Stop voting for fucking Tories

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Lib Dems are the most pro, but they want to win Tory voters, it ends up hard to know what their position is beyond being the most pro-EU among anti-EU parties.

The Lib Dems are happily returning to being a plural party, one which campaigns with different ideas in different constituencies in the same election.

It's rather bonkers, it also lacks some element of democracy per se. But it's much easier to unite the factions if everyone pretends everyone else isn't doing something different

[Mahoney]

Actual sourced quote:

Climate activists are sometimes depicted as dangerous radicals. But, the truly dangerous radicals are the countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels.

Investing in new fossil fuels infrastructure is moral and economic madness.

https://press.un.org/en/2022/sgsm21228.doc.htm

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ate-crisis

The bit he said in 2022 was

The truly dangerous radicals are the countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels,” Guterres said in 2022

Yes, I literally quoted it in the bit you are replying to. You'll note that's the only link to anything he's said in that Guardian article, and that in the opening sentence where they disingenuously imply he was directly & personally criticising Sunak in response to Sunak's recent policy announcement they carefully only put quotation marks around the bits from the 2022 article.

It's perfectly reasonable to draw the conclusion that Guterres ought to think that about Sunak, given what he said in 2022, but that's all that can be said - Guterres hasn't made a further statement directly calling Sunak a dangerous radical pursuing moral and economic madness, which isn't surprising given he's UN Secretary General and Sunak is political leader of a country with a seat on the security council. Be pretty astonishing if he did.

[Simian]

Actual sourced quote:

https://press.un.org/en/2022/sgsm21228.doc.htm

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ate-crisis

The bit he said in 2022 was

The truly dangerous radicals are the countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels,” Guterres said in 2022

Yes, I literally quoted it in the bit you are replying to. You'll note that's the only link to anything he's said in that Guardian article, and that in the opening sentence where they disingenuously imply he was directly & personally criticising Sunak in response to Sunak's recent policy announcement they carefully only put quotation marks around the bits from the 2022 article.

It's perfectly reasonable to draw the conclusion that Guterres ought to think that about Sunak, given what he said in 2022, but that's all that can be said - Guterres hasn't made a further statement directly calling Sunak a dangerous radical pursuing moral and economic madness, which isn't surprising given he's UN Secretary General and Sunak is political leader of a country with a seat on the security council. Be pretty astonishing if he did.

Huh? The article could not be clearer these are comments made in 2022?

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Sunak isn't so much a dangerous radical as a dangerous conservative, or just a conservative, wedded to doing things the way they've always been done, and doing it really badly. Which is why Norway did something useful with O&G and we've spaffed it up the wall.

[C69]

Sunak isn't so much a dangerous radical as a dangerous conservative, or just a conservative, wedded to doing things the way they've always been done, and doing it really badly. Which is why Norway did something useful with O&G and we've spaffed it up the wall.

Tbh I just want competence, the Tory Party have not demonstrated any competency for half a decade

[Mahoney]

Huh? The article could not be clearer these are comments made in 2022?

Of course it could. if you only read the first headline, sub head & first 2 paragraphs, as many people will have done, they won't have even got to the 2022 mention, they'll just have read this:

Sunak’s new oil and gas licences are ‘moral and economic madness’

PM becomes ‘dangerous radical’, in words of UN chief, by backing fossil fuels incompatible with net zero goals

By announcing hundreds of new oil and gas licences, the prime minister, Rishi Sunak, has become a “dangerous radical” pursuing “moral and economic madness”.

That is not the judgment of Just Stop Oil, or any other environmental campaign group, but the United Nations secretary general, António Guterres.

Read that in isolation (and to repeat it is the opening of the article so when you first read it it will be in isolation) and you'd assume that Guterres was speaking after Sunak's policy announcements and directly criticising Sunak.

Only when you read on do you realise (well, if you have decent reading comprehension...) that they are extrapolating his current views on Sunak from statements made in 2022.

Obviously the article could have been clearer, because it could have opened with:

"In 2022, the United Nations secretary general, António Guterres, declared that 'the truly dangerous radicals are the countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels. Investing in new fossil fuels infrastructure is moral and economic madness'. As that is now Rishi Sunak's policy, the only logical conclusion is that Guterres should now consider him a 'dangerous radical' pursuing 'moral and economic madness'."

