richmond, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton, Baroness May of Maidenhead, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.
She is understood to have taken the most advice from Duncan Smith and Cameron, who is said to have told her: “There are only three living people who have gone from being leader of the opposition to being prime minister. I am the only one who wants to help you.”
The Spectator reported that Johnson spoke at the opening of the party’s new headquarters in London and has been in touch with Badenoch about how best to take on Nigel Farage.
He said: “Is it not wonderful, poetic, beautiful to see Reform being devoured, haemorrhaging votes on the right to this party called Restore, which sounds like a sort of hair-loss potion or something?”
Speccie also saying that Boris is gearing up to return to the front line fray having put sufficient "hay in the loft" for the family.
One of the things that differentiates Tories from Reformers is in their attitude to Ukraine. And one thing about Boris is his absolute commitment to Ukraine and anger at anyone who backslides on this. No Reformer he.
I think this goes some way to explaining the antagonism between him and Farage, a long-time repeater of Kremlin lines, and who has said he won't commit UK troops to Ukraine when the war ends. Will be interesting, not to say entertaining, if Boris returns to the fray.
JRM came on board with Kemi this week apparently
Oh dear. She can't win at everything.
As @TSE has said Kemi involvement with all past conservative leaders and PMs, excluding Truss, is impressive and if they publically endorse her and campaign for her it will be quite a win
Would you mind if I borrowed your rose tinted spectacles? I still don't see the political genius you have detected.
Its like being chased by the bear. Kimi doesn't need to be a political genius, she needs to be better than the field. It's a seriously low bar right now. It remains to be seen if Burnham is able to raise it at all.
The field is her shadow cabinet, not Burnham.
And yes, they do make her look good. Its like going on the pull with your ugliest mate, so you look handsome in comparison.
Cyclefree hold the door on your way out, after reading these posts between Foxy and DavidL I think I am going to join you exiting this site right now! I suspect that Foxy does not have any daughters, I don't either, but I do have three lovely sons and I now have two wonderful feisty daughter in laws like me who would find this post really beyond the pale!!!
Subbing the Aussie keeper for the penalties is...a choice.
2 misses from the Aussies!
Now all we need is for the Aussies to be beaten in Rugby, Rugby League, Cricket and everything they are competing in in the Commonwealth Games and they can concentrate on what they do best, making good red wine.
20 days left, according to the big clock in Glasgow Central!
What a tip it is around Central right now. Had to walk an extra half mile to get to McDonald's on Argyle st last week. At least the Scottie dogs are brightening the city centre up
A site where people like @Roger tells lies about me is not for me any more.
I responded to a poster saying that no-one gave a fuck about Gaza by saying that some people do care a lot and then went on to say that the death of civilians was a tragedy. As well as being one of this site's worst misogynists with a penchant for targeting me in particular (though I imagine any woman with opinions is a problem for him) he also has a problem with English comprehension.
I have no time or energy for people like him. And his presence makes the forum more unpleasant than it should be.
So bye.
Oh no, no Cyclefree please don't leave the site! You make an amazing contribution here with your detailed thoughtful and insightful articles as well as your comments in the threads. I don't always agree with your political stance here but I always respect it and take your point of view on board especially due to your incredible background knowledge of the law and how it plays out politically at our Westminster Parliament. What ever I am when it comes to being a tribal Scottish Conservative, I am a stronger supporter of that Parliament functioning as a collective body to hold the Government of the day to account who ever is in power.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
- We cannot afford to lose any female contributors to this forum - there are only a few anyway
Totally agree Big_G_Wales, sadly we have lost too many female contributers on this site due to ill health and I am now only in contact with one former regular here who has no desire to return. But its up to this site and the now regular contributors here to decide if they are man enough to cope with even a few more women contributers here to shake things up. But judging by their dismissive attitude to Kemi Badenoch, I suspect not, and they are in their boring comfort zone and want to keep this a left leaning blinkered Dad-centric mans shed when it comes to politics with a dismissive attitude to powerful women in general despite their many talents....
I agree more F on here would be good, and that some of the tone isn't welcoming to women, but I don't buy the rest of what you're saying. It isn't that left leaning. There's loads of right wing posters. And it isn't particularly down on Kemi Badenoch. Compared to the vitriol about Keir Starmer she gets an easy ride.
