Hah, Andy Burnham offered Al Carns the Prisons Minister job, my suggestion was DEFRA.
Given the announcement that the early release program is under review - the prison minister job has just been made the most poisoned of poison chalices. Al was correct to run away from it..
Anyone else having difficulty following threads involving references to both Al (Carns) and AI?
Yes. Pb (and/or Vanilla) seems to be set up to use a sans serif typeface which makes Al look like AI. Maybe this will change after the big move. I can't see a user-level setting for this.
There is AI managing the battery usage and it's not working..
On the surface, having machine learning software controlling the power unit is a flagrant violation of the F1 rules, which state the driver must drive the car "alone and unaided". That would be a bit of an issue if a team were to protest the PU control software as illegal.
I also suspect, given how most of the drivers hate this nonsense, the GPDA is waiting for a big crash to happen before it declares the PU control software a safety hazard and demands it be disabled.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
Palestine Action seems to have driven the ruling classes a little bit mental.
Let him face the consequences of his actions in a court of law. If he has found to have acted illegally by ignoring the judges direction then so be it. I don't see the issue.
"On Wednesday evening, senior legal figures lined up to criticise the prosecution of Menon, believed to be the first of a barrister related to his closing speech."
Even during the Troubles, when you had lawyers who were actual members of the various Community Organisations, I don't recall them being prosecuted.
Interestingly he works for Garden Court Chambers, that's the same law firm from which the immigration judge worked for who decided "family" extended to adult brothers and sisters and let in 18 Gazans under ECHR.
It still doesn't say what Menon is supposed to have said
Apoarently he reminded the jury of their right to acquit, and suggested the court was biased, and that Elbit Systems were somehow getting preferential treatment by having criminal damage prosecuted
That URL is wrong but there's a free link to the article from the tweet.
I was about to add that Stanley Baldwin joked about wanting to fill the Cabinet with Cambridge men after its years of Oxford domination but on reflection, it was replacing Etonians with people from Harrow.
There is AI managing the battery usage and it's not working..
On the surface, having machine learning software controlling the power unit is a flagrant violation of the F1 rules, which state the driver must drive the car "alone and unaided". That would be a bit of an issue if a team were to protest the PU control software as illegal.
I also suspect, given how most of the drivers hate this nonsense, the GPDA is waiting for a big crash to happen before it declares the PU control software a safety hazard and demands it be disabled.
Earlier this year Norris said he overtook Hamilton when he didn't want or meant to because the Ferrari decided it was time to harvest and the McLaren was far faster.
Palestine Action seems to have driven the ruling classes a little bit mental.
Let him face the consequences of his actions in a court of law. If he has found to have acted illegally by ignoring the judges direction then so be it. I don't see the issue.
"On Wednesday evening, senior legal figures lined up to criticise the prosecution of Menon, believed to be the first of a barrister related to his closing speech."
Even during the Troubles, when you had lawyers who were actual members of the various Community Organisations, I don't recall them being prosecuted.
Interestingly he works for Garden Court Chambers, that's the same law firm from which the immigration judge worked for who decided "family" extended to adult brothers and sisters and let in 18 Gazans under ECHR.
It still doesn't say what Menon is supposed to have said
I think he its suggested he was trying to provide information about the reasons why they did what they did (i.e. the motivation) when the judge had ruled that that should not form the defence.
So the Colston 4 undoubtedly did chuck the statue in the water but their reasons were accepted by the jury. I assume in this case the judge worried (rightly as they were originally acquitted) that letting the jury know the motivation would lead to acquittal.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Alastair clearly enjoyed writing about the demise of the Tories - indeed he says as much early on - but the flaw in his analysis, if there is one, is not that he's fixated on the triumph of the centre-left but that he doesn't spend any time considering what might happen if the Reform balloon continues to deflate (or, indeed, pops, if Farage walks away, given his myriad troubles).
While I don't think it automatic that the Tories would then instantly recover pole position - Reform's vote contains many NOTA folks, some left-leaning ones, some who would go even further right to Restore, and many who probably wouldn't vote at all if the Farage factor goes away - recovering it's dominant position on the right-wing side of politics is surely a precondition to any significant Tory recovery?
Indeed, in 2019, albeit under different circumstances, Boris Johnson won because he was the only game in the town on the "right" while the "left" was split and the Conservatives took full advantage.
The poll today and Deltapoll show a very similar divide between Ref-Con and Lab-LD-Green so it continues to be a divided country and the movement to Burnham has come from "left" voters.
Is Ref-Con really a block when so many Ref come from Labour?
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
They are getting eaten from 3 sides - Lib Dem, Labour and Reform. Even if Lib Dems only hold steady in national polling, the Meeks analysis (which I think right now is accurate) is that those 60 seats which went Con to Lib Dem in 2024, are unlikely to fall back into the blue column. As Robert Waller often says, the Lib Dems are very good at first time incumbency. Expect them to dig in.
Which, I suspect, is part of the explanation as to why their relatively large parliamentary party is often accused of being not so visible on the national stage. I'm in no doubt that all the new MPs will have been told to spend the majority of their time doing stuff in their own seats.
It's a good survival strategy; see the Liberals, who probably would have vanished completely without some intense local campaigning. Two catches though;
The key one is that it's a heck of a comedown for a party that won a chunky landslide less than a decade ago.
The other is... Where to dig in? What does a Conservative seat look like? For Lib Dems, it's easy- leafy streets leading to a farmers market and a beach of Waitrose. Similarly Reform- either a golf club or a boarded-up shopping precinct. Polanski's Greens- gentrifying inner cities with lots of cargo bikes.
It's harder for Labour, because they did so well in 2024. How do you do a composite picture of 2/3 of the country? But what does a Conservative seat look like- except for one that the Lib Dems or Reform haven't taken yet?
The issue with this "For Lib Dems, it's easy- leafy streets leading to a farmers market and a beach (sic) of Waitrose." is that that describes my very Tory seat too. I assume you meant branch.
Catching up on Politics for the first time this week
Mrs BJ went into Theatres for ANOTHER major op aimed at stopping her Paraplegia turning into Quadriplegia
After the planned 4hr Op which lasted 11hrs we were told there was a further problem higher up that was going to mean a further op would be required. Thankfully a clearer MRI of the neck area clarified this wasnt the case so with time this op should see her arms retain there use.
Seems to me AB is doing well Darren Jones less so.
Early days but a positive change of direction is welcomed.
Keep it up Andy lad.
Sad to hear about Kevin Keegan and horrifying what happened to Ann Widdecombe.
Hopefully the wife is home by the weekend and the Non League football starts then too.
Catching up on Politics for the first time this week
Mrs BJ went into Theatres for ANOTHER major op aimed at stopping her Paraplegia turning into Quadriplegia
After the planned 4hr Op which lasted 11hrs we were told there was a further problem higher up that was going to be required. Thankfully a clearer MRI of the neck area clarified this wasnt the case so with time this op should see her arms retain there use.
Seems to me AB is doing well Darren Jones less so.
Early days but a positive change of direction is welcomed.
Keep it up Andy lad.
Sad to hear about Kevin Keegan and horrifying what happened to Ann Widdecombe.
Hopefully the wife is home by the weekend and the Non League football starts then too.
So happier less stressful times ahead hopefully
Hope your wife can get home soon and retain full use of her arms, Mr. Owls.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
You need seats that are narrowly held by Labour, but
a) aren't nice enough to be Lib Dem b) are too nice and have too many people with actual jobs to go Reform.
There are a few, I suspect. Central London, some of the NW London fringes like Hendon and Finchley. There must be similar demographics elsewhere.
Hah, Andy Burnham offered Al Carns the Prisons Minister job, my suggestion was DEFRA.
Given the announcement that the early release program is under review - the prison minister job has just been made the most poisoned of poison chalices. Al was correct to run away from it..
Anyone else having difficulty following threads involving references to both Al (Carns) and AI?
Me. Northern_Al
It's so tempting to set up a Northen_AI account and let an agent loose on it!
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
It's a rounding error but what happens to Reform seats if Farage goes pop?
Would Kemi refuse eg Kruger and Anderson?
It would need to be heavy in "circumstances alter cases", but I can see a possibility.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
You need seats that are narrowly held by Labour, but
a) aren't nice enough to be Lib Dem b) are too nice and have too many people with actual jobs to go Reform.
There are a few, I suspect. Central London, some of the NW London fringes like Hendon and Finchley. There must be similar demographics elsewhere.
But not many.