Then there'd be no question about the order of events and the degree of editorialising.

[Sandstorm]

Sunak isn't so much a dangerous radical as a dangerous conservative, or just a conservative, wedded to doing things the way they've always been done, and doing it really badly. Which is why Norway did something useful with O&G and we've spaffed it up the wall.

Tbh I just want competence, the Tory Party have not demonstrated any competency for half a decade

I just want a plan. Any plan. Just rudderless.

[Hal Jordan]

Sunak isn't so much a dangerous radical as a dangerous conservative, or just a conservative, wedded to doing things the way they've always been done, and doing it really badly. Which is why Norway did something useful with O&G and we've spaffed it up the wall.

Tbh I just want competence, the Tory Party have not demonstrated any competency for half a decade

I just want a plan. Any plan. Just rudderless.

Lock up climate protesters for 2-3 years, brutalise asylum seekers, demonise the Other and minorities, avoid all scrutiny and line their pockets.

That's the plan.

[Sandstorm]

Lock up climate protesters for 2-3 years, brutalise asylum seekers, demonise the Other and minorities, avoid all scrutiny and line their pockets.

That's the plan.

Just a few years ago that was the plan in Zimbabwe and there was a (fairly) massive outcry from the Britain public.

[Slick]

Sunak isn't so much a dangerous radical as a dangerous conservative, or just a conservative, wedded to doing things the way they've always been done, and doing it really badly. Which is why Norway did something useful with O&G and we've spaffed it up the wall.

I honestly thought he might be a bit different, but he actually has turned out just as bad, if not worse. He seems to have very few, if any, policy principles apart from desperately clinging on to power. His beady eyed grinning face is also almost as annoying as Marcus Smith.

[sockwithaticket]

The mistake is ever expecting anything remotely positive out of the Tories. If it happens, it's a pleasant surprise, but you can generally manage expectations pretty well by assuming the worst of them.

[JM2K6]

Sunak isn't so much a dangerous radical as a dangerous conservative, or just a conservative, wedded to doing things the way they've always been done, and doing it really badly. Which is why Norway did something useful with O&G and we've spaffed it up the wall.

I honestly thought he might be a bit different, but he actually has turned out just as bad, if not worse. He seems to have very few, if any, policy principles apart from desperately clinging on to power. His beady eyed grinning face is also almost as annoying as Marcus Smith.

And he's even worse for his country than, than, <checks big book of bitter defensive arguments> NICK DE LUCA (wait, shit, you're not Gunners... oh well too late)

[Tichtheid]

The mistake is ever expecting anything remotely positive out of the Tories. If it happens, it's a pleasant surprise, but you can generally manage expectations pretty well by assuming the worst of them.

To be honest if there ever is anything remotely positive I'm immediately looking for an ulterior motive or looking elsewhere to see what else they are hiding behind the scenes.


Take the vaccine roll out, that was a success because of collaboration between companies and academic research, plus the will of the government allied to the fantastic infrastructure of the NHS.

They now lie about only being able to do this so quickly and successfully because they were free of EU red tape - absolute bollocks, plus they are still intent on breaking up and privatising the NHS and its infrastructure, because that has worked so well with public transport and the utilities

[tabascoboy]

Just look at his face while he's listening to the NHS worker speaking to him, not even the remotest semblance of empathy

[sockwithaticket]

The mistake is ever expecting anything remotely positive out of the Tories. If it happens, it's a pleasant surprise, but you can generally manage expectations pretty well by assuming the worst of them.

To be honest if there ever is anything remotely positive I'm immediately looking for an ulterior motive or looking elsewhere to see what else they are hiding behind the scenes.


Take the vaccine roll out, that was a success because of collaboration between companies and academic research, plus the will of the government allied to the fantastic infrastructure of the NHS.

They now lie about only being able to do this so quickly and successfully because they were free of EU red tape - absolute bollocks, plus they are still intent on breaking up and privatising the NHS and its infrastructure, because that has worked so well with public transport and the utilities

Well, yeah, that's something I explicitly don't consider to be a positive of Tory governance. If anything it happened in spite of the Tories.