And with Cyclefree, she may be outnumbered by the blokes but she receives (rightly) a great deal of respect and appreciation. She's the Killer Queen of PB and imo does not need 'the board' rising up to slag off other posters in order to make her stay. She'll continue to post if she wants to and I very much hope she does.
Came in on this a bit late.
Israel/Gaza seems to have this effect. I try to avoid discussing it these days, because no one ever changes their mind, almost irrespective of events, and I have a fairly strong contempt for the leadership of both sides.
I will really miss Cyclefree if she does go. No doubt there are good reasons for deciding you've had enough of PB, but literally anything Rogerdamus might come up with would not be high on my list.
Subbing the Aussie keeper for the penalties is...a choice.
2 misses from the Aussies!
Now all we need is for the Aussies to be beaten in Rugby, Rugby League, Cricket and everything they are competing in in the Commonwealth Games and they can concentrate on what they do best, making good red wine.
20 days left, according to the big clock in Glasgow Central!
What a tip it is around Central right now. Had to walk an extra half mile to get to McDonald's on Argyle st last week. At least the Scottie dogs are brightening the city centre up
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
I haven't flagged this post, but of I had read It earlier I would have considered it. You quite regularly pile on to posters you disagree with, asking for bans and apologies to yourself and other posters.
You might not like @Roger and his posts but then you don't like mine, or Horse's posts and several others not like minded to yourself.
It would be a shame if we lost @Cyclefree and although I am not a big fan of her Trans related headers, there is a place for them on a First Amendment site like this one, even if another poster, for particularly personal reasons finds the analysis extremely offensive.
As for @Roger I like his posts on the whole. "Me Too" wasn't his finest hour but I agree entirely with his conclusions about Netanyahu, Ben G'Vir and Smotrich, and despite Barty's regular protestations that Gazans deserved all they got I agree fully with Roger. The Hamas attack on the Kibbutz AND the razing of Gaza are both stains on humanity.
Please refrain from demanding red cards for anyone you disagree with.
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
I haven't flagged this post, but of I had read It earlier I would have considered it. You quite regularly pile on to posters you disagree with, asking for bans and apologies to yourself and other posters.
You might not like @Roger and his posts but then you don't like mine, or Horse's posts and several others not like minded to yourself.
It would be a shame if we lost @Cyclefree and although I am not a big fan of her Trans related headers, there is a place for them on a First Amendment site like this one, even if another poster, for particularly personal reasons finds the analysis extremely offensive.
As for @Roger I like his posts on the whole. "Me Too" wasn't his finest hour but I agree entirely with his conclusions about Netanyahu, Ben G'Vir and Smotrich, and despite Barty's regular protestations that Gazans deserved all they got I agree fully with Roger. The Hamas attack on the Kibbutz AND the razing of Gaza are both stains on humanity.
Please refrain from demanding red cards for anyone you disagree with.
When did I demand a red card for him
Many came out in support of @Cyclefree on here tonight and you have no justification for personalising this to me
Maybe you should join the support for @Cyclefree and understand what she was accused of was simply wrong
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
I haven't flagged this post, but of I had read It earlier I would have considered it. You quite regularly pile on to posters you disagree with, asking for bans and apologies to yourself and other posters.
You might not like @Roger and his posts but then you don't like mine, or Horse's posts and several others not like minded to yourself.
It would be a shame if we lost @Cyclefree and although I am not a big fan of her Trans related headers, there is a place for them on a First Amendment site like this one, even if another poster, for particularly personal reasons finds the analysis extremely offensive.
As for @Roger I like his posts on the whole. "Me Too" wasn't his finest hour but I agree entirely with his conclusions about Netanyahu, Ben G'Vir and Smotrich, and despite Barty's regular protestations that Gazans deserved all they got I agree fully with Roger. The Hamas attack on the Kibbutz AND the razing of Gaza are both stains on humanity.
Please refrain from demanding red cards for anyone you disagree with.
When did I demand a red card for him
Many came out in support of @Cyclefree on here tonight and you have no justification for personalising this to me
Maybe you should join the support for @Cyclefree and understand what she was accused of was simply wrong
Who is the immature wanker flagging posts they don’t like? Seriuosly folks. The flag should bre for things that may get the site in trouble. Don’t like a post? Write one saying why.
