What do these retailers do with the subscribtion/standing charge?
Surely that should give them a whopping leeway, no?
Not sure I understand the point you are making, so apologies if the following doesnāt follow properly but the issue in the UK is that the energy cap is only marginally more than what energy providers where charging upto this autumn but the cost of energy is now 6-8 times as much so they canāt raise prices to cover the cost. Well run companies like bulb end up going bust because they canāt charge above the cap.
My understanding is that those charges are less than 2 monthsā billings, and were intended to be flowthrough charges approximating transmission & distribution network charges, plus costs of billing and meter reading/monitoring, while the energy tariff is a straight per energy unit charge. So by design, the standing charges are not any sort of buffer against a fundamental mispricing of energy.
This blew up at PMQās.
Should the police investigate?
Iām not entirely sure itāll turn up what youād want anywayā¦
No, theyād wiggle out of it somehow but Iād love for it to happen anyway. Just for the squirm factor.
Just a question, I never gotten down to asking this but Barbados have so called become a republic and no longer recognized the monarchy as head of state.
My question is other than just historical reasons, what benefits like financial etc do countries like Australia or NZ who recognize the monarchy? And would the UK or the people in these countries react badly if any country, ok I no longer want to recognize the monarchy. Would it cause an uproar? I understand UK was quite supportive of Barbados decision so wondering this if it is the same sentiments.
For me, it feels like a fraternal bond has weakened but I 100% support the democratic choices of all sovereign nations, whether that be self-determination to become independent or to choose their own head of state.
Monarchy, whilst undeniably anachronistic in a traditional sense, certainly has its benefits compared to, say, a US style republicanism. There are definite advantages to having an unelected politically-unaligned head of state. The UK Monarchy, of course, brings particular added standing for the UK both in the tourism income it generates and the respect with which The Queen is held both at home and abroad. How much that changes when sheās no longer with us will be interesting.
So for me (and the UK in general, I think) thereās no animosity whatsoever if countries no longer want to have The Queen as their head of state, or if they no longer want the Union Flag represented on their national flag etc. No problem at all, they can do what they want as independent countries.
Weāre still mates.
I dont think thereās any particular financial gain from it but listening to a radio programme the other day when this broke there were a number of people from Barbados that were glad that the country was able to shake off the coat tails of colonialism. They were saying that everything in Barbados is basically tilted towards being a remote version of the UK in many senses and this is an opportunity for them to build their own identity.
Also worth noting that most callers were not currently residing in Barbados and conceded that to most people living there this will make no difference to their daily lives whatsoever.
This could get awkward.
Cressida Dick stated earlier today that the Met Police cannot investigate parties at Downing St because no complaint was made 
Barry Gardiner MP has now written to the Met Police to ask them to investigate.
Worth noting that Cressida Dick was granted a 2 year extension to her contract from the current government.
Cressida Dick sounds like an STD
But can you clear it up with a cream?
In the particular case, there is also a massive psychological element that I donāt think is there in the same way with Canada/Australia/NZ, and that is the simple fact of slavery. The vast majority of Barbadians are descendants of slaves owned by British aristocracy. In a way that I cannot feel, this was the last step to independence for them.
very much which is why those that did not reside in Barbados were more excited by this step. They have seen the UK and relate that back to āhomeā and were therefore more inclined to support that step away.
Honest question here.
Is Johnson just lucky or does he really know what heās doing all the time. His ability to avoid scrutiny like water off a ducks back is uncanny.
Iām not sure I understand what went on. Did the High Court simply just decide that bullying was not expressly forbidden in the ministerial code? Otherwise, if itās not contested that her behaviour amounted to bullying, hasnāt she indeed broken the ministerial code?
Remind you of anyone?