[dpedin]

Just look at his face while he's listening to the NHS worker speaking to him, not even the remotest semblance of empathy

She is 100% correct! Any increase in the NHS. workforce is limited by the narrowest point in the training pipeline. For example anyone who works in obstetrics needs to deliver a certain number of babies in order to achieve their training competences or meet their ongoing CPD requirements. Any increase in midwifery and medical trainees means they will be fighting to deliver babies during a period of ongoing reductions in birth rates. A consultant surgeon needs to train trainee consultants and this takes time and effort which reduces patient throughput. Consultants who do training need to be qualified to do so. Consultants will be under pressure to reduce waiting lists but also to spend time training new doctors. If we already have fewer consultants than we need then training capacity is lower than it needs to be. Existing NHS staff train and supervise new NHS staff and big shortages of existing staff means capacity for training is not sufficient for future training requirements. It will take some considerable time to incrementally grow the NHS workforce, something the Workforce Plan fails to properly address or recognise that delivery of it is dependant upon the existing NHS workforce. As the NHS worker tries to explain to Sunak if you dont have a NHS workforce you dont have the training capacity!!!

[_Os_]

Lock up climate protesters for 2-3 years, brutalise asylum seekers, demonise the Other and minorities, avoid all scrutiny and line their pockets.

That's the plan.

Just a few years ago that was the plan in Zimbabwe and there was a (fairly) massive outcry from the Britain public.

Bingo. English nationalism seems quite similar to African nationalism.

There's two main similarities. The first is how demonisation of the other is used as a tool to keep power by those that don't regard themselves as racially superior, it coming instead from grievance/anger/victimhood/entitlement (which makes it seem even more pointlessly cruel and unjustified rather than less). This can be seen in how African nationalist regimes often have whites or Indians in leadership positions, who usually end up the most crazy to prove themselves. The second similarity is how those in leadership positions are alienated from their own country, which is usually made of a few different ethnic groups with their own languages/cultures sometimes not all originating in Africa. The elites the African nationalist leadership comes from tend to be quite different to the people they're ruling, they come from/live in the single large city where most white collar employment is and know very little of the country besides that, this is most obvious in elites using the colonial language as a lingua franca but they also all go to the same small selection of schools etc. They end up ruling a country that doesn't fit what their nationalism imagined it to be (Cummings when he was in Number 10 is reported to have shouted "FUCK NORTHERN IRELAND!" more than once), the citizenry turn out to be alien to them and everything is harder than they imagined, then they give up and use their power to loot the country into offshore bank accounts.

There's other similarities. The crazy grand plans, that have little to no buy in from key stake holders, which predictably blow up. The crazy big man leaders that are thrown up, Johnson and his many wives and children, or his tunnels and bridges to Ireland that he thought would solve customs and borders issues.

The outcome is a giant mess with nothing much happening.

[petej]

Just look at his face while he's listening to the NHS worker speaking to him, not even the remotest semblance of empathy

She is 100% correct! Any increase in the NHS. workforce is limited by the narrowest point in the training pipeline. For example anyone who works in obstetrics needs to deliver a certain number of babies in order to achieve their training competences or meet their ongoing CPD requirements. Any increase in midwifery and medical trainees means they will be fighting to deliver babies during a period of ongoing reductions in birth rates. A consultant surgeon needs to train trainee consultants and this takes time and effort which reduces patient throughput. Consultants who do training need to be qualified to do so. Consultants will be under pressure to reduce waiting lists but also to spend time training new doctors. If we already have fewer consultants than we need then training capacity is lower than it needs to be. Existing NHS staff train and supervise new NHS staff and big shortages of existing staff means capacity for training is not sufficient for future training requirements. It will take some considerable time to incrementally grow the NHS workforce, something the Workforce Plan fails to properly address or recognise that delivery of it is dependant upon the existing NHS workforce. As the NHS worker tries to explain to Sunak if you dont have a NHS workforce you dont have the training capacity!!!

It is part of the mentality of his ideology. The time and benefit of this training is not accounted for, therefore, not valued. Pretty much everywhere I've worked such training will never be allowed to be booked as training or an overhead.

[sockwithaticket]

Tory government does tend to epitomise knowing the cost of everything and value of nothing.