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
I haven't flagged this post, but of I had read It earlier I would have considered it. You quite regularly pile on to posters you disagree with, asking for bans and apologies to yourself and other posters.
You might not like @Roger and his posts but then you don't like mine, or Horse's posts and several others not like minded to yourself.
It would be a shame if we lost @Cyclefree and although I am not a big fan of her Trans related headers, there is a place for them on a First Amendment site like this one, even if another poster, for particularly personal reasons finds the analysis extremely offensive.
As for @Roger I like his posts on the whole. "Me Too" wasn't his finest hour but I agree entirely with his conclusions about Netanyahu, Ben G'Vir and Smotrich, and despite Barty's regular protestations that Gazans deserved all they got I agree fully with Roger. The Hamas attack on the Kibbutz AND the razing of Gaza are both stains on humanity.
Please refrain from demanding red cards for anyone you disagree with.
When did I demand a red card for him
Many came out in support of @Cyclefree on here tonight and you have no justification for personalising this to me
Maybe you should join the support for @Cyclefree and understand what she was accused of was simply wrong
Who is the immature wanker flagging posts they don’t like? Seriuosly folks. The flag should bre for things that may get the site in trouble. Don’t like a post? Write one saying why.
Hilarious. I can only hope some adult pop has been consumed…
Subbing the Aussie keeper for the penalties is...a choice.
2 misses from the Aussies!
Now all we need is for the Aussies to be beaten in Rugby, Rugby League, Cricket and everything they are competing in in the Commonwealth Games and they can concentrate on what they do best, making good red wine.
20 days left, according to the big clock in Glasgow Central!
What a tip it is around Central right now. Had to walk an extra half mile to get to McDonald's on Argyle st last week. At least the Scottie dogs are brightening the city centre up
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
I haven't flagged this post, but of I had read It earlier I would have considered it. You quite regularly pile on to posters you disagree with, asking for bans and apologies to yourself and other posters.
You might not like @Roger and his posts but then you don't like mine, or Horse's posts and several others not like minded to yourself.
It would be a shame if we lost @Cyclefree and although I am not a big fan of her Trans related headers, there is a place for them on a First Amendment site like this one, even if another poster, for particularly personal reasons finds the analysis extremely offensive.
As for @Roger I like his posts on the whole. "Me Too" wasn't his finest hour but I agree entirely with his conclusions about Netanyahu, Ben G'Vir and Smotrich, and despite Barty's regular protestations that Gazans deserved all they got I agree fully with Roger. The Hamas attack on the Kibbutz AND the razing of Gaza are both stains on humanity.
Please refrain from demanding red cards for anyone you disagree with.
When did I demand a red card for him
Many came out in support of @Cyclefree on here tonight and you have no justification for personalising this to me
Maybe you should join the support for @Cyclefree and understand what she was accused of was simply wrong
Who is the immature wanker flagging posts they don’t like? Seriuosly folks. The flag should bre for things that may get the site in trouble. Don’t like a post? Write one saying why.
And you have been flagged
This is getting ridiculous
The support for @Cyclefree tonight on here shows just how much her contributions are appreciated and when she announced she was leaving her announcement actually received a like would you believe
Approximately 570,000 are expected across the race weekend at Silverstone, breaking the record held by previous highest attendance of 520,000 at the Australian GP in 1995 but most striking is the makeup of those numbers.
Female attendance now makes up 43% of sales at the British GP. The driver’s dedicated Landostand on the outside of Stowe corner, bedecked in his florescent yellow colour scheme, has been increased to a 20,000 capacity this year and last year 70% of ticket sales there were to female fans...
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
I haven't flagged this post, but of I had read It earlier I would have considered it. You quite regularly pile on to posters you disagree with, asking for bans and apologies to yourself and other posters.
You might not like @Roger and his posts but then you don't like mine, or Horse's posts and several others not like minded to yourself.
It would be a shame if we lost @Cyclefree and although I am not a big fan of her Trans related headers, there is a place for them on a First Amendment site like this one, even if another poster, for particularly personal reasons finds the analysis extremely offensive.
