Stop voting for fucking Tories

[C69]

The Tories need to split as a Party now. They really are a group of cliques and loons.
I hope they have a slow painful death. They have fucked the Country for years to come.

[dpedin]

Tory MPs have already written off the next election and the Head Boy and are busy jostling for position either within the Tory Party or within Reform. I cant see the Squatter lasting much longer and I wouldn't be surprised to see him throwing in his jotters and feckin off to sunny California asap. If he is going to keep lurching on from one disaster to another then the Tories are just going to see an even bigger thrashing come the GE. It is not going to get any better for them, there is nothing on the horizon coming to save them, they need to cut their losses and call an election.

[Hal Jordan]

They won't go until the public purse has been raided as far as is humanly possible, and some appalling culture war legislation is passed. Salt the earth for Labour, blame them for not fixing the mess and then look to get back in after one term in Opposition, relying on the goldfish memory of the electorate.

[Tichtheid]

An item on the radio just now;

“Trolley waits” are cases where someone waits for over twelve hours on a hospital trolley before being admitted to a ward.
In 2011 there were four trolley waits in England, (I assume they were talking about England, but I missed if this included the other parts of the UK)

Last year there were forty four thousand trolley waits

[Slick]

An item on the radio just now;

“Trolley waits” are cases where someone waits for over twelve hours on a hospital trolley before being admitted to a ward.
In 2011 there were four trolley waits in England, (I assume they were talking about England, but I missed if this included the other parts of the UK)

Last year there were forty four thousand trolley waits

My 73 year old mum was one of them

[_Os_]

How do they think voters will respond: "my life is worse than it was, but at least the Tories keep doing stuff on immigration they later say is shit and a failure"???

As I was saying ...

Weeks were spent over summer on the huge urgency of housing asylum seekers on barges and how it was absolutely necessary.

also...

The cycle goes like this.

1. Claims by fringe politicians (Farage etc) that immigration is an existential crisis and a massive emergency, get outsized attention in the media.
2. A really extreme proposal starts being supported by the Tories and gets all the media coverage. None of the details matter and there's very little real debate. If it makes any sort of sense does not matter. It's unhinged from reality.
3. Some version of it happens, usually the most extreme version anyone can come up with.
4. For those impacted which is usually legal immigrants/innocent people, the change is massively damaging. But it does none of the things those who supported wanted it to do because it never could.
5. The policy, which once dominated government/parliament/media for weeks as the most important and urgent issue, is forgotten or openly called shit and a failure.
6. It becomes painfully obvious that the UK needs migrants at around this point (eg the truck driver crisis). But those who want no immigration are prepared to sacrifice nothing. They don't want ordinary people to have free quality education and/or skills training, because those ordinary people would then compete against their children who they sent to the best schools and universities precisely so their children could beat everyone else on a non-merit basis, that's what they're paying for. Those ordinary people are the vast majority of the workforce and cannot meet the needs of the economy. Businessmen who are Tory donors then demand and get exceptions from the new laws for their industry, this ends up covering the entire economy.
7. Go back to step 1.

[Paddington Bear]

https://x.com/Sam_Dumitriu/status/17475 ... 88660?s=20

Found this thread interesting. Korea produces nuclear plants at speeds we can only dream of, at wholesale prices a quarter of ours. Being able to achieve this would have an astonishing impact on our industrial costs and personal costs of living.

This is essentially ‘catch up growth’ - it’s not that hard with political will. The starting point has to be accepting the ego hit of how badly we’re managing things, and that we should look externally for solutions.

[tabascoboy]

So just to bring you up to date, the Prime Minister of the day is currently planning to explicitly force civil servants to break the law in order to buy off his own MPs

Michael Tomlinson confirms the civil service code could be updated to satiate Rwanda rebels.

Asked if the code will be changed to tell civil servants to advise ministers to ignore rulings by judges, the Illegal Migration minister says govt is "looking at the detail of that".

[inactionman]

https://x.com/Sam_Dumitriu/status/17475 ... 88660?s=20

Found this thread interesting. Korea produces nuclear plants at speeds we can only dream of, at wholesale prices a quarter of ours. Being able to achieve this would have an astonishing impact on our industrial costs and personal costs of living.

This is essentially ‘catch up growth’ - it’s not that hard with political will. The starting point has to be accepting the ego hit of how badly we’re managing things, and that we should look externally for solutions.

I can only speak in a very limited context, but I take all this with a large pinch of salt. South Korea isn't the wild west but I have seen cases where H&S and corporate responsibility isn't as intrinsic as it should be.