[tc27]

There's two main similarities. The first is how demonisation of the other is used as a tool to keep power by those that don't regard themselves as racially superior, it coming instead from grievance/anger/victimhood/entitlement (which makes it seem even more pointlessly cruel and unjustified rather than less). This can be seen in how African nationalist regimes often have whites or Indians in leadership positions, who usually end up the most crazy to prove themselves. The second similarity is how those in leadership positions are alienated from their own country, which is usually made of a few different ethnic groups with their own languages/cultures sometimes not all originating in Africa. The elites the African nationalist leadership comes from tend to be quite different to the people they're ruling, they come from/live in the single large city where most white collar employment is and know very little of the country besides that, this is most obvious in elites using the colonial language as a lingua franca but they also all go to the same small selection of schools etc. They end up ruling a country that doesn't fit what their nationalism imagined it to be (Cummings when he was in Number 10 is reported to have shouted "FUCK NORTHERN IRELAND!" more than once), the citizenry turn out to be alien to them and everything is harder than they imagined, then they give up and use their power to loot the country into offshore bank accounts.

Its interesting that you talk about a ruling class being alienated from the people they rule.

I would imagine if you talked to most people they would want climate protesters who deliberately cause massive disruption jailed for meaningul amounts of time, they want to have some assurance national borders and immigration are under control.

These are not IMO unreasonable positions nor are they the manifestations of 'English nationalism' (if the boats were landing in Dundee it would have the same political effect). England (particularly its cities) is easily the most diverse part of the UK (which has a Hindu prime minister) and to imply its indulging in anything like the ethnic politics that have literally torn some African countries apart is...well I think your comparison is a stretch to say the least.

FWIW I agree about infrastructure - its because of the unholy mess of political interests and regulations that make building anything so difficult..

[_Os_]

There's two main similarities. The first is how demonisation of the other is used as a tool to keep power by those that don't regard themselves as racially superior, it coming instead from grievance/anger/victimhood/entitlement (which makes it seem even more pointlessly cruel and unjustified rather than less). This can be seen in how African nationalist regimes often have whites or Indians in leadership positions, who usually end up the most crazy to prove themselves. The second similarity is how those in leadership positions are alienated from their own country, which is usually made of a few different ethnic groups with their own languages/cultures sometimes not all originating in Africa. The elites the African nationalist leadership comes from tend to be quite different to the people they're ruling, they come from/live in the single large city where most white collar employment is and know very little of the country besides that, this is most obvious in elites using the colonial language as a lingua franca but they also all go to the same small selection of schools etc. They end up ruling a country that doesn't fit what their nationalism imagined it to be (Cummings when he was in Number 10 is reported to have shouted "FUCK NORTHERN IRELAND!" more than once), the citizenry turn out to be alien to them and everything is harder than they imagined, then they give up and use their power to loot the country into offshore bank accounts.

Its interesting that you talk about a ruling class being alienated from the people they rule.

I would imagine if you talked to most people they would want climate protesters who deliberately cause massive disruption jailed for meaningul amounts of time, they want to have some assurance national borders and immigration are under control.

These are not IMO unreasonable positions nor are they the manifestations of 'English nationalism' (if the boats were landing in Dundee it would have the same political effect). England (particularly its cities) is easily the most diverse part of the UK (which has a Hindu prime minister) and to imply its indulging in anything like the ethnic politics that have literally torn some African countries apart is...well I think your comparison is a stretch to say the least.

FWIW I agree about infrastructure - its because of the unholy mess of political interests and regulations that make building anything so difficult..

With borders and immigration, (as I've posted before) the UK had net emigration before Thatcher this then switched to net immigration, somehow Labour was blamed for this, then net immigration increased again under the Tories to historic levels ... no one with any power cares about this. It's not about what the mass of ordinary people want (which as you say is very likely less immigration), it's about how those with power use their grievances and anger. Fairly obvious how the media, Farage, Tories, etc, all play on things like immigration (you've seen the montages of Daily Mail and Express front pages I'm guessing) then offer their supporters no respite when those same supporters give them power, quite the opposite. The leaders those ordinary people give power are alienated from the country and its people, they don't care what happens, they care more about offshore bank accounts and probably have access to a foreign passport too (quite a lot of Tory Brexiter types seem to be dual nationals/own foreign homes/have offshore businesses).