As for @Roger I like his posts on the whole. "Me Too" wasn't his finest hour but I agree entirely with his conclusions about Netanyahu, Ben G'Vir and Smotrich, and despite Barty's regular protestations that Gazans deserved all they got I agree fully with Roger. The Hamas attack on the Kibbutz AND the razing of Gaza are both stains on humanity.
Please refrain from demanding red cards for anyone you disagree with.
When did I demand a red card for him
Many came out in support of @Cyclefree on here tonight and you have no justification for personalising this to me
Maybe you should join the support for @Cyclefree and understand what she was accused of was simply wrong
Who is the immature wanker flagging posts they don’t like? Seriuosly folks. The flag should bre for things that may get the site in trouble. Don’t like a post? Write one saying why.
And you have been flagged
This is getting ridiculous
The support for @Cyclefree tonight on here shows just how much her contributions are appreciated and when she announced she was leaving her announcement actually received a like would you believe
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
I haven't flagged this post, but of I had read It earlier I would have considered it. You quite regularly pile on to posters you disagree with, asking for bans and apologies to yourself and other posters.
You might not like @Roger and his posts but then you don't like mine, or Horse's posts and several others not like minded to yourself.
It would be a shame if we lost @Cyclefree and although I am not a big fan of her Trans related headers, there is a place for them on a First Amendment site like this one, even if another poster, for particularly personal reasons finds the analysis extremely offensive.
As for @Roger I like his posts on the whole. "Me Too" wasn't his finest hour but I agree entirely with his conclusions about Netanyahu, Ben G'Vir and Smotrich, and despite Barty's regular protestations that Gazans deserved all they got I agree fully with Roger. The Hamas attack on the Kibbutz AND the razing of Gaza are both stains on humanity.
Please refrain from demanding red cards for anyone you disagree with.
When did I demand a red card for him
Many came out in support of @Cyclefree on here tonight and you have no justification for personalising this to me
Maybe you should join the support for @Cyclefree and understand what she was accused of was simply wrong
Who is the immature wanker flagging posts they don’t like? Seriuosly folks. The flag should bre for things that may get the site in trouble. Don’t like a post? Write one saying why.
And you have been flagged
This is getting ridiculous
The support for @Cyclefree tonight on here shows just how much her contributions are appreciated and when she announced she was leaving her announcement actually received a like would you believe
I would just like to say @Cyclefree leaving us because of unjustified accusations by @Roger is a real low, and I appeal to this forum to show wholeheartedly support for her to reconsider and stay and for @Roger to apologise
I haven't flagged this post, but of I had read It earlier I would have considered it. You quite regularly pile on to posters you disagree with, asking for bans and apologies to yourself and other posters.
You might not like @Roger and his posts but then you don't like mine, or Horse's posts and several others not like minded to yourself.
It would be a shame if we lost @Cyclefree and although I am not a big fan of her Trans related headers, there is a place for them on a First Amendment site like this one, even if another poster, for particularly personal reasons finds the analysis extremely offensive.
As for @Roger I like his posts on the whole. "Me Too" wasn't his finest hour but I agree entirely with his conclusions about Netanyahu, Ben G'Vir and Smotrich, and despite Barty's regular protestations that Gazans deserved all they got I agree fully with Roger. The Hamas attack on the Kibbutz AND the razing of Gaza are both stains on humanity.
Please refrain from demanding red cards for anyone you disagree with.
When did I demand a red card for him
Many came out in support of @Cyclefree on here tonight and you have no justification for personalising this to me
Maybe you should join the support for @Cyclefree and understand what she was accused of was simply wrong
Who is the immature wanker flagging posts they don’t like? Seriuosly folks. The flag should bre for things that may get the site in trouble. Don’t like a post? Write one saying why.
And you have been flagged
This is getting ridiculous
The support for @Cyclefree tonight on here shows just how much her contributions are appreciated and when she announced she was leaving her announcement actually received a like would you believe
Yes, I quite like @Cyclefree, though do tend to skip her rather tiresome anti-Trans polemic headers. I hope she enjoys her break. Most of us need one from time to time.
But @roger is also a poster valued by me. One of the wittiest posters here, and more edgy than even our resident matelot.
