Stop voting for fucking Tories

[Biffer]

Sunak's very brief interview on Radio Scotland this morning was tetchy and condescending to say the least.

That's the default for all these fucks when the person interviewing does anything other than brown nose or throw softballs. They're so used to getting their own way that when challenged, however mildly, they can't stand it.

Yeah, and there's also the 'uppity jocks' overtones when they're being interviewed by BBC Scotland or STV.

[SaintK]

Sunak's very brief interview on Radio Scotland this morning was tetchy and condescending to say the least.

That's the default for all these fucks when the person interviewing does anything other than brown nose or throw softballs. They're so used to getting their own way that when challenged, however mildly, they can't stand it.

Yeah, and there's also the 'uppity jocks' overtones when they're being interviewed by BBC Scotland or STV.

[Sandstorm]

The Prime Minister of Engalnd can't get on coach with you plebs. Honestly he can't. Explaining that shouldn't be so hard

[fishfoodie]

The Prime Minister of Engalnd can't get on coach with you plebs. Honestly he can't. Explaining that shouldn't be so hard

And it might be another 40 years before a Tory PM gets the photo op of a trip in HS2

[_Os_]

There's a few moving parts with the Tory's approach to green issues.

1. Sunak personally thinks climate issues are bullshit, I have seen something that looked like a reliable source stating this (cannot remember where). All his personal choices point to that, the helicopter rides and the heated pool. Sunak has also decided to go big on the culture war stuff as an election ploy (when his whole image was the non-culture war guy, someone capable of appealing to middle ground voters). Attacking green issues is probably more comfortable for him than other culture war issues. Sunak is perusing a 25% strategy, the Tories are aiming for their core vote and hoping to limit the damage and get lucky.

The first problem they have, is unlike Labour the Tory spread of their voters is thinner/more optimised. Labour support is uneven (some constituencies have overwhelming Labour support, others none) making it harder for Labour to get majorities but also making it harder to go below 200-ish seats/about a third. Tory support is much less lumpy than Labour's making it easier for the Tories to get a majority, but much more easy for them to be wiped out. MRP polling is consistently showing that for the Tories 25% of the vote means about 100 seats (basically the worst ever Tory electoral performance).

The second problem for them, is Sunak is precisely the wrong person to be driving this campaign. The people they're trying to convince are people that put politely "express high in group preference", Sunak could say all the stuff their core voters want to hear, and many of them still would not vote and/or demand Truss or Big Dog return.

2. Oil companies have captured UK policy on oil. During this period of Tory rule the UK has paid oil companies north of £250b. On some numbers the oil companies took more subsidies than they paid in tax. The low tax and no state ownership model that started under Thatcher is a failure. Then all the profit goes into tax cuts rather than investment and becomes a double failure. The Norway model of a high tax and high state ownership with investment of profit into a sovereign wealth fund, has proved itself superior. Norway has extracted about the same amount of oil as the UK, but the value to Norway has been x3 compared to the UK (gained more though tax, and has direct financial interest through state ownership which the UK doesn't have).

The Tories are ideologically committed to Thatcherism/neoliberalism, but so are Labour when they get power. Which means this model never changes. The level of incentive the UK gives to large corporations is ridiculous, there's been four decades of a huge underselling of the UK's position (it's not in a region where some huge crazy war could destroy oil production 10 years from now).

3. The EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is coming in 2026. This will put tariffs on goods linked to the carbon that went into their manufacture, at the same time the EU are spending 1 trillion euros on the European Green Deal. That's the direction of travel of the UK's biggest trade partner, a tariff regime linked to carbon whilst they're decarbonising their power grid. I don't know how all that would interact with the TCA but unless the UK is running on green power, it's looking like eventually the UK will either need its own CBAM compliant framework (on my understanding keeping green taxes in the UK), or pay EU green tariffs. For the UK (which cannot compete with the EU on price), this really means become completely green (which includes turning off gas power stations) or do not export any goods to the EU.

The US is also rolling out a huge green programme, which I know less about. But the US does surprisingly little trade with the world, outside of Canada/US/Mexico almost nothing at all. It'll be a no brainer for them to implement their own carbon tariffs.

