[Boiler]

At long last. Of course, it'll upset the Greens and the naive (but! but! the waste!)

[Youngian]

The nuclear power facility near the town of Leiston on the Suffolk coast is due to be up and running by the mid-2030s. It is expected to cost £20bn, with the government committing to £17.8bn in funding so far. https://news.sky.com/story/what-is-size ... l-13381498

And that's the opening cost. Electrcity storage technology and grid management will have advanced in the mid 30s enough to hopefully see the end of the moribund nuclear dream in sight. It's the least bad option among non renewable energy choices but that's not saying much.

[Tubby Isaacs]

We're losing quite a bit of nuclear capacity before this new facility comes on stream, even with Milliband having extended the life of some of our older power stations. This won't be particularly transformative, but it's necessary. And expensive.

[Youngian]

This is terrific news although why the Vagrancy Act has lingered on the statutes books for so long is a mystery. Probably due to a huge swathe of voters being mean spirited bastards.

Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said the Government is 'drawing a line under nearly two centuries of injustice' by abolishing the Vagrancy Act, which has been on the statute books since 1824. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/ ... 7n4oyH_xOQ

[Andy McDandy]

Convenience. If no obvious crime being committed, use the Vagrancy Act as a catch-all.

[The Weeping Angel]

[Boiler]

Highest-rated comment BTL on the Guardian today regarding Reeves' spending review:

Screenshot 2025-06-11 at 13-01-14.png (17.41 KiB) Viewed 1450 times

I'm sure Chris Mason will find out.

[Tubby Isaacs]

The Spending Review looks, well, brave. Not much money for day to day spending, but a lot more for investment. This is exactly the long terms people have said they want for ages, grow the economy. I bet it's not very popular at all.

The Guardian has an odd panel. One thinks that supply and demand with homes isn't a thing, another thinks it's austerity if it feels like it, and another thinks all this extra investment is "Treasury brain" (my understanding of that is that phrase is cutting investment to get headline numbers down).

[Malcolm Armsteen]

The Guardian has an odd panel.

Colour me amazed...

[Andy McDandy]

and another thinks all this extra investment is "Treasury brain"

I can't understand it. Must be bollocks.

Because, as we all know, there's nobody smarter than a newspaper pundit.

[Tubby Isaacs]

It’s “Reeves Brain” if anything. Strict rules for day to day spending, but much more freedom for capital investment. The rules predate Reeves being in the Treasury.

[The Weeping Angel]

[Tubby Isaacs]

Ha ha ha ha. It was fairly predictable Milliband would do OK because of the way fiscal rules work, Much more allowance for investment rather than day to day spending. Much easier to fund lots of solar farms than it is to put money into local councils.

Perhaps Jessica could hold some of these commentators to account. Next time she sees them by the coffee machine.

[The Weeping Angel]

It seems the welfare cuts will go ahead.

[Tubby Isaacs]

To no great surprise.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... chool-fees

High court dismisses challenges against adding VAT to UK private school fees

Julie Robinson, the chief executive of the Independent Schools Council (ISC), one of the claimants, said: “This is an unprecedented tax on education and it was right that its compatibility with human rights law was tested.

“The ISC is carefully considering the court’s judgment and next steps. Our focus remains on supporting schools, families and children. We will continue to work to ensure the government is held to account over the negative impact this tax on education is having across independent and state schools.”

Roughly translated- we've just wasted a load of our members' money, and will continue to pursue a dreadful PR strategy of silly exaggeration.

[The Weeping Angel]

Some small bit of good news.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c80k8v4043vo

Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall is making changes to her package of welfare reforms in an attempt to reassure Labour MPs who are considering rebelling against the plans.

Kendall has tried to soften the impact of planned benefits cuts worth £5bn a year by 2030 before MPs vote on the government's welfare changes.

The welfare reform bill will include proposals to make it harder for disabled people with less severe conditions to claim personal independence payment (Pip).

The BBC has been told anybody who loses Pip will receive the payment for a transitional period of 13 weeks, rather than the usual four weeks, before it is removed.

Carer's allowance will continue to be paid during the 13-week transition, but will be ended when Pip is taken away.

Benefits recipients with the most severe health conditions will not be reassessed and will receive extra income support through a universal credit payment.

A scheme to give disabled people a right to try employment without the risk of losing their benefits will also be introduced at the same time as the welfare reform bill.

[davidjay]

Without getting too Tory, there has to be some way of getting people on benefits, particularly disability, back to work. Just don't ask me how.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Without getting too Tory, there has to be some way of getting people on benefits, particularly disability, back to work. Just don't ask me how.

Support, education and training. An NHS that works, and decent mental health care. A growing economy.
Labour's on it.

[davidjay]

Without getting too Tory, there has to be some way of getting people on benefits, particularly disability, back to work. Just don't ask me how.

Support, education and training. An NHS that works, and decent mental health care. A growing economy.
Labour's on it.

I truly hope so. One thing that does give me hope is the belief that at last we've got a government who believe in long-term planning.

[Dalem Lake]

.

Without getting too Tory, there has to be some way of getting people on benefits, particularly disability, back to work. Just don't ask me how.

A big problem is employers. The facts are that if you've been out of work for a period of time your desirability to an employer drops, so if you've been out of work for years on health-related benefits you've got a real struggle to sell yourself. You can't rely on government training schemes because I've been on more of them than I've had hot dinners and let tell you they are utter dog shit and effectively just a vehicle to funnel some cash into the private sector "colleges" that run them.