Subbing the Aussie keeper for the penalties is...a choice.
2 misses from the Aussies!
Now all we need is for the Aussies to be beaten in Rugby, Rugby League, Cricket and everything they are competing in in the Commonwealth Games and they can concentrate on what they do best, making good red wine.
20 days left, according to the big clock in Glasgow Central!
What a tip it is around Central right now. Had to walk an extra half mile to get to McDonald's on Argyle st last week. At least the Scottie dogs are brightening the city centre up
On the whole, I think the big wedding today is a good thing for the US, and the Western world. Our largest domestic problem* is our weakenied families, and so it is good to see two weathy celebrities do the right thing. I hope their example will inspire others, especially our young men. https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/2026/07/03/taylor-swift-travis-kelces-wedding-guide/
(*Yes, I think it even worse than our grotesquely large national deficits and debt.)
The BBC article about the time change to the England - Mexico match has been updated to include this:
England and Mexico are locked in talks with Fifa about moving their World Cup last-16 tie to 19:00 BST on Sunday.
Fifa was set to make the change on Friday evening and issue a statement but both teams' officials have been angered by the late proposed change.
...
Football's world governing body maintains no decision has been made on rescheduling the fixture.
Sources have told BBC Sport suggestions of a change, which was first reported by local media in Mexico, took the Football Association and its Mexican counterparts by surprise.
Before the news, planning for Sunday's game was continuing as normal on Friday, with officials involved in planning and security discussions.
Subbing the Aussie keeper for the penalties is...a choice.
2 misses from the Aussies!
Now all we need is for the Aussies to be beaten in Rugby, Rugby League, Cricket and everything they are competing in in the Commonwealth Games and they can concentrate on what they do best, making good red wine.
20 days left, according to the big clock in Glasgow Central!
What a tip it is around Central right now. Had to walk an extra half mile to get to McDonald's on Argyle st last week. At least the Scottie dogs are brightening the city centre up
Thanks. I must have missed your original post. Hope you enjoyed your visit.
Thanks, the weather was alright, luckily. A few drops of rain at Leven on Tuesday afternoon, but otherwise sunny. Wednesday, when I did East Kilbride, Troon, etc. was mostly dry too, though cloudy.
Though I did kick myself for not doing Linlithgow to Dalmeny and back on Tuesday evening (19:10 Glasgow Queen St to Inverkeithing and 20:24 return)! I did do the outbound journey as far as Dalmeny in 2018, but by the time I arrived there, it was on the cusp of darkness in mid-October.
The BBC article about the time change to the England - Mexico match has been updated to include this:
England and Mexico are locked in talks with Fifa about moving their World Cup last-16 tie to 19:00 BST on Sunday.
Fifa was set to make the change on Friday evening and issue a statement but both teams' officials have been angered by the late proposed change.
...
Football's world governing body maintains no decision has been made on rescheduling the fixture.
Sources have told BBC Sport suggestions of a change, which was first reported by local media in Mexico, took the Football Association and its Mexican counterparts by surprise.
Before the news, planning for Sunday's game was continuing as normal on Friday, with officials involved in planning and security discussions.
That would definitely scupper England in that heat
Looking over the tables, I note that the of the 8 best 3rd placed teams, only Ghana and Paraguay are still in, and only because they haven't played their R32 matches yet.
I think Ghana is the only one with a realistic chance of progression.
48 teams is simply too many teams for a tournament.
Comments
I would be astonished if you did
Hopefully it won't be penalties!
And yes, they do make her look good. Its like going on the pull with your ugliest mate, so you look handsome in comparison.
I only wish we had more Cyclefree's up here in Scotland at Holyrood, it would be a far better place as a result! And while I am at it tonight, I really want to see JosiasJessop back posting here if he is still around lurking?! I did not know why you left, but I think I got the gist and understand it after one night lurking here and I hope you and your wife will come back because I got the same shade here many years ago and its why Fitaloon left and wanted me to do the same.
But Cyclefree and JosiasJessop don't let the sods get you down, if you leave they win and this site would become even poorer without you both....
The Thames Path is not analogous to an unclassified single track road somewhere in back end of Shropshire, or one of my backland routes into Derbyshire - it is the most important public footpath in London.
