[Tubby Isaacs]

We're doing very well on Net Zero and Reeves has provided it with lots of investment. I'm not sure that a cut there is particularly bad. Apart from the politics who'll talk like Starmer's basically the same as Farage, Transport hasn't had the same investment, and cutting that would be bad.

[Oboogie]

Trivial I know, but <a> I'd be happier if it was just "British Railways" (none of this Johnson-style boosterism) and <b> the chosen livery didn't look like a GB News strap/lower third...

From Wiki:
The term Great Britain was first used officially in 1474, in the instrument drawing up the proposal for a marriage between Cecily, daughter of Edward IV of England, and James, son of James III of Scotland, which described it as "this Nobill Isle, callit Gret Britanee".

"Great" in this sense means "large" rather than "very good".

I see no mention of Boris Johnson or "boosterism".

[Tubby Isaacs]

In astonishing news, the Guardian (Heather Stewart, one of the good ones) has an article suggesting Rachel Reeves is actually OK.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ing-uk-plc

Comments are a mixed bag, but there's very little interest in actual policy on eg devolution. There's actually quite a bit happening, at least in the areas with metro mayors.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org. ... ion-mayors

Can we have more Heather Stewart and less Owen Jones, Aditya Chakraborty and Andy Beckett please?

[Tubby Isaacs]

There's a valid criticism of the over reliance on metro mayors. I'm in an area that doesn't have one. Even though the council is pretty efficient (luckily elected before Reform were properly a thing), it's a fairly rural unitary. In terms of economic development, I'm not sure what it could do. We're party of the West Midlands for statistics, and have a handy train line to Birmingham, but we don't really fit. From where I'm standing, concentrating on bigger conurbations is a reasonable priority.