The problem for the Tories is they need to come up with an approach that wins back seats like Witney & Maidenhead as well as winning back the Stoke seats.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
You need seats that are narrowly held by Labour, but
a) aren't nice enough to be Lib Dem b) are too nice and have too many people with actual jobs to go Reform.
There are a few, I suspect. Central London, some of the NW London fringes like Hendon and Finchley. There must be similar demographics elsewhere.
But not many.
Huge swathes of the Midlands have been immune to the charms of the LibDems. If you are looking for a Tory recovery, then if Burnham proves a dud, look there.
Vance telling lies to support a greater ‘truth’, yet again. Bit of a blood libel vibe..
🚨 JD Vance is now claiming that when settlers arrived in the New World, they “found widespread child sacrifice” and that “Christian civilization ended the practice.”
Archaeologists and historians, including experts in North American Indigenous history, say this is a complete fabrication. There is zero evidence of widespread child sacrifice among First Nations.
This isn’t a slip.
It’s racist revisionism dressed up as patriotism. And it tells you exactly how far they’ll go to rewrite history to justify oppression. FOLLOW: @Trustintrump47
But the Aztecs did quite extensively. Vance uses New World. The commentator North America. Not the same thing at all.
It's the usual confusion of ideas from Vance. "Settlers" implies North rather than South America, where there is no evidence of large scale (if any) human sacrifice. It's not really a term used for the conquistadors (who engaged in their own version of widespread human sacrifice). But what he's really talking about, if you listen to his spiel about "brothels in the ancient world", is abortion.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Alastair clearly enjoyed writing about the demise of the Tories - indeed he says as much early on - but the flaw in his analysis, if there is one, is not that he's fixated on the triumph of the centre-left but that he doesn't spend any time considering what might happen if the Reform balloon continues to deflate (or, indeed, pops, if Farage walks away, given his myriad troubles).
While I don't think it automatic that the Tories would then instantly recover pole position - Reform's vote contains many NOTA folks, some left-leaning ones, some who would go even further right to Restore, and many who probably wouldn't vote at all if the Farage factor goes away - recovering it's dominant position on the right-wing side of politics is surely a precondition to any significant Tory recovery?
Indeed, in 2019, albeit under different circumstances, Boris Johnson won because he was the only game in the town on the "right" while the "left" was split and the Conservatives took full advantage.
The poll today and Deltapoll show a very similar divide between Ref-Con and Lab-LD-Green so it continues to be a divided country and the movement to Burnham has come from "left" voters.
Is Ref-Con really a block when so many Ref come from Labour?
Not that many Labour voters are switching to Reform right now. They have a much bigger problem of haemorrhaging votes to Greens. The more that happens the more Labour seats will fall to Reform on relative vote shares. Vote Green and get Reform has a germ of truth.
I suspect Burnham hopes to win Reform voters to Labour. His retail offers look targeted at that group. Whether he can do that and avoid cementing Labour to Green switchers is questionable.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
You need seats that are narrowly held by Labour, but
a) aren't nice enough to be Lib Dem b) are too nice and have too many people with actual jobs to go Reform.
There are a few, I suspect. Central London, some of the NW London fringes like Hendon and Finchley. There must be similar demographics elsewhere.
But not many.
The problem for the Tories is they need to come up with an approach that wins back seats like Witney & Maidenhead as well as winning back the Stoke seats.
I cannot see a policy platform that does that.
The only one that has given a chunky majority since 1987 is to have Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the other lot.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
You need seats that are narrowly held by Labour, but
a) aren't nice enough to be Lib Dem b) are too nice and have too many people with actual jobs to go Reform.
There are a few, I suspect. Central London, some of the NW London fringes like Hendon and Finchley. There must be similar demographics elsewhere.
But not many.
The problem for the Tories is they need to come up with an approach that wins back seats like Witney & Maidenhead as well as winning back the Stoke seats.
I cannot see a policy platform that does that.
The tories don't need to win Stoke. It wasn't key to Maggie gaining power.
Vance telling lies to support a greater ‘truth’, yet again. Bit of a blood libel vibe..
🚨 JD Vance is now claiming that when settlers arrived in the New World, they “found widespread child sacrifice” and that “Christian civilization ended the practice.”
Archaeologists and historians, including experts in North American Indigenous history, say this is a complete fabrication. There is zero evidence of widespread child sacrifice among First Nations.
This isn’t a slip.
It’s racist revisionism dressed up as patriotism. And it tells you exactly how far they’ll go to rewrite history to justify oppression. FOLLOW: @Trustintrump47
But the Aztecs did quite extensively. Vance uses New World. The commentator North America. Not the same thing at all.
Amazing that the VP of the USA, a constituent part of North America, should conflate his country with the whole of the Americas. He doesn't seem very keen on many of the countries that currently make up the continent.
Did them naughty Aztecs also steal and eat people's pets?
They were partial to guinea pigs, I think ? Though they didn't eat much meat.
Vance telling lies to support a greater ‘truth’, yet again. Bit of a blood libel vibe..
🚨 JD Vance is now claiming that when settlers arrived in the New World, they “found widespread child sacrifice” and that “Christian civilization ended the practice.”
Archaeologists and historians, including experts in North American Indigenous history, say this is a complete fabrication. There is zero evidence of widespread child sacrifice among First Nations.
This isn’t a slip.
It’s racist revisionism dressed up as patriotism. And it tells you exactly how far they’ll go to rewrite history to justify oppression. FOLLOW: @Trustintrump47
But the Aztecs did quite extensively. Vance uses New World. The commentator North America. Not the same thing at all.
It's the usual confusion of ideas from Vance. "Settlers" implies North rather than South America, where there is no evidence of large scale (if any) human sacrifice. It's not really a term used for the conquistadors (who engaged in their own version of widespread human sacrifice). But what he's really talking about, if you listen to his spiel about "brothels in the ancient world", is abortion.
It's a multi-stage segway.
Then he pivots from "child sacrifice" to "protecting unborn children".
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
You need seats that are narrowly held by Labour, but
a) aren't nice enough to be Lib Dem b) are too nice and have too many people with actual jobs to go Reform.
There are a few, I suspect. Central London, some of the NW London fringes like Hendon and Finchley. There must be similar demographics elsewhere.
But not many.
Which I think is the effect @MoonRabbit identifies in her analysis: Milton Keynes, Trafford, plus the London fringes. Swindon maybe too much Reform. I think the effect also requires Labour to lose votes to the Greens.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Alastair clearly enjoyed writing about the demise of the Tories - indeed he says as much early on - but the flaw in his analysis, if there is one, is not that he's fixated on the triumph of the centre-left but that he doesn't spend any time considering what might happen if the Reform balloon continues to deflate (or, indeed, pops, if Farage walks away, given his myriad troubles).
While I don't think it automatic that the Tories would then instantly recover pole position - Reform's vote contains many NOTA folks, some left-leaning ones, some who would go even further right to Restore, and many who probably wouldn't vote at all if the Farage factor goes away - recovering it's dominant position on the right-wing side of politics is surely a precondition to any significant Tory recovery?
Indeed, in 2019, albeit under different circumstances, Boris Johnson won because he was the only game in the town on the "right" while the "left" was split and the Conservatives took full advantage.
The poll today and Deltapoll show a very similar divide between Ref-Con and Lab-LD-Green so it continues to be a divided country and the movement to Burnham has come from "left" voters.
Is Ref-Con really a block when so many Ref come from Labour?
Not that many Labour voters are switching to Reform right now. They have a much bigger problem of haemorrhaging votes to Greens. The more that happens the more Labour seats will fall to Reform on relative vote shares. Vote Green and get Reform has a germ of truth.
I suspect Burnham hopes to win Reform voters to Labour. His retail offers look targeted at that group. Whether he can do that and avoid cementing Labour to Green switchers is questionable.
Within 3 years it is not beyond the realms of possibility to see Reform crash and burn but Burnham to prove a dud and for Labour to lose votes to the Greens. The Tories could win back a swathe of seats in that scenario.
Vance telling lies to support a greater ‘truth’, yet again. Bit of a blood libel vibe..
🚨 JD Vance is now claiming that when settlers arrived in the New World, they “found widespread child sacrifice” and that “Christian civilization ended the practice.”
Archaeologists and historians, including experts in North American Indigenous history, say this is a complete fabrication. There is zero evidence of widespread child sacrifice among First Nations.
This isn’t a slip.
