I mean, honestly, this is just plain daft. Just when the bien pensants start to think maybe she has something she goes back to being mad as a mad thing:
@Tomorrow'sMPs @tomorrowsmps · 8m Badenoch says she is ruling out as candidates anyone who supports ECHR or Net Zero. That could problems with some existing MPs.
I am live at my Camden by-election count, postal votes being checked, mood tense.
Some early talk that the independent might do well. He was endorsed by the Green who was elected and disqualified in May, but who had then fallen out with the party. The indie had also had support from the Camden People's Alliance, a Your Party-adjacent grouping.
However, it's probably more likely to be a showdown between the Greens and Labour.
Turnout low, but what do you expect in this heat?
The greatest drama so far was actually when someone turned the lights off by mistake.
22% turnout, but who can blame the electorate in this heat for not coming out!
I got 51 votes and last place - woo!
And the winner was... Labour! In the end it was pretty close between Labour, Green 2nd and the independent 3rd. The indie cost the Greens the seat. I think most of those indie votes would've been Green if he hadn't stood and then they would've walked it.
Tories 4th, Reform 5th. The Tories were happy to reverse the order between them and Reform in the ward from May. The Tories at the count were very nice. I don't think Reform turned up!
22% turnout, but who can blame the electorate in this heat for not coming out!
I got 51 votes and last place - woo!
And the winner was... Labour! In the end it was pretty close between Labour, Green 2nd and the independent 3rd. The indie cost the Greens the seat. I think most of those indie votes would've been Green if he hadn't stood and then they would've walked it.
Tories 4th, Reform 5th. The Tories were happy to reverse the order between them and Reform in the ward from May. The Tories at the count were very nice. I don't think Reform turned up!
You... stood for Reform?
It came as a surprise to me too.
Don’t let the wrong one in, though you never can tell sometimes.
I mean, honestly, this is just plain daft. Just when the bien pensants start to think maybe she has something she goes back to being mad as a mad thing:
@Tomorrow'sMPs @tomorrowsmps · 8m Badenoch says she is ruling out as candidates anyone who supports ECHR or Net Zero. That could problems with some existing MPs.
So what if a dozen or so of your own MPs are arguing about the precise details of Net Zero - maybe 2050, maybe 2040 etc etc?
Bonkers.
Bizarre timing.
It's also Net zero, not gross zero - you might be a DAC optimist, or want to bring back the Caledonian Rainforest. Or you might want to achieve it purely from a National Security perspective, or because of other negative effects like air pollution. You might want to get almost all done by 2040, but reach zero in 2060.
On ECHR - you might be like me and support the underlying principles, but think it and the Refugee Convention should be radically reformed to reflect the 21st Century.
A simple thought experiment will show you why this can happen: Suppose a school has 120 students in four 4th grade classes. The school hires two new teachers and reduces average class sizes from 30 to 20. The two new teachers are learning their jobs, and so 40 of the students get poorer teaching, while the other 80 may get slightly better teaching. And perhaps the two new teachers never improve much. (There is not an unlimited supply of good teachers in the US; I don't know what the situation is in the UK.)
Something like this happened in the US as discrimination against women decreased since WW II. Capable young women, who might have been teachers in earlier decades, instead went into business, law, science, and other fields. Class sizes were reduced, but achievement did not improve much, especially in schools outside the old South.
(For the record: To avoid the draft during Vietnam I taught for a few years in a Chicago grade school. We had only one full-time police officer; a nearby high school had four.)
I mean, honestly, this is just plain daft. Just when the bien pensants start to think maybe she has something she goes back to being mad as a mad thing:
@Tomorrow'sMPs @tomorrowsmps · 8m Badenoch says she is ruling out as candidates anyone who supports ECHR or Net Zero. That could problems with some existing MPs.
So what if a dozen or so of your own MPs are arguing about the precise details of Net Zero - maybe 2050, maybe 2040 etc etc?
Bonkers.
During a record breaking heatwave, she decides to make Climate Change denial a central strategy.
I think a message that Net Zero policies are unrealistic, too costly, and do not have the global impact to make them a proportionate solution, could be reasonably popular without being pitched as absolute climate denialism. But purely on optics bringing it up on a normal or even cool day would probably be better.