As example*, the Scottish Government gave tax incentives for wind turbine manufacture in Helensbrough a few years back, taken on by a south Korean company. Workers raised all sorts of issues about errant health and safety practices that were simply not dealt with by the Korean management as they would add to production cost. The plant remained in business only as long as the financial incentive remained in place. I appreciate this incentive hunting is pretty common, and many companies will shift sites arounds the UK and abroad to chase subsidies,, but the real issue was that they couldn't economically make these in Scotland, or - more accurately - they could make them more cheaply where they weren't held to the same standard of site safety (i.e. back in South Korea).

There are, sensibly, very stringent safety and planning restrictions on nuclear. Quite what is just red tape and what is essential safety checks isn't clear, but we cannot make mistakes and I'd rather go too far than not far enough. I'd also be very reluctant to follow the leads of other countries who have different risk appetites or approaches to governance (e.g. Japan, whose regulator knew flood defences of key infrastructure at Fukushima were inadequate given the risks). We've had a nuclear accident at windscale and the chief engineer hadn't insisted on filters on the top of the chimney stacks we could have had a very, very bad time of it indeed.

Apols if this seems snarky, not my intent- it's just to raise the point that things aren't equivalent in all places and we can admire the results but not necessarily want to replicate the appraoches.

(*apols, I cannot for the life of me lay a hand on the article I read on this, if I find it I'll insert a link - I'm also going from memory which isn't what it once was)

[Sandstorm]

Nuclear is 20th century tech. Move on people; if you're building new, it's got to be renewables going forward.

Cost, emissions, waste, public safety, maintenance, training, etc, etc. On all these fronts, nuclear is a loser.

[inactionman]

Nuclear is 20th century tech. Move on people; if you're building new, it's got to be renewables going forward.

Cost, emissions, waste, public safety, maintenance, training, etc, etc. On all these fronts, nuclear is a loser.

How else do you make a nuclear warhead?

[Sandstorm]

Nuclear is 20th century tech. Move on people; if you're building new, it's got to be renewables going forward.

Cost, emissions, waste, public safety, maintenance, training, etc, etc. On all these fronts, nuclear is a loser.

How else do you make a nuclear warhead?

[Biffer]

https://x.com/Sam_Dumitriu/status/17475 ... 88660?s=20

Found this thread interesting. Korea produces nuclear plants at speeds we can only dream of, at wholesale prices a quarter of ours. Being able to achieve this would have an astonishing impact on our industrial costs and personal costs of living.

This is essentially ‘catch up growth’ - it’s not that hard with political will. The starting point has to be accepting the ego hit of how badly we’re managing things, and that we should look externally for solutions.

I can only speak in a very limited context, but I take all this with a large pinch of salt. South Korea isn't the wild west but I have seen cases where H&S and corporate responsibility isn't as intrinsic as it should be.

As example*, the Scottish Government gave tax incentives for wind turbine manufacture in Helensbrough a few years back, taken on by a south Korean company. Workers raised all sorts of issues about errant health and safety practices that were simply not dealt with by the Korean management as they would add to production cost. The plant remained in business only as long as the financial incentive remained in place. I appreciate this incentive hunting is pretty common, and many companies will shift sites arounds the UK and abroad to chase subsidies,, but the real issue was that they couldn't economically make these in Scotland, or - more accurately - they could make them more cheaply where they weren't held to the same standard of site safety (i.e. back in South Korea).

There are, sensibly, very stringent safety and planning restrictions on nuclear. Quite what is just red tape and what is essential safety checks isn't clear, but we cannot make mistakes and I'd rather go too far than not far enough. I'd also be very reluctant to follow the leads of other countries who have different risk appetites or approaches to governance (e.g. Japan, whose regulator knew flood defences of key infrastructure at Fukushima were inadequate given the risks). We've had a nuclear accident at windscale and the chief engineer hadn't insisted on filters on the top of the chimney stacks we could have had a very, very bad time of it indeed.

Apols if this seems snarky, not my intent- it's just to raise the point that things aren't equivalent in all places and we can admire the results but not necessarily want to replicate the appraoches.

(*apols, I cannot for the life of me lay a hand on the article I read on this, if I find it I'll insert a link - I'm also going from memory which isn't what it once was)

This might be of interest wrt nuclear and Korea

https://www.samdumitriu.com/p/how-to-ge ... ilt-faster

[Paddington Bear]

https://x.com/Sam_Dumitriu/status/17475 ... 88660?s=20

Found this thread interesting. Korea produces nuclear plants at speeds we can only dream of, at wholesale prices a quarter of ours. Being able to achieve this would have an astonishing impact on our industrial costs and personal costs of living.