It’s racist revisionism dressed up as patriotism. And it tells you exactly how far they’ll go to rewrite history to justify oppression. FOLLOW: @Trustintrump47
But the Aztecs did quite extensively. Vance uses New World. The commentator North America. Not the same thing at all.
It's the usual confusion of ideas from Vance. "Settlers" implies North rather than South America, where there is no evidence of large scale (if any) human sacrifice. It's not really a term used for the conquistadors (who engaged in their own version of widespread human sacrifice). But what he's really talking about, if you listen to his spiel about "brothels in the ancient world", is abortion.
It's a multi-stage segway.
Then he pivots from "child sacrifice" to "protecting unborn children".
It is very lawyerly, or Jesuitical if you prefer.
The Jesuits were generally more gifted in sophistry than Vance's meandering efforts..
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
You need seats that are narrowly held by Labour, but
a) aren't nice enough to be Lib Dem b) are too nice and have too many people with actual jobs to go Reform.
There are a few, I suspect. Central London, some of the NW London fringes like Hendon and Finchley. There must be similar demographics elsewhere.
But not many.
Which I think is the effect @MoonRabbit identifies in her analysis: Milton Keynes, Trafford, plus the London fringes. Swindon maybe too much Reform. I think the effect also requires Labour to lose votes to the Greens.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
You need seats that are narrowly held by Labour, but
a) aren't nice enough to be Lib Dem b) are too nice and have too many people with actual jobs to go Reform.
There are a few, I suspect. Central London, some of the NW London fringes like Hendon and Finchley. There must be similar demographics elsewhere.
But not many.
Which I think is the effect @MoonRabbit identifies in her analysis: Milton Keynes, Trafford, plus the London fringes. Swindon maybe too much Reform. I think the effect also requires Labour to lose votes to the Greens.
The Barratt Home seats?
If Ref crashes then some of the ex-mining and steel seats (Balsover, Peniston) might be worth watching as well.
I see that Ruth Mackenzie has been made a peer and Culture Minister. Hmm. When she was part of a triumvirate running Chichester Theatre, audience figures halved and the theatre got into financial trouble.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Alastair clearly enjoyed writing about the demise of the Tories - indeed he says as much early on - but the flaw in his analysis, if there is one, is not that he's fixated on the triumph of the centre-left but that he doesn't spend any time considering what might happen if the Reform balloon continues to deflate (or, indeed, pops, if Farage walks away, given his myriad troubles).
While I don't think it automatic that the Tories would then instantly recover pole position - Reform's vote contains many NOTA folks, some left-leaning ones, some who would go even further right to Restore, and many who probably wouldn't vote at all if the Farage factor goes away - recovering it's dominant position on the right-wing side of politics is surely a precondition to any significant Tory recovery?
Indeed, in 2019, albeit under different circumstances, Boris Johnson won because he was the only game in the town on the "right" while the "left" was split and the Conservatives took full advantage.
The poll today and Deltapoll show a very similar divide between Ref-Con and Lab-LD-Green so it continues to be a divided country and the movement to Burnham has come from "left" voters.
Is Ref-Con really a block when so many Ref come from Labour?
Not that many Labour voters are switching to Reform right now. They have a much bigger problem of haemorrhaging votes to Greens. The more that happens the more Labour seats will fall to Reform on relative vote shares. Vote Green and get Reform has a germ of truth.
I suspect Burnham hopes to win Reform voters to Labour. His retail offers look targeted at that group. Whether he can do that and avoid cementing Labour to Green switchers is questionable.
Within 3 years it is not beyond the realms of possibility to see Reform crash and burn but Burnham to prove a dud and for Labour to lose votes to the Greens. The Tories could win back a swathe of seats in that scenario.
Agreed. The Tory strategy is to wait for the other parties to self-combust and they win by default. May happen.
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Hah, Andy Burnham offered Al Carns the Prisons Minister job, my suggestion was DEFRA.
Given the announcement that the early release program is under review - the prison minister job has just been made the most poisoned of poison chalices. Al was correct to run away from it..
Anyone else having difficulty following threads involving references to both Al (Carns) and AI?
A poor performance by Farage in Clacton might go some way to putting the skids under Reform. I know that doing a poll there would be farcical, but a bit of on-the-ground sporting wouldn't go amiss.
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
You need seats that are narrowly held by Labour, but
a) aren't nice enough to be Lib Dem b) are too nice and have too many people with actual jobs to go Reform.
There are a few, I suspect. Central London, some of the NW London fringes like Hendon and Finchley. There must be similar demographics elsewhere.
But not many.
Which I think is the effect @MoonRabbit identifies in her analysis: Milton Keynes, Trafford, plus the London fringes. Swindon maybe too much Reform. I think the effect also requires Labour to lose votes to the Greens.
The Barratt Home seats?
If Ref crashes then some of the ex-mining and steel seats (Balsover, Peniston) might be worth watching as well.
The other part of the Tories' wait for Reform to collapse calculation then kicks in. Will the dispossessed Reform voter switch to the Conservatives at that point? Andy Burnham seems keen to win them over and these are seats that voted Labour for a century. There's still plenty of muscle memory.
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
You need seats that are narrowly held by Labour, but
a) aren't nice enough to be Lib Dem b) are too nice and have too many people with actual jobs to go Reform.
There are a few, I suspect. Central London, some of the NW London fringes like Hendon and Finchley. There must be similar demographics elsewhere.
But not many.
Huge swathes of the Midlands have been immune to the charms of the LibDems. If you are looking for a Tory recovery, then if Burnham proves a dud, look there.
Which is the Stoke demographic that TSE discusses. The issue is that unless Reform totally implode why would anyone vote for the Tories..
it's going to be down to percentages, unless Reform are sat at less than 15% there is no place where the Tories can recover and win seats.
Hah, Andy Burnham offered Al Carns the Prisons Minister job, my suggestion was DEFRA.
Given the announcement that the early release program is under review - the prison minister job has just been made the most poisoned of poison chalices. Al was correct to run away from it..
Anyone else having difficulty following threads involving references to both Al (Carns) and AI?
Artificial Intelligence Carns would explain some of his recent interventions
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
Apparently the BBC is now asking the judge to unseal the Jack Smith grand jury testimony as part of their defense against Trumps 10 billion lawsuit. The BBC argues that Trump was denied executive privilege 5 times in court and should not be able to hide behind it now. I think the BBC wants to prove that Trump did in fact incite the J6 riots, thus proving Trumps defamation claim as false. I do hope the judge agrees, as that grand jury testimony will be a good read. https://x.com/PrezLives2022/status/2080043922382819599
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
The problem is, as ever, socio-political.
It is very easy for a politician to announce "One zillion more nurses". This is easy to sell to the public. We can import medical staff - as many as we want.
Investing in equipment isn't as sexy and offers slow returns - you would be looking at an evolution over years.
And the unions would not be especially happy with shifting money from staff to infrastructure.
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
The problem is, as ever, socio-political.
It is very easy for a politician to announce "One zillion more nurses". This is easy to sell to the public. We can import medical staff - as many as we want.
Investing in equipment isn't as sexy and offers slow returns - you would be looking at an evolution over years.
And the unions would not be especially happy with shifting money from staff to infrastructure.
"Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year" !!!! ??? Wow.
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
An implementing government would have to do it very quietly least they run into issues with NHS-staff-worship tendency that exists amongst chunks of the public.
Apparently the BBC is now asking the judge to unseal the Jack Smith grand jury testimony as part of their defense against Trumps 10 billion lawsuit. The BBC argues that Trump was denied executive privilege 5 times in court and should not be able to hide behind it now. I think the BBC wants to prove that Trump did in fact incite the J6 riots, thus proving Trumps defamation claim as false. I do hope the judge agrees, as that grand jury testimony will be a good read. https://x.com/PrezLives2022/status/2080043922382819599
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
An implementing government would have to do it very quietly least they run into issues with NHS-staff-worship tendency that exists amongst chunks of the public.
it would be one way of addressing recruitment issues...\ I'd be interested in @Foxy 's take.
Hah, Andy Burnham offered Al Carns the Prisons Minister job, my suggestion was DEFRA.
Given the announcement that the early release program is under review - the prison minister job has just been made the most poisoned of poison chalices. Al was correct to run away from it..
Anyone else having difficulty following threads involving references to both Al (Carns) and AI?
Me. Northern_Al
Yes why can't people just use the version of a capital I that has the two lines at the top and bottom?
It is interesting, because AFAIAA most fonts distinguish between O and 0.