The capital city is always the most heterogeneous part of the country, the country is never just the capital though, typically the capital supports the non-nationalist opposition and the nationalists themselves define it as the enemy ("London metropolitan elite" of the Brexiters? Or Farage's comments about the UK census which amounted to "London isn't English anymore"?). They always try to turn the country against its urban centres, ironically they themselves are the most urbane and elite of those cities (usually the capital). The nationalism doesn't come from a sense of outright racial superiority (as it doesn't in the case of African nationalism, and it seems English nationalism too), so there's no barrier to other ethnic groups getting into leadership roles as long as they prove themselves by not being moderates and there's not many of them (Tory membership is 97% white). Zambia post-KK had white cabinet ministers, Mugabe had white cabinet ministers and backers, Moz under Machel had whites in leadership positions, the ANC has whites/coloureds/Indians in cabinet and on the NEC ... all whilst they cynically pursued anti-minority policies.

Funny how a lot of it passes by without comment. Truss using place names to refer to the length of the country "from x in the south to y in the north", but only using English towns. Johnson's remarks about Scots.

[Insane_Homer]

https://www.thenational.scot/news/23696 ... am-girmay/

THE UK Government has denied a visa to one of the world’s top cyclists, meaning they will not be able to take part in the world championships in Scotland, according to reports.

Biniam Girmay, who in 2022 became the first Black African cyclist to win a Grand Tour stage at the Giro D’Italia, is one of four cyclists who have been barred entry to the UK, according to Global Cycling Network.

[fishfoodie]

https://www.thenational.scot/news/23696 ... am-girmay/

THE UK Government has denied a visa to one of the world’s top cyclists, meaning they will not be able to take part in the world championships in Scotland, according to reports.

Biniam Girmay, who in 2022 became the first Black African cyclist to win a Grand Tour stage at the Giro D’Italia, is one of four cyclists who have been barred entry to the UK, according to Global Cycling Network.

But I bet they let the cunting Russians in !

[salanya]

https://www.thenational.scot/news/23696 ... am-girmay/

THE UK Government has denied a visa to one of the world’s top cyclists, meaning they will not be able to take part in the world championships in Scotland, according to reports.

Biniam Girmay, who in 2022 became the first Black African cyclist to win a Grand Tour stage at the Giro D’Italia, is one of four cyclists who have been barred entry to the UK, according to Global Cycling Network.

Happy to have a go at the Tories, but Girmay is not competing this weekend due to an injury.

[Hal Jordan]

I'd say we're odds on to have the 2030 ICE sales ban reversed. The lunatic Tweets from Graht Shapps, declaring that Labour are nor the official political wing of Just Stop Oil would seem to indicate that whatever Sunak said about standing firm, he'll soon light another bonfire made of a "green" policy to appease rhe Net Zero Group cunts.

How a small number of MPs has managed to so competely take over the Tory Party and cow all opposition in their Coat of Many Research Groups, is beyond me.

But then, we've had Cameron (gutless coward), May (personally strong minded but politically weak as hell in her position), Johnson (didn't care and would do or say anything for the job, or sex, or money) and now Sunak (weak, lacking any authority and utterly unsuited to leadership) as the people who might have faced them down and told them to fuck off, so that's that.

[Hal Jordan]

P.S. I genuinely forgot Truss was PM.

[Tichtheid]

[sefton]

I wish somebody would stand up and repeat that in Parliament.

[tabascoboy]

But does he do anything about it before going off on hols? Will anyone do anything about it?

Nadine Dorries not doing MP's job properly, says Rishi Sunak

Nadine Dorries's constituents are not being properly represented, the prime minister has said. Rishi Sunak told LBC people deserved to have an MP "that represents them wherever they are".

The former culture secretary announced in June she was standing down as MP for Mid Bedfordshire with immediate effect. But she later said she would not resign until she got more information about why she was denied a peerage in Boris Johnson's resignation honours list.

Ms Dorries, whose salary as an MP is £86,584, has not spoken in the Commons since June 2022.

In his LBC interview, Mr Sunak set out what he thought people had a right to expect from their MPs. "It's just making sure your MP is engaging with you, representing you, whether that's speaking in Parliament or being present in their constituencies doing surgeries, answering your letters.

"That's the job of an MP and all MPs should be held to that standard."

Asked if that meant Ms Dorries was failing her constituents, Mr Sunak said: "Well, at the moment, people aren't being properly represented."

