Mailwatch(ed) Forum

No. It’s bollocks.

Thanks, could you elaborate on that a little bit?

Okay. Obsessed with winning the next election? Bollocks. If that were really the case, would the government be implementing unpopular policies on the means testing of the winter fuel allowance and the restrictions on welfare benefits ? If the next (general) election had been last Thursday, Labour would theoretically have lost to Farage. So the government clearly isn’t “obsessed” with the next election. There is a recognition that the totality of what Starmer needs to achieve will take more than a single term, so there must of necessity always be one eye on re-election, but that is true of any government. But it isn’t true of a government that is just 9 months old.

Thanks.

I'm not sure how true this is, but if it is a terrible idea.

More here.

I remember when the BBC came under the Home Office. I wonder if this will mean the BBC will be put under business, prior to its (inevitable) privatisation/conversion to a subscription model post-charter renewal? ITV and Channel 4 are also having struggles: https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... al-mergers

Won't this just be seen as tinkering at the edges though? Again, I don't see this cutting through to say, the disillusioned voters of Annfield Plain and Tanfield council ward (although given their new council representative...).

Outbreak of rabies in Portugal;

https://zelo-street.blogspot.com/2025/0 ... s.html?m=1

Ah, Tim Fenton, now there's someone we don't need to hear from.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Sun May 04, 2025 1:49 pm Ah, Tim Fenton, now there's someone we don't need to hear from.

His mate Anonymous can keep quiet as well.

On reflection, "Education and Culture" could work, with Broadcasting going in the Business department. I wish Universities were back there too, Bridget Philipson (sacked or unsacked) hasn't shown much interest in them. I think Peter Kyle might do better with them though. Seeing he became an MP in 2015, I don't get what "Blairite" has to do with anything. As he's been Science minister, that might be quite forward looking.

The downside is that Culture and Sport loses its dedicated voice in the Cabinet. That might not be very popular.

Boiler wrote: ↑Sun May 04, 2025 9:44 am I remember when the BBC came under the Home Office. I wonder if this will mean the BBC will be put under business, prior to its (inevitable) privatisation/conversion to a subscription model post-charter renewal? ITV and Channel 4 are also having struggles: https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... al-mergers

Won't this just be seen as tinkering at the edges though? Again, I don't see this cutting through to say, the disillusioned voters of Annfield Plain and Tanfield council ward (although given their new council representative...).

More likely Broadcasting goes to the Business department, I think. Would be like when Vince Cable had first say on the Sky takeover.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Sun May 04, 2025 2:49 pm More likely Broadcasting goes to the Business department, I think. Would be like when Vince Cable had first say on the Sky takeover.

Which is what I said.

Ah, sorry, indeed you did. I must have given up reading after the first sentence.

davidjay wrote: ↑Sun May 04, 2025 2:00 pm

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Sun May 04, 2025 1:49 pm Ah, Tim Fenton, now there's someone we don't need to hear from.

His mate Anonymous can keep quiet as well.

I still think that his pet Tankie is Fenton himself. Similar drag 'n' drop phrases.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Sun May 04, 2025 2:38 pm On reflection, "Education and Culture" could work, with Broadcasting going in the Business department. I wish Universities were back there too, Bridget Philipson (sacked or unsacked) hasn't shown much interest in them. I think Peter Kyle might do better with them though. Seeing he became an MP in 2015, I don't get what "Blairite" has to do with anything. As he's been Science minister, that might be quite forward looking.

The downside is that Culture and Sport loses its dedicated voice in the Cabinet. That might not be very popular.

It feels harsh because it seems to be she's being forced out because a load of Times and Telegraph journalists want her gone because of school fees and she cancelled Latin.

Maybe they should hire Stephen Bush as a policy advisor, he seems to have all the answers, or at least he thinks he does.

J O’B was waffling on about Carol Vorderman apparently predicting that Peter Kyle would be the next Labour Leader after Starmer. I predicted during the darkness of the Corbyn digression that Bridget Phillipson would lead the party one day. I still think she will.

I'm baffled as to why this government and the Tory one before think there is anger out there about foreigners coming over here to pay for a higher education.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Sun May 04, 2025 4:59 pm Maybe they should hire Stephen Bush as a policy advisor, he seems to have all the answers, or at least he thinks he does.

Does he know that Australian Labour already conceded a lot of the Kipper stuff on refugees?

That doesn't look like a "blitz" so much as one policy announcement that's been scheduled for a while. I'm trying to understand the issue, but seems like these visas allow people to work for two years after graduating without a job offer. Is changing that to saying they need to find a sponsor within a certain period or have to earn a certain amount going to make that much difference?

But I can see why the universities wouldn't like it. I think this is where they'd be better off being back under Business, seeing the argument for universities (as in that article) tends to be put in terms of business.