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
An implementing government would have to do it very quietly least they run into issues with NHS-staff-worship tendency that exists amongst chunks of the public.
it would be one way of addressing recruitment issues...\ I'd be interested in @Foxy 's take.
Machines are better than foreigners but not natives - but not in a racist way - is a complex message to sell.
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
An implementing government would have to do it very quietly least they run into issues with NHS-staff-worship tendency that exists amongst chunks of the public.
The sooner we start seeing the NHS as a deeply flawed organisation that will never have enough money, and not a national religion, the better
Vance telling lies to support a greater ‘truth’, yet again. Bit of a blood libel vibe..
🚨 JD Vance is now claiming that when settlers arrived in the New World, they “found widespread child sacrifice” and that “Christian civilization ended the practice.”
Archaeologists and historians, including experts in North American Indigenous history, say this is a complete fabrication. There is zero evidence of widespread child sacrifice among First Nations.
This isn’t a slip.
It’s racist revisionism dressed up as patriotism. And it tells you exactly how far they’ll go to rewrite history to justify oppression. FOLLOW: @Trustintrump47
But the Aztecs did quite extensively. Vance uses New World. The commentator North America. Not the same thing at all.
It's the usual confusion of ideas from Vance. "Settlers" implies North rather than South America, where there is no evidence of large scale (if any) human sacrifice. It's not really a term used for the conquistadors (who engaged in their own version of widespread human sacrifice). But what he's really talking about, if you listen to his spiel about "brothels in the ancient world", is abortion.
It's a multi-stage segway.
Then he pivots from "child sacrifice" to "protecting unborn children".
It is very lawyerly, or Jesuitical if you prefer.
The Jesuits were generally more gifted in sophistry than Vance's meandering efforts..
Apparently the BBC is now asking the judge to unseal the Jack Smith grand jury testimony as part of their defense against Trumps 10 billion lawsuit. The BBC argues that Trump was denied executive privilege 5 times in court and should not be able to hide behind it now. I think the BBC wants to prove that Trump did in fact incite the J6 riots, thus proving Trumps defamation claim as false. I do hope the judge agrees, as that grand jury testimony will be a good read. https://x.com/PrezLives2022/status/2080043922382819599
Like the Al Fayed-Hamilton court case.
Can’t both sides lose.
The whole thing is weird. Most of the world believes that he did indeed incite the riots. The BBC clearly does. But its also true that the documentary used a distorted version of his speech to make it look like a direct statement.
Apparently the BBC is now asking the judge to unseal the Jack Smith grand jury testimony as part of their defense against Trumps 10 billion lawsuit. The BBC argues that Trump was denied executive privilege 5 times in court and should not be able to hide behind it now. I think the BBC wants to prove that Trump did in fact incite the J6 riots, thus proving Trumps defamation claim as false. I do hope the judge agrees, as that grand jury testimony will be a good read. https://x.com/PrezLives2022/status/2080043922382819599
Like the Al Fayed-Hamilton court case.
Can’t both sides lose.
Is there any thing in the fabric of the UK you actually like?
So far you've complained about the BBC and the NHS and it's not even midday yet.
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
An implementing government would have to do it very quietly least they run into issues with NHS-staff-worship tendency that exists amongst chunks of the public.
The sooner we start seeing the NHS as a deeply flawed organisation that will never have enough money, and not a national religion, the better
The sooner Reform push that line the sooner we can breathe a sense of relief as their chances of most seats evaporates
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
An implementing government would have to do it very quietly least they run into issues with NHS-staff-worship tendency that exists amongst chunks of the public.
More equipment means more staff to run it so that is not necessarily an issue. The main difference from a very shallow glance at the figures quoted suggests that Koreans make a lot more outpatient visits, and presumably also hospital stays since they have more beds. Have they done away with GPs as gatekeepers?
Apparently the BBC is now asking the judge to unseal the Jack Smith grand jury testimony as part of their defense against Trumps 10 billion lawsuit. The BBC argues that Trump was denied executive privilege 5 times in court and should not be able to hide behind it now. I think the BBC wants to prove that Trump did in fact incite the J6 riots, thus proving Trumps defamation claim as false. I do hope the judge agrees, as that grand jury testimony will be a good read. https://x.com/PrezLives2022/status/2080043922382819599
Like the Al Fayed-Hamilton court case.
Can’t both sides lose.
Is there any thing in the fabric of the UK you actually like?
So far you've complained about the BBC and the NHS and it's not even midday yet.
So what. Both were brought up, I instigated neither, and they should be immune from criticism.
There is plenty in the fabric of the U.K. I like.
The BBC and the sainted rNHS are a tiny part of it and neither deserve slavish adulation.
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
An implementing government would have to do it very quietly least they run into issues with NHS-staff-worship tendency that exists amongst chunks of the public.
The sooner we start seeing the NHS as a deeply flawed organisation that will never have enough money, and not a national religion, the better
The sooner Reform push that line the sooner we can breathe a sense of relief as their chances of most seats evaporates
I doubt they would.
They won’t push any line that could cost votes. They won’t push reform of the triple lock.
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
An implementing government would have to do it very quietly least they run into issues with NHS-staff-worship tendency that exists amongst chunks of the public.
The sooner we start seeing the NHS as a deeply flawed organisation that will never have enough money, and not a national religion, the better
Half our beds are taken up by people recovered but stuck waiting on social care
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
An implementing government would have to do it very quietly least they run into issues with NHS-staff-worship tendency that exists amongst chunks of the public.
The sooner we start seeing the NHS as a deeply flawed organisation that will never have enough money, and not a national religion, the better
Half our beds are taken up by people recovered but stuck waiting on social care
Good point Malc. If Burnham can solve it all credit to him.
Apparently the BBC is now asking the judge to unseal the Jack Smith grand jury testimony as part of their defense against Trumps 10 billion lawsuit. The BBC argues that Trump was denied executive privilege 5 times in court and should not be able to hide behind it now. I think the BBC wants to prove that Trump did in fact incite the J6 riots, thus proving Trumps defamation claim as false. I do hope the judge agrees, as that grand jury testimony will be a good read. https://x.com/PrezLives2022/status/2080043922382819599
Like the Al Fayed-Hamilton court case.
Can’t both sides lose.
Is there any thing in the fabric of the UK you actually like?
So far you've complained about the BBC and the NHS and it's not even midday yet.
So what. Both were brought up, I instigated neither, and they should be immune from criticism.
There is plenty in the fabric of the U.K. I like.
The BBC and the sainted rNHS are a tiny part of it and neither deserve slavish adulation.
Apparently the BBC is now asking the judge to unseal the Jack Smith grand jury testimony as part of their defense against Trumps 10 billion lawsuit. The BBC argues that Trump was denied executive privilege 5 times in court and should not be able to hide behind it now. I think the BBC wants to prove that Trump did in fact incite the J6 riots, thus proving Trumps defamation claim as false. I do hope the judge agrees, as that grand jury testimony will be a good read. https://x.com/PrezLives2022/status/2080043922382819599
The BBC should counter sue for deformation as he has said a lot worse about them and done far more damage to their reputation (which in terms of brand worth is a lot more than his).
It should also argue that he is indulged in a form of fraud; making a claim for a riddiculous amount in the hope of a lower settlement he isn't entitled too!
Apparently the BBC is now asking the judge to unseal the Jack Smith grand jury testimony as part of their defense against Trumps 10 billion lawsuit. The BBC argues that Trump was denied executive privilege 5 times in court and should not be able to hide behind it now. I think the BBC wants to prove that Trump did in fact incite the J6 riots, thus proving Trumps defamation claim as false. I do hope the judge agrees, as that grand jury testimony will be a good read. https://x.com/PrezLives2022/status/2080043922382819599
The BBC should counter sue for deformation as he has said a lot worse about them and done far more damage to their reputation (which in terms of brand worth is a lot more than his).
It should also argue that he is indulged in a form of fraud; making a claim for a riddiculous amount in the hope of a lower settlement he isn't entitled too!
I don't see anything that has suddenly made the Tories more competent, or looking more competent, since they were turfed out in 2024?
The only real change has been that Reform has been foolish enough to relieve the Tories of some of their most incompetent ministers, such that both of them risk being seen as not up to the job of government.
History suggests that when parties are decisively thrown out of government for negative reasons, it takes more than one GE before people forget and their reputation recovers. I see nothing different, this time.
I think Mr Meeks yesterday had a better analysis on the Tories - basically they have very few seats they can win and a lot of the seats they currently have are likely to be lost in the next election to the Lib Dems thanks to their shift to the right towards Reform.