A close ally of Mr Johnson, she has accused Mr Sunak's political team of removing her name from the former prime minister's resignation honours list. She said she had requested copies of all correspondence relating to her nomination for the Lords. Ms Dorries has said she is seeking the information from the House of Lords Appointments Commission - which vets nominations, the cabinet secretary - the head of the civil service - and the Cabinet Office. She has insisted it remains "absolutely my intention to resign", but "this process is now sadly necessary".

Her "office continues to function as normal and will of course continue to serve my constituents," she added.

'Nowhere to be seen'
Responding to Mr Sunak's comments, Labour frontbencher Peter Kyle called on the prime minister to "should show some leadership and tell Nadine Dorries to step aside". Mr Sunak was again showing "he's too weak to lead a Conservative Party which is too divided to govern the country", Mr Kyle added.

Liberal Democrat deputy leader Daisy Cooper MP said: "When your own prime minister says you aren't doing your job properly, it really is time to go.

"People in Mid Bedfordshire feel completely taken for granted by Nadine Dorries. "Families are facing soaring bills and are finding it almost impossible to get a GP appointment, while this government is wrapped up in sleaze and the Conservative MP is nowhere to be seen."

Downing Street has said it is important for Ms Dorries' constituents to have "certainty". But Mr Sunak can not force her to stand down from Parliament, outside a general election, although he could suspend her from the Conservative Party.

She had a majority of 24,664 in Mid Bedfordshire in the 2019 general election, but both Labour and the Liberal Democrats are already targeting the seat. A by-election can be called only when an MP formally resigns.

Labour has selected Alistair Strathern as its candidate, with Emma Holland-Lindsay chosen to stand for the Lib Dems and Festus Akinbusoye lined up for the Conservatives.

With Parliament currently in recess and not sitting again until September, the earliest a by-election could be held - if Ms Dorries quits - is in October.

Last week, Flitwick Town Council, in her constituency, added its voice to calls for her to go immediately, pointing to her job hosting a show on TalkTV. The councillors also noted she had not maintained a constituency office "for a considerable time".

Ms Dorries has also written a book titled The Plot: The Political Assassination Of Boris Johnson, due to be published days before the Conservative Party conference in October.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66382232

[petej]

I'd say we're odds on to have the 2030 ICE sales ban reversed. The lunatic Tweets from Graht Shapps, declaring that Labour are nor the official political wing of Just Stop Oil would seem to indicate that whatever Sunak said about standing firm, he'll soon light another bonfire made of a "green" policy to appease rhe Net Zero Group cunts.

How a small number of MPs has managed to so competely take over the Tory Party and cow all opposition in their Coat of Many Research Groups, is beyond me.

But then, we've had Cameron (gutless coward), May (personally strong minded but politically weak as hell in her position), Johnson (didn't care and would do or say anything for the job, or sex, or money) and now Sunak (weak, lacking any authority and utterly unsuited to leadership) as the people who might have faced them down and told them to fuck off, so that's that.

During his single term did John Major actually stand up to the eurosceptic loons in the tory party? So he had a spine unlike the recent tory leaders.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Major having a spine when PM is an interesting assertion. Certainly he was no fan of the loons on the right, but he certainly bottled standing up to the DUP, he might contend politics is the art of the possible, but in that event it would been better imo to call an earlier general election, Major took the view it was better he remain in power even if horribly crippled in his ability to act.

And if someone really had a spine they probably wouldn't have had so many meetings with Jeffrey Archer on their calendar. You would only meet with Archer if you needed a little fluffing

[_Os_]

Sunak commences his holiday in California staying in his £5m Santa Monica flat.

I'm old enough to remember when Tory big men attacked "globalists", "citizens of nowhere", and said they were for "somewheres" rather than the "anywheres". It's full mask off now and what do you know, they were the globalist citizens of nowhere who could be from anywhere.

If the UK declines further the ones that aren't in some foreign bolt hole already (cough ... Andrew Neil, dead Nigel Lawson), will get foreign citizenship (cough ... Alan Howard, Jeremy Isaacs, Stanley Johnson, Daniel Moylan, Andy Wigmore, Michael Portillo), then move themselves there just like they've already done with their businesses (cough ... Jacob Rees-Mogg, James Dyson).

Meanwhile the people that supported them, will be stuck in the UK and even more fucked than they were before.

[Biffer]

https://www.thenational.scot/news/23696 ... am-girmay/

THE UK Government has denied a visa to one of the world’s top cyclists, meaning they will not be able to take part in the world championships in Scotland, according to reports.