All this stuff takes planning and at least a decade of implementation. If the UK gets to the 2030s and finds the EU and US are significantly greener whilst the UK is not, and there's carbon tariffs in place, then that's the end of UK goods exports.

... This whole thing reminds me a lot of Truss and Kwarteng, who thought they knew what business and the market wanted (having never run a business), until they blew everything up because the market told them "no". Not much evidence the market is going to want a super abundance of hydrocarbons, they cannot see this because they think the market is self regulating and government has no role.

[Hal Jordan]

A lot of it stems, once again, from gutless Cameron appeased and ballsed it up (onshore wind, fracking, cut the green crap) rather than confronting the issue, and the associated wingnuts in his Party. A man who literally ran away at the end of statements to the Press rather than take questions.

The Great Stink is a good parallel, that eventually got solved when the Houses of Parliament were overwhelmed by it. So when PMQS is conducted in galoshes, we might get some political leadership on the issue.

Although the real answer, and it's already starting to happen, is when the insurance industry gets it's teeth into the issue. Once the underwriters start to review cover and deem certain industries and activities bad risks, the writing will be on the wall.

[inactionman]

A lot of it stems, once again, from gutless Cameron appeased and ballsed it up (onshore wind, fracking, cut the green crap) rather than confronting the issue, and the associated wingnuts in his Party. A man who literally ran away at the end of statements to the Press rather than take questions.

The Great Stink is a good parallel, that eventually got solved when the Houses of Parliament were overwhelmed by it. So when PMQS is conducted in galoshes, we might get some political leadership on the issue.

Although the real answer, and it's already starting to happen, is when the insurance industry gets it's teeth into the issue. Once the underwriters start to review cover and deem certain industries and activities bad risks, the writing will be on the wall.

We're already seeing banks considering environmental factors such as flood risk within their lending decisions, and although it's a relatively minor factor at present you'd hope for changes to behaviour once fingers start getting badly burnt.

[tc27]

You may detest the Prime Minister and the party but the idea they shouldn't use VIP transport when on official business is nuts.

[_Os_]

A lot of it stems, once again, from gutless Cameron appeased and ballsed it up (onshore wind, fracking, cut the green crap) rather than confronting the issue, and the associated wingnuts in his Party. A man who literally ran away at the end of statements to the Press rather than take questions.

The Great Stink is a good parallel, that eventually got solved when the Houses of Parliament were overwhelmed by it. So when PMQS is conducted in galoshes, we might get some political leadership on the issue.

Although the real answer, and it's already starting to happen, is when the insurance industry gets it's teeth into the issue. Once the underwriters start to review cover and deem certain industries and activities bad risks, the writing will be on the wall.

The negatives for the UK aren't too bad, the worst cases are a lot colder and drier. Frost is a moron but wasn't entirely wrong, climate change has a smaller impact on the UK than elsewhere.

The thing that isn't being factored into the UK's discussion is my point 3 in the above post. It doesn't really matter what the impact to the UK is, the places the UK trades with have made up their mind, so the choice ends up being go with them or become poorer.

[fishfoodie]

A lot of it stems, once again, from gutless Cameron appeased and ballsed it up (onshore wind, fracking, cut the green crap) rather than confronting the issue, and the associated wingnuts in his Party. A man who literally ran away at the end of statements to the Press rather than take questions.

The Great Stink is a good parallel, that eventually got solved when the Houses of Parliament were overwhelmed by it. So when PMQS is conducted in galoshes, we might get some political leadership on the issue.

Although the real answer, and it's already starting to happen, is when the insurance industry gets it's teeth into the issue. Once the underwriters start to review cover and deem certain industries and activities bad risks, the writing will be on the wall.

The negatives for the UK aren't too bad, the worst cases are a lot colder and drier. Frost is a moron but wasn't entirely wrong, climate change has a smaller impact on the UK than elsewhere.

The thing that isn't being factored into the UK's discussion is my point 3 in the above post. It doesn't really matter what the impact to the UK is, the places the UK trades with have made up their mind, so the choice ends up being go with them or become poorer.