Accepting climate change, accepting that the UK can’t single handedly stop it, and that we need to mitigate its effects, by protecting from flooding, encouraging air conditioning and making homes and workplaces more resilient, may win more votes than hairshirt Green policies.
It is like accepting infectious disease but rejecting as a policy any behavioural change or public intervention to prevent it. It is illogical and totally stupid. As such. typical of the deeply unserious Kemi Badenoch.
Andy Burnham urged to scrap income tax and NI in radical fiscal overhaul Economists including Jim O’Neill write open letter calling for single levy to replace six key taxes to raise money for public services ... Prosperity 2030 suggests replacing six key taxes, including income tax, capital gains tax, inheritance tax and national insurance contributions, with a single levy. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/jul/09/andy-burnham-scrap-income-tax-national-insurance-fiscal-overhaul
I mean, honestly, this is just plain daft. Just when the bien pensants start to think maybe she has something she goes back to being mad as a mad thing:
@Tomorrow'sMPs @tomorrowsmps · 8m Badenoch says she is ruling out as candidates anyone who supports ECHR or Net Zero. That could problems with some existing MPs.
So what if a dozen or so of your own MPs are arguing about the precise details of Net Zero - maybe 2050, maybe 2040 etc etc?
Bonkers.
Bizarre timing.
It's also Net zero, not gross zero - you might be a DAC optimist, or want to bring back the Caledonian Rainforest. Or you might want to achieve it purely from a National Security perspective, or because of other negative effects like air pollution. You might want to get almost all done by 2040, but reach zero in 2060.
On ECHR - you might be like me and support the underlying principles, but think it and the Refugee Convention should be radically reformed to reflect the 21st Century.
Badenoch is the most frustrating politician.
The challenge I would make to those who agree with the principles of ECHR but not the specifics, is what specifically do you want changed?
My question to the likes of Badenoch (not yourself obviously) - what is it about human rights you don't like?
Reform byelection campaign risks a replay of the Johnson error In triggering an entirely optional byelection, Nigel Farage has given opponents weeks to repeat the claims about his finances ... If there is one lesson from the Johnson era, it is this: the public is largely relaxed about sleaze allegations against politicians until they are suddenly not; protestations about witch hunts and the deep state are indulged until they are suddenly not.
A surprisingly inconsequential article by Polly Filla.
What is not mentioned is something JRM pointed out, that the PSC process limits what Farage can say publicly in his defence. If so, Farage has compounded this problem by lengthening the time in which his critics can make hay before the PSC's verdict is delivered.
Comments
We need to ultimately get to Net Zero, or as close to it as practical.
Bankrupting ourselves to do it by law by 2050, regardless of economic or technological feasibility, is another matter.
Between every election you're like this and, come polling day, you always vote Lib Dem or Labour.
Don’t let the wrong one in, though you never can tell sometimes.
Economists including Jim O’Neill write open letter calling for single levy to replace six key taxes to raise money for public services
...
Prosperity 2030 suggests replacing six key taxes, including income tax, capital gains tax, inheritance tax and national insurance contributions, with a single levy.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/jul/09/andy-burnham-scrap-income-tax-national-insurance-fiscal-overhaul
My question to the likes of Badenoch (not yourself obviously) - what is it about human rights you don't like?
In triggering an entirely optional byelection, Nigel Farage has given opponents weeks to repeat the claims about his finances
...
If there is one lesson from the Johnson era, it is this: the public is largely relaxed about sleaze allegations against politicians until they are suddenly not; protestations about witch hunts and the deep state are indulged until they are suddenly not.
Sometimes the decisive factor is a single fact that sticks, but other times it is sheer repetition. In triggering an entirely optional byelection, Farage has given his opponents several more weeks to repeat the allegations about his finances.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jul/09/reform-byelection-campaign-risks-a-replay-of-the-johnson-error
A surprisingly inconsequential article by Polly Filla.
What is not mentioned is something JRM pointed out, that the PSC process limits what Farage can say publicly in his defence. If so, Farage has compounded this problem by lengthening the time in which his critics can make hay before the PSC's verdict is delivered.