This is essentially ‘catch up growth’ - it’s not that hard with political will. The starting point has to be accepting the ego hit of how badly we’re managing things, and that we should look externally for solutions.

I can only speak in a very limited context, but I take all this with a large pinch of salt. South Korea isn't the wild west but I have seen cases where H&S and corporate responsibility isn't as intrinsic as it should be.

As example*, the Scottish Government gave tax incentives for wind turbine manufacture in Helensbrough a few years back, taken on by a south Korean company. Workers raised all sorts of issues about errant health and safety practices that were simply not dealt with by the Korean management as they would add to production cost. The plant remained in business only as long as the financial incentive remained in place. I appreciate this incentive hunting is pretty common, and many companies will shift sites arounds the UK and abroad to chase subsidies,, but the real issue was that they couldn't economically make these in Scotland, or - more accurately - they could make them more cheaply where they weren't held to the same standard of site safety (i.e. back in South Korea).

There are, sensibly, very stringent safety and planning restrictions on nuclear. Quite what is just red tape and what is essential safety checks isn't clear, but we cannot make mistakes and I'd rather go too far than not far enough. I'd also be very reluctant to follow the leads of other countries who have different risk appetites or approaches to governance (e.g. Japan, whose regulator knew flood defences of key infrastructure at Fukushima were inadequate given the risks). We've had a nuclear accident at windscale and the chief engineer hadn't insisted on filters on the top of the chimney stacks we could have had a very, very bad time of it indeed.

Apols if this seems snarky, not my intent- it's just to raise the point that things aren't equivalent in all places and we can admire the results but not necessarily want to replicate the appraoches.

(*apols, I cannot for the life of me lay a hand on the article I read on this, if I find it I'll insert a link - I'm also going from memory which isn't what it once was)

This doesn’t read as snarky at all, all fair points. I’m not suggesting shipping over the entire Korean nuclear industry, and won’t pretend to be an expert.

I would say that when a first world democracy with similar income levels can build at a quarter of the cost and a fraction of the time to us, it has to be worth examining why. If the answer comes back ‘they take massive h&s shortcuts’ then we can disregard it, for the reasons you outline.
With that said, British projects suffer from enormous cost disease even when they have lower h&s implications than nuclear plants. My guess would be that there’s a combination of things that explain their performance vs ours, h&s being one, but also accompanied by:

- Better procurement
- Clearer and more streamlined planning
- Coherent political decision making
- ‘What works’ rather than ‘world beating’
- fewer consultants and contractors

None of which skimp on h&s per se. If we took on board the good bits of what e.g Korea are doing whilst ignoring lax h&s rules, we might not get down to a quarter of the current cost, but speeding up building and substantially reducing costs would in itself be an enormous win.

[Hal Jordan]

This is the UK we're talking about. We would take on all the bad practices, add a few of our own, spaff money on consultancy fees for companies mysteriously close to MPs and Ministers, take five times as long to start as we originally stated as the time frame, and then junk the whole lot to win some votes and shut the backbench lynch mob up.

And we'd still have a fucked energy supply policy.

[Sandstorm]

This is the UK we're talking about. We would take on all the bad practices, add a few of our own, spaff money on consultancy fees for companies mysteriously close to MPs and Ministers, take five times as long to start as we originally stated as the time frame, and then junk the whole lot to win some votes and shut the backbench lynch mob up.

And we'd still have a fucked energy supply policy.

Spot on and really annoying too!

[_Os_]

They're useless, the UK hasn't been governed for years now. But you have to laugh at these fucking morons.

Brendan Clarke-Smith and Lee Anderson "resigned on principle". Anderson has the piss taken out of him by Labour MPs when he votes no, so instead abstains on his resigning matter. Clarke-Smith votes for the thing he resigned over.

Some Tory Lord blames Tony Blair for immigration in 2024, "this is the result of the laws put in place by Tony Blair". Blair was last PM in June 2007, there's been 6 PMs since! The Tories invented the lie that "New Labour opened the floodgates", when migration switched from net emigration to net immigration under Thatcher's structural reforms of the UK economy. It pre-dates and now post-dates New Labour.

This is the platform they're building for an election in the mid-2020s, immigration with Rwanda as their solution and blame Labour/Tony Blair for the Tory record on immigration. Presumably the election is going to be really vile. They would be better off not talking about immigration at all. Telling that Starmer has led with Rwanda two PMQs running.