Biniam Girmay, who in 2022 became the first Black African cyclist to win a Grand Tour stage at the Giro D’Italia, is one of four cyclists who have been barred entry to the UK, according to Global Cycling Network.

Happy to have a go at the Tories, but Girmay is not competing this weekend due to an injury.

Seems to be a wee bit of debate about that. Regardless, three of his team mates have been denied visas, and some countries didn't bother even applying due to the expense, and so aren't sending a team. The Eritrean athletes had to travel to Turkey to even apply for visas, and Benin aren't ending a team due to the expense of having to send their entire team to Nigeria to apply for visas, on top of the tournament costs.

[fishfoodie]

Major having a spine when PM is an interesting assertion. Certainly he was no fan of the loons on the right, but he certainly bottled standing up to the DUP, he might contend politics is the art of the possible, but in that event it would been better imo to call an earlier general election, Major took the view it was better he remain in power even if horribly crippled in his ability to act.

And if someone really had a spine they probably wouldn't have had so many meetings with Jeffrey Archer on their calendar. You would only meet with Archer if you needed a little fluffing

It was the UUP at that stage, but yes, he was totally beholden to them, & as a result the IRA Ceasefire was a totally wasted opportunity, & it waited till Blair to get a peace agreement. It was the same malign influence that the DUP had over the entire Brexit process while May was PM

[C T]

I think there's a few other factors at work, a key one being the mindset of 'why should we do this when it's China/India etc etc currently making most of the mess'

Even in this flawed context, a forward-thinking person might have concluded that being a global incubator for green technology would be a Very Good Thing.

I'd like to see the stats that tend to be shown on carbon emissions by country at least have alongside it the consumer country as well as the producer country.

Gut feel suggests that if we looked by consumer rather that producer that it would tell a different picture.

Different picture yes, but not as big a difference as you’d think.

Here’s a decent report on it. https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worl ... exporters/

Summary would be; it knocks some shine off the west’s virtue signalling of CO2 reductions, but China and India are still the biggest producers even after that is taken into account.

I've not managed to fully read through this yet, but it is right up there with the most interesting things I've read on a forum. Thank you for posting.

[Biffer]

I think there's a few other factors at work, a key one being the mindset of 'why should we do this when it's China/India etc etc currently making most of the mess'

Even in this flawed context, a forward-thinking person might have concluded that being a global incubator for green technology would be a Very Good Thing.

I'd like to see the stats that tend to be shown on carbon emissions by country at least have alongside it the consumer country as well as the producer country.

Gut feel suggests that if we looked by consumer rather that producer that it would tell a different picture.

Different picture yes, but not as big a difference as you’d think.

Here’s a decent report on it. https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worl ... exporters/

Summary would be; it knocks some shine off the west’s virtue signalling of CO2 reductions, but China and India are still the biggest producers even after that is taken into account.

I've been banging on about this for a while. You can see in those numbers that the UK has been decreasing it's CO2 production since the 90s, but our consumption figures have only turned a corner in the last few years - and are still higher than they were in 1990.

The other thing about consumption is its link to wealth. higher earners consume more products and generally account for more carbon in that consumption. Bottom half of the World population by income is responsible for about 10 or 15% of emissions by consumption. Top 10% wealthiest are responsible for 50% of emissions by consumption.

https://www.iea.org/commentaries/the-wo ... e-bottom-1

Top 10% isn't global elite mega rich folks. There's more than 780 million people in there.

[sockwithaticket]

I'd like to see the stats that tend to be shown on carbon emissions by country at least have alongside it the consumer country as well as the producer country.

Gut feel suggests that if we looked by consumer rather that producer that it would tell a different picture.

Different picture yes, but not as big a difference as you’d think.

Here’s a decent report on it. https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worl ... exporters/

Summary would be; it knocks some shine off the west’s virtue signalling of CO2 reductions, but China and India are still the biggest producers even after that is taken into account.

I've been banging on about this for a while. You can see in those numbers that the UK has been decreasing it's CO2 production since the 90s, but our consumption figures have only turned a corner in the last few years - and are still higher than they were in 1990.