I think in my view you are proposing a compromise with a business that has no reasonable expectation of a compromise since their obstruction of the public highway is unlawful, and you therefore giving away far more than is reasonable. Why should a private business be able to annexe more than half of a public highway for their own purposes? We do not compromise with Travellers who want to camp in our parks, and I would not be allowed to extend my garden across 60% of the road outside because I want space for my children to have a trampoline.
And I don't see the difference - there is no "both sides" to this. This is pedestrian space - essentially full stop, and a pub obstructing it is in the same category as a farmer blocking a public footpath with his tractor or his haystack, or me blocking the road outside with an extension to my garden.
A pavement license is a limited and privileged exception to the legal rule, and I see no reason why there should be any compromise of the lawful public use of the ROW beyond the minimal, if any at all. I do take a moderately strong stance on this, since there is a hell of a long way to push the pendulum back to create a balanced culture around these questions.
We'll see where the Council come down.
PS You may enjoy this account of what happens if pavement tables go too far. A friend went into a shop in York after wheeling along the pavement, and by the time she came out the pavement in both directions was entirely blocked by cafe tables they had put out on both sides, and she was trapped.
She 'persuaded' the Council to change their licensing policy. This is why the Equality Act 2010 is essential !
https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/campaigners-legal-fight-forces-council-to-scrap-ludicrous-pavement-policy2/
We cannot afford to lose any female contributors to this forum - there are only a few anyway
Just to show how serious they are, the Government should make a statement (as soon as possible) that anyone working for Thames Water when it goes bankrupt will have their jobs and salaries guatanteed by the state for three months. HMG can then reassess the situation once they have put new managemnt in charge.
"Nationalisation" means that the bond holders and shareholders will be rewarded for running the company into the ground. That's a non-starter as far as I am concerned.
Maybe someone can tell me
Mexico have a bit more of a home advantage than most teams though!
I am, however, considering whether to pay for 1 month to watch the rest of the WC.
Not had a licence for at least a decade, and watched live sport with Flatlander Sr, but sadly he is no longer with us.
Note this is for the vehicle to operate as a taxi with a licence under his name, not for the convicted man to drive the taxi personally. Decision widely criticised and a few councillors who voted for it have resigned
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9q2dqzl12zo
Better from the Egyptian
You'll forgive me as a non Conservative for not being as joyful about your party's prospects. The Conservatives have become like the Liberal Democrats - islands of strength surrounded by large areas of weakness. We see, week after week in local council by-elections, some dramatic falls in Conservative vote shares often but not exclusively to Reform.
Burnham will be a more combative and difficult opponent than Starmer and I think he will do the day-to-day cut and thrust of politics much better and that will make life harder for Badenoch.
Of course, the Conservatives are happy to have Labour as the main opponent - Reform are the big challenge and while some seem to think Reform and Farage are somehow going to wither and die (with the accompanying vote switch to the Conservatives), the actual evidence is flimsy.
One good by-election doesn't make a summer - ask the LDs. Outside some parts of London, the May local elections were very poor for the Conservatives - holding the elections in the likes of Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex in 2026 rather than 2025 masked the scale of the losses to some extent (or accentuated them).
The Conservatives need to be clearly established as the primary repository for an anti-Labour vote - that's how they won in 1970 and 1979 and advanced in 2010 but at the moment in many parts of the country, that role is filled by other parties.
We are still three years from a General Election and a lot of water has to flow under a lot of bridges. Scotland will do what Scotland does - the Holyrood results give the lie to the euphoria from the Aberdeen South win. In much of the country, beyond the areas of activity, the Conservative Party is irrelevant - they may win 100 seats next time, they may do better, they may do worse - the problem is their fate isn't wholly in their hands.
And then remembered I m supposed to be out all day doing ‘things’.
Bugger.
And with Cyclefree, she may be outnumbered by the blokes but she receives (rightly) a great deal of respect and appreciation. She's the Killer Queen of PB and imo does not need 'the board' rising up to slag off other posters in order to make her stay. She'll continue to post if she wants to and I very much hope she does.