Only if you ignore migration, or regard it as a positive, which the Anti-Net Zero Tories clearly don't !

[_Os_]

You may detest the Prime Minister and the party but the idea they shouldn't use VIP transport when on official business is nuts.

Helicopters aren't required, cars are available.

It's a way of attacking him for being a near enough a billionaire. "Man takes helicopter rides all the time", "man has ultra expensive shoes/suit/watch", "man has heated swimming pool that uses so much power it required upgrading the local power grid infrastructure", "man has multiple mansions", "man so out of touch he tells homeless man at soup kitchen to become an investment banker or something", "man so out of touch he doesn't know how to buy petrol".

It was always a bold move for the Tories to pick a billionaire guy as leader.

[petej]

You may detest the Prime Minister and the party but the idea they shouldn't use VIP transport when on official business is nuts.

Helicopters aren't required, cars are available.

It's a way of attacking him for being a near enough a billionaire. "Man takes helicopter rides all the time", "man has ultra expensive shoes/suit/watch", "man has heated swimming pool that uses so much power it required upgrading the local power grid infrastructure", "man has multiple mansions", "man so out of touch he tells homeless man at soup kitchen to become an investment banker or something", "man so out of touch he doesn't know how to buy petrol".

It was always a bold move for the Tories to pick a billionaire guy as leader.

Multimillionaire takes expensive travel option paid for by the state while preaching cuts and restraint for everyone else.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

It was always a bold move for the Tories to pick a billionaire guy as leader.

Dennis Thatcher was very comfortably off. Call me Dave was rich, his wife richer. And now Rishi is minted even if like Call me Dave his wife is far richer again. Even Boris was of the land of opulence, he just lacked the instinct to keep track of any of his wealth because it would have taken a modicum of effort and splurged still more again

I don't think they think it's a problem somehow, their thing is being selfish no matter the cost to others, to the environment...

[I like neeps]

You may detest the Prime Minister and the party but the idea they shouldn't use VIP transport when on official business is nuts.

I agree. But also make them take trains so they realise how f*cked the network is.

[salanya]

You may detest the Prime Minister and the party but the idea they shouldn't use VIP transport when on official business is nuts.

Flying by helicopter from London to Aberdeen makes total sense.

Flying from London to Oxfordshire, Nottinghamshire, Birmingham etc. is demonstrating what a rich entitled twat you are.

(Ps for disclaimer: I don't know his exact travel schedule, but I know that there were several trips that were just 1-2 hours by train or car)

[_Os_]

It was always a bold move for the Tories to pick a billionaire guy as leader.

Dennis Thatcher was very comfortably off. Call me Dave was rich, his wife richer. And now Rishi is minted even if like Call me Dave his wife is far richer again. Even Boris was of the land of opulence, he just lacked the instinct to keep track of any of his wealth because it would have taken a modicum of effort and splurged still more again

I don't think they think it's a problem somehow, their thing is being selfish no matter the cost to others, to the environment...

The dodgy part of Cameron's wealth was that his father was an offshore specialist, similar to Thatcher she offshored her wealth so her children could get around inheritance tax. (I need to make a follow up post on offshoring continuing where Paddington left it, but it's difficult making it short, the big issue is it provides such an advantage to those who do it that any large corporate doing it obliterates smaller competition, it's probably feeding the UK's productivity problem).

Back to Sunak. It's an issue because of point 1 in my above post. Tories are leaning into the culture war and identity stuff. People like Cameron and Johnson know how they're seen by ordinary people and take active measures to avoid it looking too bad, they make it as hard as possible for people to say "this guy isn't one of us and doesn't share our identity". Sunak is richer than all of them, if he isn't a billionaire already he will be. If it lands that Sunak "isn't one of us and doesn't share our identity", then the Tories are fucked with their own voters, being the nouveau riche billionaire guy with an opulent life makes it really easy to land this. Much harder when the Tory leader is pretending to be middle class whilst they're offshoring wheelbarrows of cash/assets.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Boris, weirdly, as the least sociable of recent Tory leaders did cut across the wealth divide such 'ordinary' folk found they could identify with him, another thing the lying, fat, corrupt arsewipe has in common with Trump. Call me Dave never connected, sometimes he'd try, claiming to be an Aston Villa fan but not being able to name a player, that sort of thing, Rishi has tried it filling up an aide's small car at a petrol station.