[_Os_]

The Tories are heading back into Truss levels of support, she was posting numbers like this in October 2022. One year for them to turn it around, or they will potentially become a Lib Dem level party.

[Margin__Walker]

This tickled me this morning.

[I like neeps]

They're useless, the UK hasn't been governed for years now. But you have to laugh at these fucking morons.

Brendan Clarke-Smith and Lee Anderson "resigned on principle". Anderson has the piss taken out of him by Labour MPs when he votes no, so instead abstains on his resigning matter. Clarke-Smith votes for the thing he resigned over.

Some Tory Lord blames Tony Blair for immigration in 2024, "this is the result of the laws put in place by Tony Blair". Blair was last PM in June 2007, there's been 6 PMs since! The Tories invented the lie that "New Labour opened the floodgates", when migration switched from net emigration to net immigration under Thatcher's structural reforms of the UK economy. It pre-dates and now post-dates New Labour.

This is the platform they're building for an election in the mid-2020s, immigration with Rwanda as their solution and blame Labour/Tony Blair for the Tory record on immigration. Presumably the election is going to be really vile. They would be better off not talking about immigration at all. Telling that Starmer has led with Rwanda two PMQs running.

To be fair to Lee Anderson he resigned because he doesn't have quite such a lucrative gig at GB News when he loses his seat. Clarke-Smith I presume was also positioning himself.

Great clip of Coffey, is there a clip of the rebuttal?

[Insane_Homer]

[dpedin]

This tickled me this morning.

I love the quiet giggle from the Labour bench - as I have said before all Labour have to do is stand back and let the morons keep digging!

[dpedin]

All this Rwanda shite is more about keeping immigration and 'stop the boats' in the headlines rather than all the real shit flying about for which the Gov can be blamed. This is the one and only issue they want the election to be fought on, it is all they have and they are desperate to appeal to the ex UKIP/Reform party voters. It is all about 'look we can be shitty racists too!' image for Little Englanders to admire. Utter bastards every single one of them, I share Phillips's utter contempt for them.

[Slick]

They're useless, the UK hasn't been governed for years now. But you have to laugh at these fucking morons.

Brendan Clarke-Smith and Lee Anderson "resigned on principle". Anderson has the piss taken out of him by Labour MPs when he votes no, so instead abstains on his resigning matter. Clarke-Smith votes for the thing he resigned over.

Some Tory Lord blames Tony Blair for immigration in 2024, "this is the result of the laws put in place by Tony Blair". Blair was last PM in June 2007, there's been 6 PMs since! The Tories invented the lie that "New Labour opened the floodgates", when migration switched from net emigration to net immigration under Thatcher's structural reforms of the UK economy. It pre-dates and now post-dates New Labour.

This is the platform they're building for an election in the mid-2020s, immigration with Rwanda as their solution and blame Labour/Tony Blair for the Tory record on immigration. Presumably the election is going to be really vile. They would be better off not talking about immigration at all. Telling that Starmer has led with Rwanda two PMQs running.

To be fair to Lee Anderson he resigned because he doesn't have quite such a lucrative gig at GB News when he loses his seat. Clarke-Smith I presume was also positioning himself.

Great clip of Coffey, is there a clip of the rebuttal?

There was an even funnier clip of him being interviewed outside Parliament when he looked like he might cry as he said "they laughed , pointed and giggled at me"

[Margin__Walker]

Yep. You're not really a serious politician if you abstain rather than vote against something because people were laughing at you.

Poor bairn

[SaintK]

This tickled me this morning.

Christ!!!! Thick as mince

[inactionman]

I'm not keeping count, but I think she's close to overtaking Boris on the gaffe-o-meter

[Slick]

I think you can see her face redden as she realises what she has done as folk shout it out

[dpedin]

This tickled me this morning.

Christ!!!! Thick as mince

Strange person indeed - has a PhD in Chemistry but was Liz Truss's campaign manager during Tory Party leadership election. More worryingly she is only 52, that must have been a hell of a paper round!

[tabascoboy]

This tickled me this morning.

Christ!!!! Thick as mince

If it was a trap laid by Cooper then it was a good 'un!

But this is the main mopus operandi this government and its minsters has now in exchanges, to try for one-upmanship and point scoring to evade the actual issue. Same with Sunak in PMQ yesterday

[sockwithaticket]

It's funny until you realise how much money we've paid the moron as a cabinet member and MP.