Basically if Reform sits at 20% and Burnham consolidates the left wing vote (as he will) the Tories are doomed whenever the next election is..
My take on Meeks is that he is likely influenced to some extent by dislike of the Tories. The other take is that Badenoch is polling way ahead of the party and that gets more important at election time. Once again, those of us on PB, obsessed by test cricket, pizza, radiohead, F1, politics and betting tend to forget that the vast, vast majority of the country cares little for politics, and many cannot even tell you who is the leader of the Liberal Democrats. We should also remember that at the next election every seat starts from scratch. Yes there is an incumbency effect, yes local performance of councils and councillors matters and yes the activist base is important, but I think its simply wrong to say that there are very few seats where the Tories can win. Why? In 2019 they won many of them, and those voters can return.
I remember people saying the same thing in 2022-2024 when he was predicting an epochal defeat for the Tories.
Which is a totally fair point, but I think my point about leaders vs party ratings, and the general public is true too.
I wouldn't be surprised by (a) further Tory decline to sub 100 seats or (b) a modest recovery to near or just over 200.
Hard to see more than that.
If you look at Mr Meek's analysis he doesn't and I don't see any seats that the Tories don't already have where they have a chance of winning.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
You need seats that are narrowly held by Labour, but
a) aren't nice enough to be Lib Dem b) are too nice and have too many people with actual jobs to go Reform.
There are a few, I suspect. Central London, some of the NW London fringes like Hendon and Finchley. There must be similar demographics elsewhere.
But not many.
Which I think is the effect @MoonRabbit identifies in her analysis: Milton Keynes, Trafford, plus the London fringes. Swindon maybe too much Reform. I think the effect also requires Labour to lose votes to the Greens.
The Barratt Home seats?
If Ref crashes then some of the ex-mining and steel seats (Balsover, Peniston) might be worth watching as well.
The other part of the Tories' wait for Reform to collapse calculation then kicks in. Will the dispossessed Reform voter switch to the Conservatives at that point? Andy Burnham seems keen to win them over and these are seats that voted Labour for a century. There's still plenty of muscle memory.
Kemi's unyielding right-wing posture and straight-talking schtik is designed to make her, and the party, palatable to trad Tories who have drifted to Reform. And who, at the end of the day, don't really see Reform as fit to run the country. You won't ever get the Lee Andersons back tho.
The Meeks prognosis is bleak, and has some truth to it, but Conservatives will be encouraged by Kemi's ratings - miles better than Farage's - and that the LibDems really don't seem to be doing much nationally. If the Home Counties middle classes want rid of Labour badly enough they will revert back to the Tories.
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
An implementing government would have to do it very quietly least they run into issues with NHS-staff-worship tendency that exists amongst chunks of the public.
More equipment means more staff to run it so that is not necessarily an issue. The main difference from a very shallow glance at the figures quoted suggests that Koreans make a lot more outpatient visits, and presumably also hospital stays since they have more beds. Have they done away with GPs as gatekeepers?
Apparently the BBC is now asking the judge to unseal the Jack Smith grand jury testimony as part of their defense against Trumps 10 billion lawsuit. The BBC argues that Trump was denied executive privilege 5 times in court and should not be able to hide behind it now. I think the BBC wants to prove that Trump did in fact incite the J6 riots, thus proving Trumps defamation claim as false. I do hope the judge agrees, as that grand jury testimony will be a good read. https://x.com/PrezLives2022/status/2080043922382819599
Like the Al Fayed-Hamilton court case.
Can’t both sides lose.
The whole thing is weird. Most of the world believes that he did indeed incite the riots. The BBC clearly does. But its also true that the documentary used a distorted version of his speech to make it look like a direct statement.
Wrongs on both sides.
No, it's pretty straightforward.
The BBC made a significant editing error - you can call it stupid or dishonest; it doesn't matter. They very publicly apologised for it, and those responsible lost their jobs.
Vance telling lies to support a greater ‘truth’, yet again. Bit of a blood libel vibe..
🚨 JD Vance is now claiming that when settlers arrived in the New World, they “found widespread child sacrifice” and that “Christian civilization ended the practice.”
Archaeologists and historians, including experts in North American Indigenous history, say this is a complete fabrication. There is zero evidence of widespread child sacrifice among First Nations.
This isn’t a slip.
It’s racist revisionism dressed up as patriotism. And it tells you exactly how far they’ll go to rewrite history to justify oppression. FOLLOW: @Trustintrump47
But the Aztecs did quite extensively. Vance uses New World. The commentator North America. Not the same thing at all.
Amazing that the VP of the USA, a constituent part of North America, should conflate his country with the whole of the Americas. He doesn't seem very keen on many of the countries that currently make up the continent.
Did them naughty Aztecs also steal and eat people's pets?
They were partial to guinea pigs, I think ? Though they didn't eat much meat.
Apparently the BBC is now asking the judge to unseal the Jack Smith grand jury testimony as part of their defense against Trumps 10 billion lawsuit. The BBC argues that Trump was denied executive privilege 5 times in court and should not be able to hide behind it now. I think the BBC wants to prove that Trump did in fact incite the J6 riots, thus proving Trumps defamation claim as false. I do hope the judge agrees, as that grand jury testimony will be a good read. https://x.com/PrezLives2022/status/2080043922382819599
Like the Al Fayed-Hamilton court case.
Can’t both sides lose.
Is there any thing in the fabric of the UK you actually like?
So far you've complained about the BBC and the NHS and it's not even midday yet.
So what. Both were brought up, I instigated neither, and they should be immune from criticism.
That's not criticism - you're wishing for the BBC to lose a $10bn libel case, not on the basis of law, but because you don't like them.
Vance telling lies to support a greater ‘truth’, yet again. Bit of a blood libel vibe..
🚨 JD Vance is now claiming that when settlers arrived in the New World, they “found widespread child sacrifice” and that “Christian civilization ended the practice.”
Archaeologists and historians, including experts in North American Indigenous history, say this is a complete fabrication. There is zero evidence of widespread child sacrifice among First Nations.
This isn’t a slip.
It’s racist revisionism dressed up as patriotism. And it tells you exactly how far they’ll go to rewrite history to justify oppression. FOLLOW: @Trustintrump47
But the Aztecs did quite extensively. Vance uses New World. The commentator North America. Not the same thing at all.
Amazing that the VP of the USA, a constituent part of North America, should conflate his country with the whole of the Americas. He doesn't seem very keen on many of the countries that currently make up the continent.
Did them naughty Aztecs also steal and eat people's pets?
They were partial to guinea pigs, I think ? Though they didn't eat much meat.
Apparently the BBC is now asking the judge to unseal the Jack Smith grand jury testimony as part of their defense against Trumps 10 billion lawsuit. The BBC argues that Trump was denied executive privilege 5 times in court and should not be able to hide behind it now. I think the BBC wants to prove that Trump did in fact incite the J6 riots, thus proving Trumps defamation claim as false. I do hope the judge agrees, as that grand jury testimony will be a good read. https://x.com/PrezLives2022/status/2080043922382819599
The BBC should counter sue for deformation as he has said a lot worse about them and done far more damage to their reputation (which in terms of brand worth is a lot more than his).
It should also argue that he is indulged in a form of fraud; making a claim for a riddiculous amount in the hope of a lower settlement he isn't entitled too!
Peter.
Defamation
I dunno. They could sue him on the grounds that a certain part of him is apparently quite deformed and it has apparently driven him nuts.
Vance telling lies to support a greater ‘truth’, yet again. Bit of a blood libel vibe..
🚨 JD Vance is now claiming that when settlers arrived in the New World, they “found widespread child sacrifice” and that “Christian civilization ended the practice.”
Archaeologists and historians, including experts in North American Indigenous history, say this is a complete fabrication. There is zero evidence of widespread child sacrifice among First Nations.
This isn’t a slip.
It’s racist revisionism dressed up as patriotism. And it tells you exactly how far they’ll go to rewrite history to justify oppression. FOLLOW: @Trustintrump47
But the Aztecs did quite extensively. Vance uses New World. The commentator North America. Not the same thing at all.
Amazing that the VP of the USA, a constituent part of North America, should conflate his country with the whole of the Americas. He doesn't seem very keen on many of the countries that currently make up the continent.
Did them naughty Aztecs also steal and eat people's pets?
They were partial to guinea pigs, I think ? Though they didn't eat much meat.