If they need to do the culture war thing it's better not to have Rishi do it, he and Hunt can be the steady hands on the tiller who don't scare the professional classes. They've plenty of folk who can get out and spin some bad faith nonsense to drum up some populist support, not just 30p Lee and Mark 'Penfold' Francois but people who can actually construct a sentence and reliably turn up sober

[tc27]

You may detest the Prime Minister and the party but the idea they shouldn't use VIP transport when on official business is nuts.

Flying by helicopter from London to Aberdeen makes total sense.

Flying from London to Oxfordshire, Nottinghamshire, Birmingham etc. is demonstrating what a rich entitled twat you are.

(Ps for disclaimer: I don't know his exact travel schedule, but I know that there were several trips that were just 1-2 hours by train or car)

Car travel for a PM requires outriders and multiple cars...its generally a ball ache for special branch and other drivers. I just think we need to stop spilling so much digital ink getting outraged that national and devolved leaders/ministers get VIP travel arrangements. It completely unremarkable and happens in every other country.

[sturginho]

You may detest the Prime Minister and the party but the idea they shouldn't use VIP transport when on official business is nuts.

Flying by helicopter from London to Aberdeen makes total sense.

Flying from London to Oxfordshire, Nottinghamshire, Birmingham etc. is demonstrating what a rich entitled twat you are.

(Ps for disclaimer: I don't know his exact travel schedule, but I know that there were several trips that were just 1-2 hours by train or car)

Car travel for a PM requires outriders and multiple cars...its generally a ball ache for special branch and other drivers. I just think we need to stop spilling so much digital ink getting outraged that national and devolved leaders/ministers get VIP travel arrangements. It completely unremarkable and happens in every other country.

Kim Jong Un travels by train, if it's good enough for him....

[Sandstorm]

You may detest the Prime Minister and the party but the idea they shouldn't use VIP transport when on official business is nuts.

I agree. But also make them take trains so they realise how f*cked the network is.

Corbyn took a train and it started him on the downward slide right out of the Party Cabinet.

[tabascoboy]

Anything to try and scrape votes - easier than trying to create initiatives to reduce car dependency I suppose

[JM2K6]

You may detest the Prime Minister and the party but the idea they shouldn't use VIP transport when on official business is nuts.

Helicopters aren't required, cars are available.

It's a way of attacking him for being a near enough a billionaire. "Man takes helicopter rides all the time", "man has ultra expensive shoes/suit/watch", "man has heated swimming pool that uses so much power it required upgrading the local power grid infrastructure", "man has multiple mansions", "man so out of touch he tells homeless man at soup kitchen to become an investment banker or something", "man so out of touch he doesn't know how to buy petrol".

It was always a bold move for the Tories to pick a billionaire guy as leader.

Security often dictates otherwise. It's la la land stuff to think otherwise. You can detest the political class but also recognise the risks inherent in the job. It's what makes us the right sorts ffs

Yeah? What are the risks to a serving UK Prime Minister travelling in England? It's not fucking Blackhawk Down, lads.

[sockwithaticket]

Yes Rishi, they're super important... because your party has overseen a massive contraction in public transport services. Buses in particular.

[petej]

You may detest the Prime Minister and the party but the idea they shouldn't use VIP transport when on official business is nuts.

Flying by helicopter from London to Aberdeen makes total sense.

Flying from London to Oxfordshire, Nottinghamshire, Birmingham etc. is demonstrating what a rich entitled twat you are.

(Ps for disclaimer: I don't know his exact travel schedule, but I know that there were several trips that were just 1-2 hours by train or car)

Car travel for a PM requires outriders and multiple cars...its generally a ball ache for special branch and other drivers. I just think we need to stop spilling so much digital ink getting outraged that national and devolved leaders/ministers get VIP travel arrangements. It completely unremarkable and happens in every other country.

