[The Weeping Angel]

[Tubby Isaacs]

It's mainly about the 10 pledges.

Yeah, all made before the £350bn hit to the economy.

[Oboogie]

I hope that proves to be accurate, it would dodge Starmer having to sack him, something he is clearly loathe to do.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Andrea Egan has been head of Unison for 5 minutes, elected on a tiny turnout. She’s already calling for the resignation of the PM, who extended trade union rights and settled a load of public sector strikes.

This right here is why Labour raises money from businessmen. Lots of unions are in political terms a joke. I’m tempted to support state funding and force unions to concentrate on their core function relevant to the workplace, which is what they are good at.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Among the things Egan has kicked off at is holding Andy Burnham to his promise to serve at least something approximating to a term as Mayor of Manchester.

She’s also very exercised by Farage, who is on about 25% in credible polls. Farage might be on less than that if some people didn’t act like Starmer was basically Atilla the Hun himself.

[Tubby Isaacs]

North of England 2040? Andy Burnham backs plan for multi-city Olympics bid
Northern leaders urge government to support proposal as Manchester mayor says a London bid ‘wouldn’t be right’

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... ympics-bid

I'm confused. I thought that the London Olympics were over budget, had no sporting legacy and achieved mostly bad regeneration (ie gentrification). Now we're told that the Olympics was brilliant and the Government's got to cough up for a load more venues that will struggle to find a sustainable long term future?

I get that Burnham and the other mayors have to go after any investment that they can get, but there's got to be a better idea than this.

[The Weeping Angel]

[mattomac]

All week it’s been about whether Starmer would resign with the occasional update on the Mandelson situation.

Maybe that’s the issue.

[Youngian]

A few months back the hacks were writing Kemi's obituary but now has made a Lazarus like comeback based about three good performances. But her personal ratings haven't moved and Tory poll numbers have even declined.
Is it just me or is a British PM threatening to use military force against a US president's invasion plans and who then backs down a pretty fucking exciting news story? It was almost a footnote. All a bit too complex for the gossiping courtiers of Her Majesty's press.
Looked up the last time a POTUS threatened military action against Britain and its was Trump's tariff loving hero Grover Cleveland in 1896. And get this, it was in support of a Venezuelan border dispute with neighbouring British Guiana.

[Tubby Isaacs]

What "zillionth breakfast club press release"? The media haven't shown any interest in any of this stuff. I thought initially they were a fairly underwhelming response to child poverty, but we've had the extra free school dinners and the scrapping of the 2 child cap. That all adds up to quite a bit, and deserves serious attention. It's more than was in eg the 2017 Manifesto, isn't it? A few people blame Labour comms or Morgan McSweeney or whoever for this, but there's a responsibility for them too. Starmer may be naive to think that they're going to start reporting it now, but he's got a general point.

[Tubby Isaacs]

From one of the better Guardian BTLers.

It's worth people reading the media of those who might be against their ideals. For this reason I read the number 1 news-outlet for oil lobbyists. Here is their latest article on the UK and from their perspective it's far from flattering.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-Gene ... -Grid.html

They are angry that the UK:

plans to sharply expand wind capacity and employment while leading a multinational push to build a shared offshore power network in the North Sea.

They find it surprising:

Despite criticism from the U.S., Britain’s government sees wind power as a cheaper, more secure alternative to fossil fuels and a magnet for private investment.

They continue to ask about how Trump's influence wasn't so brilliant:

But Trump’s opinion does not seem to have had an impact on the U.K. Labour government’s plans for renewable energy expansion. In addition to the 10-state deal, the U.K. also plans to develop cross-border, offshore electricity projects with Germany, Belgium, Denmark, and the Netherlands using cost-sharing schemes.

However they acknowledge that the UK's managed to act successfully in their intent:

The U.K. also recently held a record-breaking offshore wind auction, supporting the creation of 7,000 skilled jobs and driving $30.1 billion in private sector investment for the U.K.’s factories and ports. The 8.4 GW wind project pipeline of eight new offshore farms is expected to be enough to power 12 million homes. The projects include standard windfarms, with turbines fixed to the seafloor, as well as innovative floating windfarms, which could allow the U.K. to develop projects in deeper areas of the North Sea.

In the real world the UK is seen as uniting European countries in effects to create strategic autonomy from the US which long term will provide us but security in terms of military and energy. We are seen by oil lobbyists as one of the more effective nations in pivoting ourselves away from dependence on the resource their careers rely upon. What's more the UK is seen as being currently effective at doing this with little to no ability for them to force us to change course.

Would you hear this in our media? No. Do the general public have any sense of this? No. The question is why? Why is there such a coordinated attempt to create political instability in the UK ongoing now for years at the precise moment we've elected a government materially challenging the global carbon-based economy?

Are we sure that the projects we love being overseen by Miliband's department are safe with any replacement leader? For some reasons Starmer and Reeves have provided colossal support for Miliband's approaches despite the media bombardment. It's not clear that a replacement would do this? It's also clear that by this time next year Miliband's main objectives will be complete so those opposed to these changes have little time to act.

[Tubby Isaacs]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/clea ... ers-rights

Clean energy funding to be tied to stronger workers’ rights
Offshore wind firms must sign up to a ‘Fair Work Charter’ to participate in government renewables auctions.

Praise there from familiar rightwing sycophants like... Eddie Dempsey, who to his credit endorses the policy as meeting his union's objectives.

Unison's Head of Energy is positive. Unison's General Secretary was likely too busy trying to get rid of the Prime Minister, and thought that might be impeded if she personally acknowledged some good work.

It's often said that it's the fault of Government Comms or whatever that nobody knows about this stuff. And to a point, it probably is. But it's also clear that a lot of people have a vested interest in not even acknowledging it. They'd be calling this the biggest piece of genius since Isaac Newton if Jez was doing it in Government.

[The Weeping Angel]

Considering how McSweeney was supposed to be all powerful he somehow never managed to sack Milliband.

[The Weeping Angel]

More from Peter Geoghegan on the Josh Simons situation.



Geoghegan's central thesis that this was done to stop Starmer's rise due to dark money is fanciful.

[Yug]

What "zillionth breakfast club press release"?

This is an admission of guilt. It confirms that the government have been telling the news media what's going on and they (the media) have chosen not to inform their readers, preferring to shit-stir and play stupid fucking games instead.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Nor could McSweeney change the policy. We hear a lot about "corporate donors", and the Labour Right always makes some unwise associations, but if you started from policy and worked backwards to guess to was "really running the government", you might conclude that green energy providers were high on the list of sinister tentacles, and that "Wes Streeting's private health donors" weren't that important at all.

"Morgan McSweeney" can't really claim from poll ratings that he was doing a great job, but lots of people just used him as a hook on which to hang everything they didn't like (or misunderstood, in some cases). And stuff you do like wasn't anything to do with McSweeney, but only happened because people like you "forced them to act, belatedly".

[Tubby Isaacs]

UK expands Hong Kong visa scheme in wake of Jimmy Lai’s prison sentence
Exclusive: Home Office ruling means thousands more Hongkongers will be eligible to come to the UK over next five years

More of that out Reforming-Reform.

And of course, I get that the Government doubtless likes Hong Kongers more than single men who arrive on boats. But there's also the point that this is an area where we have a much more direct responsibility. Ukraine too was a war where we have immediate interests (despite the attempts of some to write it off as a faraway country). So there's a position there that's not entirely disreputable for those who choose to see it.