They ate dogs.
That’s ruff
I think you've collared the market in dog related puns there. But will it lead to anything?
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
An implementing government would have to do it very quietly least they run into issues with NHS-staff-worship tendency that exists amongst chunks of the public.
it would be one way of addressing recruitment issues...\ I'd be interested in @Foxy 's take.
Machines are better than foreigners but not natives - but not in a racist way - is a complex message to sell.
We're regularly told the NHS can't recruit in sufficient numbers without immigration. If that's the case, then the suggestion is that capital investment takes up the slack. It's just you trying to frame is as natives vs immigrants.
And it's not just "machines" - it's (eg) the availability of hospital beds. We've slashed those numbers to the bone over recent decades, and try to manage a system where there are barely enough beds when things are running smoothly. Same applies to scanners.
The argument is that more capital investment allows doctors and nurses to be more efficient.
Some ideas here for the NHS to consider. The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
Inventing in equipment to improve productivity & quality at the same time. We have centuries of evidence, in a range of fields, that this works.
So you would imagine, but it would require a very large change in the way we currently run the NHS. How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
An implementing government would have to do it very quietly least they run into issues with NHS-staff-worship tendency that exists amongst chunks of the public.
it would be one way of addressing recruitment issues...\ I'd be interested in @Foxy 's take.
Machines are better than foreigners but not natives - but not in a racist way - is a complex message to sell.
Machines are better than people at doing mechanical things. Which leaves more time for the people to do people things.
Robert Jenrick accused of spreading doctored 'stop the boats' recording of Labour MP - as party blame Guido Fawkes
Reform UK posted a 'clip' of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year
A Labour minister has demanded an apology from Reform UK after Robert Jenrick shared what appears to be an edited audio clip of the MP speaking on small boat crossings.
Reform UK posted a clip of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year.
In the clip, she appears to say: "I don't care if we stop the boats."
However, Ms White has since shared the extended version of the clip, in which she said: "I don’t care who will stop the boats… my number one priority is to stop those boats."
She hit back at the Reform UK Treasury spokesperson, writing "Reform have deliberately twisted my words to mislead the public. They should withdraw their false claim and immediately apologise."
Mr Jenrick said, in a now-deleted post, that Prime Minister Andy Burnham “clearly doesn’t give a stuff about stopping the boats”.
Despite this, when LBC contacted Reform UK about the audio, they laid blame at the door of anti-establishment political publication Guido Fawkes, who they say released the original clip.
A Reform UK spokesman said: “We’ve always trusted Guido Fawkes as a source of information, but perhaps on this occasion they didn’t get the full picture."
Labour MP Jonathan Brash has called on Mr Jenrick to resign over the apparently doctored video.
Vance telling lies to support a greater ‘truth’, yet again. Bit of a blood libel vibe..
🚨 JD Vance is now claiming that when settlers arrived in the New World, they “found widespread child sacrifice” and that “Christian civilization ended the practice.”
Archaeologists and historians, including experts in North American Indigenous history, say this is a complete fabrication. There is zero evidence of widespread child sacrifice among First Nations.
This isn’t a slip.
It’s racist revisionism dressed up as patriotism. And it tells you exactly how far they’ll go to rewrite history to justify oppression. FOLLOW: @Trustintrump47
But the Aztecs did quite extensively. Vance uses New World. The commentator North America. Not the same thing at all.
Amazing that the VP of the USA, a constituent part of North America, should conflate his country with the whole of the Americas. He doesn't seem very keen on many of the countries that currently make up the continent.
Did them naughty Aztecs also steal and eat people's pets?
They were partial to guinea pigs, I think ? Though they didn't eat much meat.
They ate dogs.
That’s ruff
I think you've collared the market in dog related puns there. But will it lead to anything?
Vance telling lies to support a greater ‘truth’, yet again. Bit of a blood libel vibe..
🚨 JD Vance is now claiming that when settlers arrived in the New World, they “found widespread child sacrifice” and that “Christian civilization ended the practice.”
Archaeologists and historians, including experts in North American Indigenous history, say this is a complete fabrication. There is zero evidence of widespread child sacrifice among First Nations.
This isn’t a slip.
It’s racist revisionism dressed up as patriotism. And it tells you exactly how far they’ll go to rewrite history to justify oppression. FOLLOW: @Trustintrump47
But the Aztecs did quite extensively. Vance uses New World. The commentator North America. Not the same thing at all.
Amazing that the VP of the USA, a constituent part of North America, should conflate his country with the whole of the Americas. He doesn't seem very keen on many of the countries that currently make up the continent.
Did them naughty Aztecs also steal and eat people's pets?
They were partial to guinea pigs, I think ? Though they didn't eat much meat.
They ate dogs.
Amazing how dogs spread all over the world, alongside humans. Did the Maori have them and take them to New Zealand/Aotearoa?
Vance telling lies to support a greater ‘truth’, yet again. Bit of a blood libel vibe..
🚨 JD Vance is now claiming that when settlers arrived in the New World, they “found widespread child sacrifice” and that “Christian civilization ended the practice.”
Archaeologists and historians, including experts in North American Indigenous history, say this is a complete fabrication. There is zero evidence of widespread child sacrifice among First Nations.
This isn’t a slip.
It’s racist revisionism dressed up as patriotism. And it tells you exactly how far they’ll go to rewrite history to justify oppression. FOLLOW: @Trustintrump47
But the Aztecs did quite extensively. Vance uses New World. The commentator North America. Not the same thing at all.
Amazing that the VP of the USA, a constituent part of North America, should conflate his country with the whole of the Americas. He doesn't seem very keen on many of the countries that currently make up the continent.
Did them naughty Aztecs also steal and eat people's pets?
They were partial to guinea pigs, I think ? Though they didn't eat much meat.
They ate dogs.
Yes, but did they enjoy it ? Guinea pigs remain part of the Andean cuisine; dogs don't.
Robert Jenrick accused of spreading doctored 'stop the boats' recording of Labour MP - as party blame Guido Fawkes
Reform UK posted a 'clip' of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year
A Labour minister has demanded an apology from Reform UK after Robert Jenrick shared what appears to be an edited audio clip of the MP speaking on small boat crossings.
Reform UK posted a clip of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year.
In the clip, she appears to say: "I don't care if we stop the boats."
However, Ms White has since shared the extended version of the clip, in which she said: "I don’t care who will stop the boats… my number one priority is to stop those boats."
She hit back at the Reform UK Treasury spokesperson, writing "Reform have deliberately twisted my words to mislead the public. They should withdraw their false claim and immediately apologise."
Mr Jenrick said, in a now-deleted post, that Prime Minister Andy Burnham “clearly doesn’t give a stuff about stopping the boats”.
Despite this, when LBC contacted Reform UK about the audio, they laid blame at the door of anti-establishment political publication Guido Fawkes, who they say released the original clip.
A Reform UK spokesman said: “We’ve always trusted Guido Fawkes as a source of information, but perhaps on this occasion they didn’t get the full picture."
Labour MP Jonathan Brash has called on Mr Jenrick to resign over the apparently doctored video.
Robert Jenrick accused of spreading doctored 'stop the boats' recording of Labour MP - as party blame Guido Fawkes
Reform UK posted a 'clip' of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year
A Labour minister has demanded an apology from Reform UK after Robert Jenrick shared what appears to be an edited audio clip of the MP speaking on small boat crossings.
Reform UK posted a clip of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year.
In the clip, she appears to say: "I don't care if we stop the boats."
However, Ms White has since shared the extended version of the clip, in which she said: "I don’t care who will stop the boats… my number one priority is to stop those boats."
She hit back at the Reform UK Treasury spokesperson, writing "Reform have deliberately twisted my words to mislead the public. They should withdraw their false claim and immediately apologise."
Mr Jenrick said, in a now-deleted post, that Prime Minister Andy Burnham “clearly doesn’t give a stuff about stopping the boats”.
Despite this, when LBC contacted Reform UK about the audio, they laid blame at the door of anti-establishment political publication Guido Fawkes, who they say released the original clip.
A Reform UK spokesman said: “We’ve always trusted Guido Fawkes as a source of information, but perhaps on this occasion they didn’t get the full picture."
Labour MP Jonathan Brash has called on Mr Jenrick to resign over the apparently doctored video.
Robert Jenrick accused of spreading doctored 'stop the boats' recording of Labour MP - as party blame Guido Fawkes
Reform UK posted a 'clip' of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year
A Labour minister has demanded an apology from Reform UK after Robert Jenrick shared what appears to be an edited audio clip of the MP speaking on small boat crossings.
