Politics Chat.

SNP this morning demanding records of all communication between the speaker and labour on the issue, really seems like they care more about which team won and lost than that a motion for a ceasefire managed to be passed

seems like they care more about which team won and lost

My disappointment over the politicing on such a tragedy is slightly softened by the way this time round people seem to understand the SNP's motivations. As opposed to last time where everyone was jizzing all over them for being the good guys and berating Starmer for not ending the war.

Obviously I do have some sympathy for the SNP. Brexit has demonstrated what a ludicrous idea separation from the UK would be. Which is sort of the point of them. Labour are regaining ground. And the party as a whole has the whiff of corruption, reminiscent of a 90s Tory party.

They've got to do what they can to survive. Otherwise a career at GB News awaits.

and berating Starmer for not ending the war.

Whipping MPs so they couldn't vote for a ceasefire resolution was definitely the best path towards UK support for a ceasefire ... ?

Oh don't worry about all that procedural stuff, that's just politics init, it's in the past, we got there in the end. We're definitely the good ones now that we've added 'sustainable' and 'humanitarian' in front of 'ceasefire' to make ourselves feel better. And redefining 'ceasefire' — but only when other people use it — to mean 'surrender' is a masterclass in messaging to fuck with the lefties.

Does Stephen Flynn know the difference between intolerable and untenable?

SNP are more arsed about this than the state of scotlands services.

When delivered in full brogue, do the public care?

Survey of 2.5 folk. These surveys are a waste of time!

Can't tell if serious or not but that's more than big enough to produce a representative sample

The quality of UK journalists do help Galloway do his thing
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1763630021552283955?t=cjy7WlJ6gmOWhdB6S57jVQ&s=19

Has Speaker had another shocker or have I missed something relevant?

He didn't allow Diane Abbott to speak during PMQs. She wasn't on the list, but he has discretion to call people who aren't and she was trying to ask a question. It hasn't gone down too well with the opposition.

I thought he was required to get through the list of names first, then he can choose "bobbers".

They just ran out of time.

Frankly that's the sort of situation where the speaker SHOULD be saying fuck convention

He did that the other day and copped it. I can imagine he was going to stick to convention come what may for the foreseeable.

I totally agree with you, by the way.

thought he was required to get through the list of names first, then he can choose "bobbers".

I'm just repeating what the BBC said, could be wrong.

Local election looming and Labour are going all out to oust the Cons we currently have.
Main focus is to "bring back weekly refuse collections"
Really taking the bull by the horns, I hope Big Government take heed and focus their efforts into emptying our wheelie bins slightly more frequently.

(Note: paper & metal recycling is taken weekly, food waste weekly. Glass is fortnightly and "black bags" are fortnightly, wheelie bins provided for the rubbish)

No mention of affordability for this or any other policy, besides the bins. It's hilarious.

Eldest used to work in Northallerton for the council on the computer side of things, one of his jobs was sorting the online bin collecting timetable. He said a huge amount of time was spent on bins and generated vast numbers of complaints when it went wrong.

Angela Rayner calling Rishi Sunak a "pint size loser" at DPMQs and I'm not sure Oliver Dowden even responded. They've just given up.

Dowden strikes me as someone who takes minutes to process new responses so isn’t exactly great at witty responses. Plus I imagine he struggled to keep a straight face on that particular insult, it’s a zinger.

Tom Watson once got told to withdraw the statement "You’re a miserable pipsqueak of a man, Gove" so Speaker letting 'pint size loser' go is probably on the basis that it is fact-based?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68889345

For all the talk of the likely incumbent next government ditching socially progressive policies, this seems like a win all round for them? Those to the left see nationalisation of public service, for those worried about unfunded spending it’s just not renewing expired contracts and putting money that will need to be spent into running it ourselves, and for those to the right it’s actually just building on existing conservative plan.

And hopefully for those (including me) who take the train everyday it means things run more smoothly for less, and can convince others who might have driven instead.

Almost everything that matters about how railways work (or don't) is already under government control and has been for most of the post British Rail era - fares, timetables, train lengths, network upgrades, etc.

Trains in this country suck because in large part because it's government policy to make them expensive and extract the maximum amount of money from people who have no choice but to use them, rather than to run it all as a subsidised public service (which can ultimately be done by public or private operators - it doesn't matter).

"Just nationalise it" on its own achieves nothing.

Those to the left see nationalisation of public service

I'd change the premise that being pro nationalisation of utilities puts people on the left. I know these yougov stats highlight that only 40% of Tories are pro nationalisation, but I'd argue that 40% is not an "only" percentage number. It's almost half of the party that brought us the fetish of privatisation.