Such a shame too.
Because I distinctly remember Johnson and Sunak being given a very fair crack of the whip on here.
4 Likes
Yep, this is the story UK wide with pretty much all UK infrastructure. Old, condition varies, well into itās service life and struggling with over utilisation.
What I was hoping for, (weāll never know) is that these contracts were so fundamentally flawed that they were effectively costing huge sums of money for bugger all work completed. Thatās been my experience with several outsourced contracts. It might mean a reset gives a little hint of momentum.
Not that it solves the problem. The maintenance liability will be massive and the capacity issue sits in a different box alongside.
When did he say that ?
LBC interview. Was widely shared
Then you have to look at the triple lock and pensions (says Mascot, approaching his 50th birthday)
The welfare bill is huge, but the vast majority of that is pensions. The public perception of welfare is still money handed out to āthieving dole scumā, but that is a tiny proportion of it.
The problem is that we are an aging population, with greater numbers of older people expecting more support from a shrinking number of younger, working people. While these are also people more likely to be opposed to people coming into the country to bolster the workforce. Someone make it make senseā¦.
2 Likes
Whatās unsustainable is breaching planetary limits.
The reason why we need to get to net zero at pace is because it is the only way to have an affordable and secure domestic energy industry. Extracting all the fossil fuels is a total red herring, because it is sold on the international markets and will do absolutely nothing to reduce bills or improve security. An economy based of fossil fuels is still going to be subject to international shocks, regardless of where the shit is dug up. And the āgreen levyā, which fossil fuel backed political parties criticise is a tiny part of your bill.
We need an aggressive programme of clean energy investment and improvements to energy efficiency. And if we do this quickly, thatās our business and industry that can export that technology and expertise. We wait for others, and weāll end up just having to pay some other country for it.
Also the āfaultā thing is peculiarly misguided and insular. Weāve been burning fossil fuels for 200 years. We fuelled a global empire on coal and oil. Do you still want to talk about blame?
3 Likes
Is this one of those jokes that people keep telling me I fail to understand?
5 Likes
So, it will be the King of the North then? Looking forward to it. Having had a bit of infos, Burnham seems an accountable and strong character. Heāll probably be less intimidated by the right wing media than Starmer, and as he will be voted in for it, will be able to implement more progressive actions than the latter. Itās just so stupid from Starmer to have lost so much time when he had all the majority he needed. He knew that heād get unpopular anyway, so why not do the things he was elected for? Now heās even more unpopular, and has to stand down quite miserably.
(In my opinion, he deserves to be sacked for being so abjectly pro-Israel, when in fact, a balanced and prudent position was required in that case. He, usually so cautious about everything, wasnāt cautious in that regard at all. He supported a plain genocide unfolding in front of his eyes, and thatās unforgiveable imo. Of course, itās not the reason why he has to pack his bags and leave 10 Downing Street, but still.)
3 Likes
Thatās just not who is is. He is a pragmatist at heart, but we are not a country that can do pragmatism.
Even āthe decent blokeā label is questionable.
I wonder when the last time there was a politician at NĀŗ10. Blair comes to mind 
.
Thereās been clowns, liers (often in the same suit). A lettuce and cowards.
Cameron was also labelled a decent bloke yet he was a coward.
May seemed quite practical but was no politician. Seemed to be better on the back benches than at NĀŗ10.
I just have the feeling the UK is ungovernable as the English just make it so.
1 Like
FIFY
Historically the UK has embraced fairly pragmatic leaders - Brown, Major, McMillan, Wilson, Attlee for instance.
I think this in itself indicated that his legal and moral judgement was messed up.
Heās not even a technocrat so effectively useless in any role.
Iāll assume you know home better than I do.
I find it very confusing with some of the people he chose to surround himself with. Mandelson and McSweeney for example.
3 Likes
It would appear he chose the wrong advisors, which isnāt very pragmatic.
I donāt see where this āpragmaticā characterisation comes from, honestly?
1 Like
This isnāt really true though. I commented on this when Labour won the election. He never really had the support of the left wing of the party closest to Corbyn. And the election win was built on cross party support voting for who would beat the Conservatives in that seat so despite winning the election with a sizeable majority, it wasnāt one he could count on in Parliament or to hold until the next election.
Itās worth remembering that immediately following the previous general election, the view was that Labour had little to no chance of winning the next one.
He has been trying to deliver promises set out in the manifesto but it takes time and requires funding which was difficult to get because of external factors pushing up borrowing costs. Those same external factors also contributed to the rise in living costs.
2 Likes
You can be a pragmatist, but still show conviction, and a clear line of thought. Adversities and opposing forces will come, but if you have a clear course, it will be easier to circumnavigate them, and thatās where pragmatism comes in handily. But here? I havenāt seen much decisiveness from him to be honest, nor clear ideas how to tackle the ongoing issues in your country (always speaking from distance of course, Iām aware that my perceptions arenāt complete by any means, but I still find the situation interesting).
Burnham will probably be a better communicator, at least I hope so. Surely, he also knows what pragmatism is, having been in charge of the Greater Manchester area for so long. The thing is how to communicate clear ideas towards the voters, so they note that there is real intent to change things. He seems well-equipped to make a better PM than Starmer in that regard.
1 Like
Maybe because he immediately set about expelling or distancing them. From the outset showed far more disdain for the left of his own party than he did for the right wing parties
2 Likes
Her expertise when she took the job was as good as any first time Chancellor. No MP is truly qualified for it.
She now has the experience of actually doing the job, and doing it competently, which should immediately elevate her above any other pretenders.
5 Likes
accidental quote
1 Like
Just something very light-hearted
https://x.com/CountBinface/status/2069056035940155803
2 Likes