[SaintK]

Sunak's press call going down like a cold cup of sick!!! There were far more than these.

[Hal Jordan]

The Tories are heading back into Truss levels of support, she was posting numbers like this in October 2022. One year for them to turn it around, or they will potentially become a Lib Dem level party.

No wonder they're letting "ex-pats" vote these days (and of course, the lovely foreign donor money that comes with it).

Meanwhile on Xhitter, the Corbyn rump appear to have accepted that Starmer may well win the next election and are feverishly writing him off as the one term Red Tory who failed socialism and let his good friends the Conservative Party back in 5 years from now.

[dpedin]

The Tories are heading back into Truss levels of support, she was posting numbers like this in October 2022. One year for them to turn it around, or they will potentially become a Lib Dem level party.

No wonder they're letting "ex-pats" vote these days (and of course, the lovely foreign donor money that comes with it).

Meanwhile on Xhitter, the Corbyn rump appear to have accepted that Starmer may well win the next election and are feverishly writing him off as the one term Red Tory who failed socialism and let his good friends the Conservative Party back in 5 years from now.

My mate who left Scotland for Belgium in 1997 has been told he is eligible to vote in next GE and has completed his paperwork online. He gets to vote in the last constituency he voted/lived in apparently? Fortunately, as a Fifer, he has a simmering hatred for all things Tory so will vote accordingly.

[Insane_Homer]

I think you can see her face redden as she realises what she has done as folk shout it out

how could you tell?

no_diff.png (93.79 KiB) Viewed 2584 times

[Paddington Bear]

The Tories are heading back into Truss levels of support, she was posting numbers like this in October 2022. One year for them to turn it around, or they will potentially become a Lib Dem level party.

No wonder they're letting "ex-pats" vote these days (and of course, the lovely foreign donor money that comes with it).

Meanwhile on Xhitter, the Corbyn rump appear to have accepted that Starmer may well win the next election and are feverishly writing him off as the one term Red Tory who failed socialism and let his good friends the Conservative Party back in 5 years from now.

Giving ex-pats permanent votes was a Cameron era policy. Pre brexit they overwhelmingly leant Tory. Now, probably a smallish further nail for the coffin

[fishfoodie]

Yeah; I can just imagine the kind of helpful, ideas, the Wankers will have to improve valuations, now that the UK isn't bound by any of the EU regulations.

Jeremy Hunt has called in Britain’s largest banks to discuss why they remain so poorly valued compared with global peers, as ministers seek feedback on how to help boost the sector and the competitiveness of the City of London.

The meeting arranged by the UK chancellor will be held on Tuesday and will include top executives from Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds, NatWest, Santander UK and the London Stock Exchange Group, according to three people with knowledge of the plans.

Franck Petitgas — the former London-based Morgan Stanley executive who was appointed as Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s business and investment adviser in April — will also attend the meeting, two of the people said.

Hunt and Petitgas will ask the executives how ministers can help them improve their perception among international and domestic investors and boost market valuations, they said.

.....

https://www.ft.com/content/b35e0516-765 ... cef9f7dea2

If a Bank needs fucking Tory Ministers to improve, "perception", they are truly fucked !

[dpedin]

Yeah; I can just imagine the kind of helpful, ideas, the Wankers will have to improve valuations, now that the UK isn't bound by any of the EU regulations.

Jeremy Hunt has called in Britain’s largest banks to discuss why they remain so poorly valued compared with global peers, as ministers seek feedback on how to help boost the sector and the competitiveness of the City of London.

The meeting arranged by the UK chancellor will be held on Tuesday and will include top executives from Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds, NatWest, Santander UK and the London Stock Exchange Group, according to three people with knowledge of the plans.

Franck Petitgas — the former London-based Morgan Stanley executive who was appointed as Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s business and investment adviser in April — will also attend the meeting, two of the people said.

Hunt and Petitgas will ask the executives how ministers can help them improve their perception among international and domestic investors and boost market valuations, they said.

.....

https://www.ft.com/content/b35e0516-765 ... cef9f7dea2

If a Bank needs fucking Tory Ministers to improve, "perception", they are truly fucked !

For 'perception' read impact of Brexit!!! I hope one of the bankers, I use that term advisedly, tells Hunt that this is the Brexit impact that they and everyone else with a brain was telling them was going to happen ... and now it is happening!

[SaintK]

Man of the people laughs in their face

[Slick]

I've seen this on a couple of social media feeds. To be honest I don't really get what the big deal is beyond him being incapable of talking to a serf