Never mind Oz, should have picked Martin Boyle
It's perfectly appropriate to criticise Kemi Badenoch if she says or does something deserving of criticism without you or other Conservative sympathisers claiming it is a "dismissive attitude to powerful woman".
She has no immunity from criticism of the party's policies and when she makes a misstep.
Cyclefree hold the door on your way out, after reading these posts between Foxy and DavidL I think I am going to join you exiting this site right now! I suspect that Foxy does not have any daughters, I don't either, but I do have three lovely sons and I now have two wonderful feisty daughter in laws like me who would find this post really beyond the pale!!!
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5591212#Comment_5591212
Israel/Gaza seems to have this effect. I try to avoid discussing it these days, because no one ever changes their mind, almost irrespective of events, and I have a fairly strong contempt for the leadership of both sides.
I will really miss Cyclefree if she does go.
No doubt there are good reasons for deciding you've had enough of PB, but literally anything Rogerdamus might come up with would not be high on my list.
You might not like @Roger and his posts but then you don't like mine, or Horse's posts and several others not like minded to yourself.
It would be a shame if we lost @Cyclefree and although I am not a big fan of her Trans related headers, there is a place for them on a First Amendment site like this one, even if another poster, for particularly personal reasons finds the analysis extremely offensive.
As for @Roger I like his posts on the whole. "Me Too" wasn't his finest hour but I agree entirely with his conclusions about Netanyahu, Ben G'Vir and Smotrich, and despite Barty's regular protestations that Gazans deserved all they got I agree fully with Roger. The Hamas attack on the Kibbutz AND the razing of Gaza are both stains on humanity.
Please refrain from demanding red cards for anyone you disagree with.
Many came out in support of @Cyclefree on here tonight and you have no justification for personalising this to me
Maybe you should join the support for @Cyclefree and understand what she was accused of was simply wrong
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5591212#Comment_5591212
This is getting ridiculous
The support for @Cyclefree tonight on here shows just how much her contributions are appreciated and when she announced she was leaving her announcement actually received a like would you believe
Misusing the Flag button pisses off Robert and myself.
It should only be used if post has the potential to get the site into trouble.
(We also understand it can be activated accidentally, just click it again, and it will get rid off the original flag.)
Edit - Repeated misuse of it, automatically restricts your ability to post.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2026/jul/03/lewis-hamilton-british-grand-prix-formula-one-ferrari
..This weekend’s British Grand Prix will attract record numbers and more of them than ever are women and girls, for which the defending world champion believes F1 should be celebrated.
Approximately 570,000 are expected across the race weekend at Silverstone, breaking the record held by previous highest attendance of 520,000 at the Australian GP in 1995 but most striking is the makeup of those numbers.
Female attendance now makes up 43% of sales at the British GP. The driver’s dedicated Landostand on the outside of Stowe corner, bedecked in his florescent yellow colour scheme, has been increased to a 20,000 capacity this year and last year 70% of ticket sales there were to female fans...
And now unflagged
What is going on tonight
But @roger is also a poster valued by me. One of the wittiest posters here, and more edgy than even our resident matelot.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/2026/07/03/taylor-swift-travis-kelces-wedding-guide/
(*Yes, I think it even worse than our grotesquely large national deficits and debt.)
Jim Miller (ce1e4c) — 7/3/2026 @ 2:38 pm
England and Mexico are locked in talks with Fifa about moving their World Cup last-16 tie to 19:00 BST on Sunday.
Fifa was set to make the change on Friday evening and issue a statement but both teams' officials have been angered by the late proposed change.
...
Football's world governing body maintains no decision has been made on rescheduling the fixture.
Sources have told BBC Sport suggestions of a change, which was first reported by local media in Mexico, took the Football Association and its Mexican counterparts by surprise.
Before the news, planning for Sunday's game was continuing as normal on Friday, with officials involved in planning and security discussions.
Though I did kick myself for not doing Linlithgow to Dalmeny and back on Tuesday evening (19:10 Glasgow Queen St to Inverkeithing and 20:24 return)! I did do the outbound journey as far as Dalmeny in 2018, but by the time I arrived there, it was on the cusp of darkness in mid-October.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/football/market/1.259533007
I think Ghana is the only one with a realistic chance of progression.
48 teams is simply too many teams for a tournament.