The other thing about consumption is its link to wealth. higher earners consume more products and generally account for more carbon in that consumption. Bottom half of the World population by income is responsible for about 10 or 15% of emissions by consumption. Top 10% wealthiest are responsible for 50% of emissions by consumption.

https://www.iea.org/commentaries/the-wo ... e-bottom-1

Obviously this is at the truly extreme end of things, but a recent look at the emissions from celebs use of private jets illustrates how wealth seems to correlate with emissions.

https://weareyard.com/insights/worst-ce ... -offenders

Her [Taylor Swift] total flight emissions for the year come in at 8,293.54 tonnes, or 1,184.8 times more than the average person's total annual emissions.

[Biffer]

Looks like the Bank of England is stuck in the 90s wrt interest rates. Haven't clicked that their efforts 12-18 months ago are now having an effect and no further interest rate rise are needed. Generally accepted that interest rate changes now have a lag of that kind of time in their effect, so by their own projection, they're now increasing interest rates to have an effect when inflation, by their own fore cast, is set to be below 2%. Which will cause a recession. a deflationary one. Which we'll struggle to get out of because all our avenues for growth are fucked.

The UK is rapidly turning into a basket case. It's only going to get worse.

[dpedin]

Looks like the Bank of England is stuck in the 90s wrt interest rates. Haven't clicked that their efforts 12-18 months ago are now having an effect and no further interest rate rise are needed. Generally accepted that interest rate changes now have a lag of that kind of time in their effect, so by their own projection, they're now increasing interest rates to have an effect when inflation, by their own fore cast, is set to be below 2%. Which will cause a recession. a deflationary one. Which we'll struggle to get out of because all our avenues for growth are fucked.

The UK is rapidly turning into a basket case. It's only going to get worse.

Agree 100%! There is a concept of tampering in quality management which seems to describe exactly what the BoE are doing:

'Tampering is attempting to adjust the process in the aim of improving quality when the only source of variation is common cause variation. When we do this, we actually increase the variation in the process. We are over adjusting when we should simply leave things alone.'

I would suggest that the BoE is doing essentially this, they are reacting to outputs derived from their inputs of 6-12 months ago and don't really have a grasp of what is actually driving inflation. It is a bit like reacting to the output of a bagatelle - if the coin put in the top in the middle is expected to come out in the middle at the bottom but it comes out the bottom to the left then they are putting the next coin in the top further to the right in the hope it comes out in the middle. If you don't understand the process that delivers the outputs - whether it is a bagatelle or a complex economy - then tampering leads to poorer results than just standing back and doing nothing. This is just guesswork from the BoE and likely to do more damage than good!

[S/Lt_Phillips]

Looks like the Bank of England is stuck in the 90s wrt interest rates. Haven't clicked that their efforts 12-18 months ago are now having an effect and no further interest rate rise are needed. Generally accepted that interest rate changes now have a lag of that kind of time in their effect, so by their own projection, they're now increasing interest rates to have an effect when inflation, by their own fore cast, is set to be below 2%. Which will cause a recession. a deflationary one. Which we'll struggle to get out of because all our avenues for growth are fucked.

The UK is rapidly turning into a basket case. It's only going to get worse.

Agree 100%! There is a concept of tampering in quality management which seems to describe exactly what the BoE are doing:

'Tampering is attempting to adjust the process in the aim of improving quality when the only source of variation is common cause variation. When we do this, we actually increase the variation in the process. We are over adjusting when we should simply leave things alone.'

I would suggest that the BoE is doing essentially this, they are reacting to outputs derived from their inputs of 6-12 months ago and don't really have a grasp of what is actually driving inflation. It is a bit like reacting to the output of a bagatelle - if the coin put in the top in the middle is expected to come out in the middle at the bottom but it comes out the bottom to the left then they are putting the next coin in the top further to the right in the hope it comes out in the middle. If you don't understand the process that delivers the outputs - whether it is a bagatelle or a complex economy - then tampering leads to poorer results than just standing back and doing nothing. This is just guesswork from the BoE and likely to do more damage than good!

I suspect the econometrics guys at the BoE do understand what the drivers of inflation are, the problem is the only lever they have to try and impact it is interest rates. They have to do something (or at least, be seen to do something), and the only thing they can do is move the lever a bit further to the right. Of course, I may be giving them too much credit, but given that most FMCG companies will be analysing marking drivers through econometrics in order to generate forecast models, surely the BoE has decent models for the UK economy.