[Boiler]

Sweet. I know a nasty little braggart on another forum who's both a Trumpshagger and Reform voter: I do so hope that's his council

[Youngian]

Intriguing...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2lvp9vk5ro

Labour has won a county council by-election, taking the seat back from Reform.

Julie Griffiths was elected to serve the Murton ward on Durham County Council on Thursday.

The by-election was called after former Reform member David Cumming stepped down last year due to work commitments. The turnout was 24.9%.

Griffiths got 1,004 votes, with Reform's Theo Bell coming in second on 786 votes, and Isaac Short of the Green Party third with 95 votes.

[mattomac]

Sorry I was on the move.

I should have posted what it was.

[Bones McCoy]

Sorry I was on the move.

I should have posted what it was.

Labour take council seat off Reform.
Have BBC politics declared a day of mourning yet?

[mattomac]

Mason’s probably too busy thinking of his next jibes for Starmer.

[Youngian]

Hardly any BNP and UKIP councillors were re-elected. Voters are surprisingly quick at spotting that you're a useless twat at council level. Especially if you drag them out at a by-election.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I'll take Labour winning an egg and spoon race in the current climate, let alone a by-election.

I see Reform have only done a small (1.99%) council tax rise. We'll see how that works out for them, though the Government have helped them out by changing the funding formula which is broadly progressive. I was ready to add this to the list of "things people cared about till Starmer did them" but perhaps there could be some positivity for the Government in this, especially if Reform burn out.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Hardly any BNP and UKIP councillors were re-elected. Voters are surprisingly quick at spotting that you're a useless twat at council level. Especially if you drag them out at a by-election.

I was thinking that Epping Forest Council (well basically the seats round Loughton/Debden) were an exception to this, because I recall them hanging about there for years. But it seems like they only ever retained one seat there (the leader's seat, in 2008). They were also lucky that there were no local elections there in 2005, where the higher turnout on a General Election day would have probably done for some of them.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Useless old Starmer, why didn't he have HMS Dragon there already? What does he think this is? The Hackney Lesbian Peace Club?

Perhaps Kemi and the media could use google. That's assuming that it's too much to expect the Leader of the Opposition and highly paid journos who sound off about Defence to read press releases from the Ministry of Defence. Because the answer isn't too hard to find.

UK Carrier Strike Group to deploy to North Atlantic to keep UK safe
UK will bolster regional security by deploying a Carrier Strike Group to the North Atlantic and High North

Operation Firecrest will involve thousands of personnel from all three services of the Armed Forces, demonstrating Britain’s ability to project force wherever it is needed and operate seamlessly within NATO. The Carrier Strike Group will exercise alongside NATO’s Standing Naval Maritime Group 1, itself being led by the UK, with HMS Dragon acting as the command ship of the NATO maritime group throughout 2026.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-c ... ep-uk-safe

Beth Rigby wanted Starmer to apologize for leaving the Cyprus base undefended, and I'm sure she's by no means the worst for this stuff. This isn't even armchair general stuff. We all opine on stuff we aren't qualified to, and it's possible that someone might in good faith reach the conclusion that HMS Dragon was better employed where it'll end up, Cyprus. I'm prepared to give people doing that a pass.

But what this is is pure political spite, directed against a Prime Minister who (per the poll released yesterday) seems to be acting pretty much in line with public opinion. And who inherited what everyone agrees were armed forces that aren't up to the threats we face.

[Abernathy]

Indeed. Rigby et al clearly want to give the false impression that Akrotiri will be completely undefended while they get that battleship ready. Yet more grist to the Starmer-trashing mill.

[The Weeping Angel]

What is Mahmood playing at?

[Boiler]

She's playing at being worse than Patel and Braverman?

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Reading the article, the word 'may' is again doing the heavy lifting the Guardian so often demands of it.

In exceptional circumstances, as a last resort, when someone being deported violently resists, restraints may be used...

Colour me amazed.

Guardian, meet sewer.

[The Weeping Angel]

This war is going to fuck up the economy.