Yeah I would agree but the tolerance for this unelected fuckwit pm is absolutely zero. They've spent 10 years lecturing us about public finances while spaffing vast quantities of public money all over the place including to their mates. You can't expect public servants to dip into their own pockets for stuff then as a multimillionaire expect the public to pay for your helicopter trips. We've all got to be part of our big society and play our part in levelling up the UK while taking back control.

[tabascoboy]

To coin a misquote...

If a monkey hoarded more bananas than it could eat, while most of the other monkeys starved, scientists would study that monkey to figure out what the heck was wrong with it. When humans do it, we elect them into government

[_Os_]

This is mad.

Apparently Starmer is a super villain, Moscow's man in London. The entire strategy from Labour has been to make sure these types of attacks cannot land.

Does Infosys still operate in Russia and pay tax to the Putin? (last time there was any reporting on this at the end of 2022 they had not left Russia) Does Infosys still work with most of the biggest integrated oil and gas companies, oilfield service companies, and upstream oil and gas companies? (obviously yes they do).

Starmer probably doesn't have a family business literally employing Russians. Starmer could respond "Labour supports the ban on all Russian oil and gas, you say I want to protect Russia jobs, does your family business still operate in Russia and employ Russians? Is your family business currently working with any Russian oil and gas companies?". But that would mean risking Starmer's carefully constructed bland image, because then the Tories say "Labour are anti-family businesses" and the right wing press (and most of the media that follows them zombie like) attacks.

[Insane_Homer]

Going full Trump

[petej]

This is mad.

Apparently Starmer is a super villain, Moscow's man in London. The entire strategy from Labour has been to make sure these types of attacks cannot land.

Does Infosys still operate in Russia and pay tax to the Putin? (last time there was any reporting on this at the end of 2022 they had not left Russia) Does Infosys still work with most of the biggest integrated oil and gas companies, oilfield service companies, and upstream oil and gas companies? (obviously yes they do).

Starmer probably doesn't have a family business literally employing Russians. Starmer could respond "Labour supports the ban on all Russian oil and gas, you say I want to protect Russia jobs, does your family business still operate in Russia and employ Russians? Is your family business currently working with any Russian oil and gas companies?". But that would mean risking Starmer's carefully constructed bland image, because then the Tories say "Labour are anti-family businesses" and the right wing press (and most of the media that follows them zombie like) attacks.

Absolute fucking filth. Dirty populist shitbag.

[I like neeps]

This is mad.

Apparently Starmer is a super villain, Moscow's man in London. The entire strategy from Labour has been to make sure these types of attacks cannot land.

Does Infosys still operate in Russia and pay tax to the Putin? (last time there was any reporting on this at the end of 2022 they had not left Russia) Does Infosys still work with most of the biggest integrated oil and gas companies, oilfield service companies, and upstream oil and gas companies? (obviously yes they do).

Starmer probably doesn't have a family business literally employing Russians. Starmer could respond "Labour supports the ban on all Russian oil and gas, you say I want to protect Russia jobs, does your family business still operate in Russia and employ Russians? Is your family business currently working with any Russian oil and gas companies?". But that would mean risking Starmer's carefully constructed bland image, because then the Tories say "Labour are anti-family businesses" and the right wing press (and most of the media that follows them zombie like) attacks.

Rishi (or his wife) have less than no impact on Infosys. The Tories are awash with Russian cash and have boosted key industries for them in Londoningrad that's where the influence is.

But the policy is mad because it's a culture war. There's not enough oil and gas in the north sea for any sort of self sufficiency anyway.

[_Os_]

... This whole thing reminds me a lot of Truss and Kwarteng, who thought they knew what business and the market wanted (having never run a business), until they blew everything up because the market told them "no". Not much evidence the market is going to want a super abundance of hydrocarbons, they cannot see this because they think the market is self regulating and government has no role.

Err, this one came in quicker than I expected.

https://www.politico.eu/article/billion ... nvestment/

[JM2K6]

Security often dictates otherwise. It's la la land stuff to think otherwise. You can detest the political class but also recognise the risks inherent in the job. It's what makes us the right sorts ffs

Yeah? What are the risks to a serving UK Prime Minister travelling in England? It's not fucking Blackhawk Down, lads.