Reform UK posted a clip of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year.
In the clip, she appears to say: "I don't care if we stop the boats."
However, Ms White has since shared the extended version of the clip, in which she said: "I don’t care who will stop the boats… my number one priority is to stop those boats."
She hit back at the Reform UK Treasury spokesperson, writing "Reform have deliberately twisted my words to mislead the public. They should withdraw their false claim and immediately apologise."
Mr Jenrick said, in a now-deleted post, that Prime Minister Andy Burnham “clearly doesn’t give a stuff about stopping the boats”.
Despite this, when LBC contacted Reform UK about the audio, they laid blame at the door of anti-establishment political publication Guido Fawkes, who they say released the original clip.
A Reform UK spokesman said: “We’ve always trusted Guido Fawkes as a source of information, but perhaps on this occasion they didn’t get the full picture."
Labour MP Jonathan Brash has called on Mr Jenrick to resign over the apparently doctored video.
Robert Jenrick accused of spreading doctored 'stop the boats' recording of Labour MP - as party blame Guido Fawkes
Reform UK posted a 'clip' of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year
A Labour minister has demanded an apology from Reform UK after Robert Jenrick shared what appears to be an edited audio clip of the MP speaking on small boat crossings.
Reform UK posted a clip of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year.
In the clip, she appears to say: "I don't care if we stop the boats."
However, Ms White has since shared the extended version of the clip, in which she said: "I don’t care who will stop the boats… my number one priority is to stop those boats."
She hit back at the Reform UK Treasury spokesperson, writing "Reform have deliberately twisted my words to mislead the public. They should withdraw their false claim and immediately apologise."
Mr Jenrick said, in a now-deleted post, that Prime Minister Andy Burnham “clearly doesn’t give a stuff about stopping the boats”.
Despite this, when LBC contacted Reform UK about the audio, they laid blame at the door of anti-establishment political publication Guido Fawkes, who they say released the original clip.
A Reform UK spokesman said: “We’ve always trusted Guido Fawkes as a source of information, but perhaps on this occasion they didn’t get the full picture."
Labour MP Jonathan Brash has called on Mr Jenrick to resign over the apparently doctored video.
"A timely reminder for all of us that you should always keep your eyes on the road when calling Nigel Farage a wanker."
Or anyone else.
Whenever I drive, which isn’t that often these days, I’m usually of the view the car ahead of me is,less than virtuous.
There's a reason that auto-braking systems are more and more popular.
Talking of cars, a friend came across an experimental self driving vehicle on a narrow country lane. Unmarked, but with kit all over it. It reversed, with the driver visibly monitoring but not interfering, a couple of hundred yards to a field gate entry to let him pass. Who said that self driving wouldn't work in the country side?
"A timely reminder for all of us that you should always keep your eyes on the road when calling Nigel Farage a wanker."
Or anyone else.
Whenever I drive, which isn’t that often these days, I’m usually of the view the car ahead of me is,less than virtuous.
There's a reason that auto-braking systems are more and more popular.
Talking of cars, a friend came across an experimental self driving vehicle on a narrow country lane. Unmarked, but with kit all over it. It reversed, with the driver visibly monitoring but not interfering, a couple of hundred yards to a field gate entry to let him pass. Who said that self driving wouldn't work in the country side?
Robert Jenrick accused of spreading doctored 'stop the boats' recording of Labour MP - as party blame Guido Fawkes
Reform UK posted a 'clip' of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year
A Labour minister has demanded an apology from Reform UK after Robert Jenrick shared what appears to be an edited audio clip of the MP speaking on small boat crossings.
Reform UK posted a clip of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year.
In the clip, she appears to say: "I don't care if we stop the boats."
However, Ms White has since shared the extended version of the clip, in which she said: "I don’t care who will stop the boats… my number one priority is to stop those boats."
She hit back at the Reform UK Treasury spokesperson, writing "Reform have deliberately twisted my words to mislead the public. They should withdraw their false claim and immediately apologise."
Mr Jenrick said, in a now-deleted post, that Prime Minister Andy Burnham “clearly doesn’t give a stuff about stopping the boats”.
Despite this, when LBC contacted Reform UK about the audio, they laid blame at the door of anti-establishment political publication Guido Fawkes, who they say released the original clip.
A Reform UK spokesman said: “We’ve always trusted Guido Fawkes as a source of information, but perhaps on this occasion they didn’t get the full picture."
Labour MP Jonathan Brash has called on Mr Jenrick to resign over the apparently doctored video.
Robert Jenrick accused of spreading doctored 'stop the boats' recording of Labour MP - as party blame Guido Fawkes
Reform UK posted a 'clip' of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year
A Labour minister has demanded an apology from Reform UK after Robert Jenrick shared what appears to be an edited audio clip of the MP speaking on small boat crossings.
Reform UK posted a clip of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year.
In the clip, she appears to say: "I don't care if we stop the boats."
However, Ms White has since shared the extended version of the clip, in which she said: "I don’t care who will stop the boats… my number one priority is to stop those boats."
She hit back at the Reform UK Treasury spokesperson, writing "Reform have deliberately twisted my words to mislead the public. They should withdraw their false claim and immediately apologise."
Mr Jenrick said, in a now-deleted post, that Prime Minister Andy Burnham “clearly doesn’t give a stuff about stopping the boats”.
Despite this, when LBC contacted Reform UK about the audio, they laid blame at the door of anti-establishment political publication Guido Fawkes, who they say released the original clip.
A Reform UK spokesman said: “We’ve always trusted Guido Fawkes as a source of information, but perhaps on this occasion they didn’t get the full picture."
Labour MP Jonathan Brash has called on Mr Jenrick to resign over the apparently doctored video.
Interesting thread on western unmanned combat aircraft. I hadn't realised that BAE's "Brontanax" has been in development for some time, and is relatively close to production. The new Rolls Royce low cost engine program which may end up powering it is also interesting.
Collaborative Combat Aircraft - the runners and riders.
Boeing MQ-28 Ghostbat. Ghost Bat is Australia's first foray into combat aircraft design for some time and given them a head start in the field. MQ-28 is fielded and in early stages of operational deployment with the RAAF. https://x.com/FennellJW/status/2080199496638570948
Comments
I also suspect, given how most of the drivers hate this nonsense, the GPDA is waiting for a big crash to happen before it declares the PU control software a safety hazard and demands it be disabled.
I think keeping 100 seats will take a miracle for the Tory party - and that's ignoring the current insane plan of removing anyone without the "right viewpoint" on a single issue - which when mentioned at an election will cost the Tory party some votes to the Lib Dems...
I was about to add that Stanley Baldwin joked about wanting to fill the Cabinet with Cambridge men after its years of Oxford domination but on reflection, it was replacing Etonians with people from Harrow.
So the Colston 4 undoubtedly did chuck the statue in the water but their reasons were accepted by the jury. I assume in this case the judge worried (rightly as they were originally acquitted) that letting the jury know the motivation would lead to acquittal.
Mrs BJ went into Theatres for ANOTHER major op aimed at stopping her Paraplegia turning into Quadriplegia
After the planned 4hr Op which lasted 11hrs we were told there was a further problem higher up that was going to mean a further op would be required. Thankfully a clearer MRI of the neck area clarified this wasnt the case so with time this op should see her arms retain there use.
Seems to me AB is doing well Darren Jones less so.
Early days but a positive change of direction is welcomed.
Keep it up Andy lad.
Sad to hear about Kevin Keegan and horrifying what happened to Ann Widdecombe.
Hopefully the wife is home by the weekend and the Non League football starts then too.
So happier less stressful times ahead hopefully
a) aren't nice enough to be Lib Dem
b) are too nice and have too many people with actual jobs to go Reform.
There are a few, I suspect. Central London, some of the NW London fringes like Hendon and Finchley. There must be similar demographics elsewhere.
But not many.
Would Kemi refuse eg Kruger and Anderson?
It would need to be heavy in "circumstances alter cases", but I can see a possibility.
I cannot see a policy platform that does that.
"Settlers" implies North rather than South America, where there is no evidence of large scale (if any) human sacrifice. It's not really a term used for the conquistadors (who engaged in their own version of widespread human sacrifice).
But what he's really talking about, if you listen to his spiel about "brothels in the ancient world", is abortion.
I suspect Burnham hopes to win Reform voters to Labour. His retail offers look targeted at that group. Whether he can do that and avoid cementing Labour to Green switchers is questionable.