[Youngian]

But good news for Putin's coffers. Let's hope gets bored next week and orders Nambia to be bombed instead.

[Boiler]

This war is going to fuck up the economy.

Sadly, we tie the cost of electricity generation to gas prices so yes, it'll certainly screw things up.

(Now, cue one regular Guardian BTL contributor saying we should all live the perfect 'green', no fossil fuels lifestyle he does, whilst another regular will moan about his green energy being subsidised by the poor...)

[Tubby Isaacs]

Reading the article, the word 'may' is again doing the heavy lifting the Guardian so often demands of it.

In exceptional circumstances, as a last resort, when someone being deported violently resists, restraints may be used...

Colour me amazed.

Guardian, meet sewer.

Almost certainly they’re used already when young people (under 18) resist or keep trying to run off.

[The Weeping Angel]

Strange article from Heather Stewart who is usually very fair. She is fair on the substance, but there's a bizarre subtext that Rachel Reeves could be sacked even though she's stabilized the public finances.

As Mujtaba Rahman of the consultancy Eurasia Group put it on Friday: “Like [Keir] Starmer, the chancellor is also fighting for her political life” – whether because the prime minister himself falls, or chooses to move his chancellor in a reset reshuffle.

What is the Eurasia Group? Why do I care what somebody from there says?

Yet each of Reeves’s moments in the spotlight since then has instead sparked drama and controversy. Within weeks of coming to power, she cut the winter fuel allowance for UK pensioners. Then there was the £25bn national insurance rise in her first budget; botched welfare cuts in last year’s spring statement – and a second stonking round of tax rises last November.

Many of these key decisions, made in the Treasury, have subsequently had to be reversed.

Well indeed. I don't want to get all Alan Partridge "what people forget about the Titanic" but this isn't a particularly balanced summary. I agree about political drama, and this does matter, I'm not saying it doesn't. But Heather is the economics editor. Couldn't we reasonably expect more economics here? A modest Keynesian stimulus has been applied and has kept the markets broadly on sign. It's hardly Kwasi Kwarteng or Black Wednesday stuff.

Andrew Wishart is from something called Berenberg. Not sure why we particularly need to hear from him, but he does in fairness make an economic point.

“We’ve all slated the national insurance tax hike but actually it’s doing the business of bringing in more revenue and closing the deficit,” Wishart says. “It was a curse, now it’s a blessing.”

Taxes in Bringing In Revenue Shock. More as we get it. Perhaps that was why hopeless-should-be-sacked-Reeves brought them in.

Anyway, back to typical Guardian territory.

Reeves announced in November that the watchdog would not formally assess her against her fiscal rules, leaving that task to the autumn budget – if she is still in post to announce it.

You just said the public finances are going better.

But as Labour MPs and No 10 strategists digest the results of Thursday’s byelection, it is unclear whether next week’s deliberately dull spring forecast will mark the beginning of the end of Reeves’s time in No 11, even if the nascent economic upturn continues.

Jesus, not again.

Saw this article on LabourList.

https://labourlist.org/2026/03/labour-e ... rs-rights/

In the run up to that general election, the leadership, and in particular the then Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves, was unapologetically pro-business, pushing for growth, and promising to get the United Kingdom working again. But since getting into power, we have reverted to the instincts of Labour governments of the past; a larger state, interventionist and following policies that damage business confidence.

In response, investment has left the country, growth has largely flatlined, and unemployment is on the rise. Confidence is in the economy has been shattered.

The problems really started with the Chancellor’s first Budget, which introduced two measures which effectively told private business to not bother hiring people.

The first was the increase in National Insurance contributions. This measure, only placed upon the private sector, made it harder and more expensive for private business to grow and recruit new employees

Secondly, increases in the National Minimum Wage began to price young people out of the jobs market, making it unaffordable for employers to give people that first taste of work, and we now have high youth unemployment.

[Tubby Isaacs]

There’s more truth to that than the idea they’re running some sort of hardline neoliberal economic policy.

It’s a risk. We’ll have to hope that it all settles down.