There is a discernible risk. Any security analyst or twat on the internet can see that

But not such a risk that he can't be taking a car without a military convoy. It's more dangerous being a fucking cyclist

[salanya]

The Dutch PM used to ride to work on a bicycle (might still do, not sure).

Anyways, it's good to see that Rishi's claim to stand for integrity is still going strong

I know there are politics to be played, but blaming Labour for supporting Russian jobs over British jobs is ridiculous on several levels.

[salanya]

The Dutch PM used to ride to work on a bicycle (might still do, not sure).

Anyways, it's good to see that Rishi's claim to stand for integrity is still going strong

I know there are politics to be played, but blaming Labour for supporting Russian jobs over British jobs is ridiculous on several levels.

He'd be an idiot to do that these days. The atmosphere is poisonous all over the world.

It's been poisonous for a good while (see Pim Fortuyn), and he was still riding his bike then.

I'm not suggesting that it's the best mode of transport for Rishi, but getting a helicopter out anytime he needs to venture out of the City is nonsense.

[dpedin]

The helicopter/private jets thing is more about the tin ear of Sunak and the incredibly poor images he presents. There are times he could have used train/schedule flights with little difference in time and security concerns yet he hasn't. Any politician in touch would have read the room and made a bit of a show about getting the train to a few places with a photo op of him working hard in first class and even a picture of him jumping aboard a BA flight to get to Aberdeen would have been good politics given his visit was about green issues. That he hasn't done this and indeed behaved like a petulant spoiled child when challenged about his use of helicopters and private jets demonstrates how little he actually understands about the communications and political environment outside of Westminster and his rich buddies. All he has done is made it an issue and prolonged the debate over his behaviour and shown how out of touch he is with the public. Very poor but there again I dont think he gives a shit now, he is too busy lining the pockets of his family/mates and burning the country before they get chucked out at the next GE.

[Tichtheid]

The helicopter/private jets thing is more about the tin ear of Sunak and the incredibly poor images he presents. There are times he could have used train/schedule flights with little difference in time and security concerns yet he hasn't. Any politician in touch would have read the room and made a bit of a show about getting the train to a few places with a photo op of him working hard in first class and even a picture of him jumping aboard a BA flight to get to Aberdeen would have been good politics given his visit was about green issues. That he hasn't done this and indeed behaved like a petulant spoiled child when challenged about his use of helicopters and private jets demonstrates how little he actually understands about the communications and political environment outside of Westminster and his rich buddies. All he has done is made it an issue and prolonged the debate over his behaviour and shown how out of touch he is with the public. Very poor but there again I dont think he gives a shit now, he is too busy lining the pockets of his family/mates and burning the country before they get chucked out at the next GE.

I read yesterday that there were two scheduled flights from London to Aberdeen around the time of Sunak's arrival, one landed around twenty minutes before and one about the same time after.

I imagine it's a fairly busy route due to the North Sea, so he wouldn't have been short of choices.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Security often dictates otherwise. It's la la land stuff to think otherwise. You can detest the political class but also recognise the risks inherent in the job. It's what makes us the right sorts ffs

Yeah? What are the risks to a serving UK Prime Minister travelling in England? It's not fucking Blackhawk Down, lads.

There is a discernible risk. Any security analyst or twat on the internet can see that

Helicopters being famously risk free, both in themselves and in the event of being attacked

[Line6 HXFX]

The scale of Tory lying is simply staggering.

[TedMaul]

Gerard Butler’s not working at the moment, he’s very experienced at this close transport business.

[tc27]

FWIW I saw Boris Johnson cycling to work when he was Mayor a few times...not sure it means anything about his character.

I also suspect a couple of the posters ardently complaining about this here could not care less about Nicola Sturgeons and other SG senior ministers preference for chauffeur driven cars instead of trains to travel around the central belt.

[TedMaul]

This is incredibly insightful but the earlier poster put it more succinctly. In the absence of a Donald Pleasance level goat fucker he’s prob ok in a car.