That's not replicable.
Though they didn't eat much meat.
Then he pivots from "child sacrifice" to "protecting unborn children".
It is very lawyerly, or Jesuitical if you prefer.
The approach to bed numbers vs medics seems almost the diametric opposite of ours. Has anyone modelled the two systems to see which is more cost effective ?
Health care paradox: Korea achieves world-class longevity with fewest doctors among developed nations
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/southkorea/health/20260723/health-care-paradox-korea-achieves-world-class-longevity-with-fewest-doctors-among-developed-nations
..the statistics reveal a health care ecosystem defined by extraordinary access and world-class preventive care, alongside mounting structural strains. Korea’s rate of avoidable mortality — deaths preventable through timely medical intervention or public health measures — stood at 139.0 per 100,000 people, far below the OECD benchmark of 208.8.
Yet this longevity is supported by a strikingly lean clinical workforce.
Korea recorded just 2.6 practicing physicians per 1,000 people (including practitioners of traditional Korean medicine), the second-lowest ratio in the OECD after Costa Rica and well below the average of 4.0. Medical school graduation rates tell a similar story, yielding just 7.3 graduates per 100,000 residents compared to the international norm of 15.3.
To bridge this human gap, the Korean medical system relies heavily on capital-intensive infrastructure and high-volume patient turnover. The country boasts 12.5 hospital beds per 1,000 residents — nearly three times the OECD average — and leads the global bloc in diagnostic equipment, housing 46.7 CT scanners per million people.
This hyper-accessible infrastructure has fostered a culture of frequent clinical consultation. Koreans visited outpatient clinics an average of 17.9 times per year, nearly triple the OECD average of 6.6 visits and the highest rate recorded worldwide..
EMERSON has Democrats with an 11-point generic ballot lead.
This would appear to be an outlier.
But if its truly 11 points, that's end days for GOP.
In 2018, when Dems took the majority, the generic ballot was D+7 - D+9
https://x.com/JakeSherman/status/2080233824072433731?s=20
https://electionmaps.uk/polling/vi
it's going to be down to percentages, unless Reform are sat at less than 15% there is no place where the Tories can recover and win seats.
How quickly/easily could you move in that direction, and what would be the cost ?
If so i guess they would be slightly disappointing for team KOUK (formally known as KoN)
I suppose FON is the most Reform friendly Pollster so the end is Nigh for Nigels run of Poll leads
Apparently the BBC is now asking the judge to unseal the Jack Smith grand jury testimony as part of their defense against Trumps 10 billion lawsuit. The BBC argues that Trump was denied executive privilege 5 times in court and should not be able to hide behind it now. I think the BBC wants to prove that Trump did in fact incite the J6 riots, thus proving Trumps defamation claim as false. I do hope the judge agrees, as that grand jury testimony will be a good read.
https://x.com/PrezLives2022/status/2080043922382819599
It is very easy for a politician to announce "One zillion more nurses". This is easy to sell to the public. We can import medical staff - as many as we want.
Investing in equipment isn't as sexy and offers slow returns - you would be looking at an evolution over years.
And the unions would not be especially happy with shifting money from staff to infrastructure.
Can’t both sides lose.
I'd be interested in @Foxy 's take.
She then hits the car in front of her.
lol
Expensive lesson
https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2080239729539252573?s=61
@EssexPR
·
53m
🍺 THIS SAVES THE AVERAGE PUB £3 A DAY - STOP SPINNING THIS AS A SAVIOUR.
Sacha Lord
@Sacha_Lord
·
51m
£1100 over the year is a start.
https://x.com/EssexPR/status/2080230183164948925
Wrongs on both sides.
So far you've complained about the BBC and the NHS and it's not even midday yet.
3 points and £100 for "without due care", or a course.
He should be pointing people in the right direction at Scarborough Open Air Theatre, in the Manor of Northstead
James Taylor and Tom Jones have shows Saturday and Sunday
https://www.scarboroughopenairtheatre.com/
So what. Both were brought up, I instigated neither, and they should be immune from criticism.
There is plenty in the fabric of the U.K. I like.
The BBC and the sainted rNHS are a tiny part of it and neither deserve slavish adulation.
Cracking venue.
They won’t push any line that could cost votes. They won’t push reform of the triple lock.
Hope you’re good Sir, and enjoying the summer
It should also argue that he is indulged in a form of fraud; making a claim for a riddiculous amount in the hope of a lower settlement he isn't entitled too!
Peter.
Voters have always taken nice stuff as their due, and nasty stuff as a cruel punishment.
The Meeks prognosis is bleak, and has some truth to it, but Conservatives will be encouraged by Kemi's ratings - miles better than Farage's - and that the LibDems really don't seem to be doing much nationally. If the Home Counties middle classes want rid of Labour badly enough they will revert back to the Tories.
The BBC made a significant editing error - you can call it stupid or dishonest; it doesn't matter.
They very publicly apologised for it, and those responsible lost their jobs.
What they didn't do is libel Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgqjrj4wz9o
If that's the case, then the suggestion is that capital investment takes up the slack. It's just you trying to frame is as natives vs immigrants.
And it's not just "machines" - it's (eg) the availability of hospital beds. We've slashed those numbers to the bone over recent decades, and try to manage a system where there are barely enough beds when things are running smoothly. Same applies to scanners.
The argument is that more capital investment allows doctors and nurses to be more efficient.
That's the Industrial Revolution.
Reform UK posted a 'clip' of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year
A Labour minister has demanded an apology from Reform UK after Robert Jenrick shared what appears to be an edited audio clip of the MP speaking on small boat crossings.
Reform UK posted a clip of the newly appointed Immigration Minister, Bassetlaw MP Jo White, speaking to constituents last year.
In the clip, she appears to say: "I don't care if we stop the boats."
However, Ms White has since shared the extended version of the clip, in which she said: "I don’t care who will stop the boats… my number one priority is to stop those boats."
She hit back at the Reform UK Treasury spokesperson, writing "Reform have deliberately twisted my words to mislead the public. They should withdraw their false claim and immediately apologise."
Mr Jenrick said, in a now-deleted post, that Prime Minister Andy Burnham “clearly doesn’t give a stuff about stopping the boats”.
Despite this, when LBC contacted Reform UK about the audio, they laid blame at the door of anti-establishment political publication Guido Fawkes, who they say released the original clip.
A Reform UK spokesman said: “We’ve always trusted Guido Fawkes as a source of information, but perhaps on this occasion they didn’t get the full picture."
Labour MP Jonathan Brash has called on Mr Jenrick to resign over the apparently doctored video.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/robert-jenrick-labour-tampered-video-recording-5Hjdf4y_2/
Whenever I drive, which isn’t that often these days, I’m usually of the view the car ahead of me is,less than virtuous.
Guinea pigs remain part of the Andean cuisine; dogs don't.
Find Out Now voting intention
🟦 Reform UK: 24% (-)
🔴 Labour: 22% (+3)
🔵 Conservatives: 19% (-1)
🟢 Greens: 14% (-1)
🟠 Lib Dems: 10% (-1)
Implied turnout: 54%
Changes from 15th July
[Find Out Now, 22nd July, N=2,385]
https://x.com/findoutnowuk/status/2080230661177090255?s=61&t=c6bcp0cjChLfQN5Tc8A_6g
@EssexPR
·
26m
To reiterate, on a £5 pint, over £2 is made up in taxes.
The publican is left with around 15p profit.
That is what needs addressing.
Pubs can’t be Government cash cows any longer, they’re dying.
@Sacha_Lord
@andyburnham
https://x.com/EssexPR/status/2080247171673112940
Driving standards have plummeted since Covid, in my experience.
If it were not stained so much already.
Talking of cars, a friend came across an experimental self driving vehicle on a narrow country lane. Unmarked, but with kit all over it. It reversed, with the driver visibly monitoring but not interfering, a couple of hundred yards to a field gate entry to let him pass. Who said that self driving wouldn't work in the country side?
I hadn't realised that BAE's "Brontanax" has been in development for some time, and is relatively close to production.
The new Rolls Royce low cost engine program which may end up powering it is also interesting.
Collaborative Combat Aircraft - the runners and riders.
Boeing MQ-28 Ghostbat. Ghost Bat is Australia's first foray into combat aircraft design for some time and given them a head start in the field. MQ-28 is fielded and in early stages of operational deployment with the RAAF.
https://x.com/FennellJW/status/2080199496638570948