The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[sidcow]

Just now, blandy said:

I didn't - they're in there

Yeah, you caught me mid edit! 

[fightoffyour]

1 hour ago, StefanAVFC said:

I actually benefit from the pound losing value, back in 2016 I'd get 1 pound for every 6 zloty and I was earning 2100 zloty gross a month.

These days, I get 1 pound for every 4.90 and combining it with a significantly higher salary, I actually have pretty even financial standing with a good amount of people in the UK. 

Still furious about the whole shitshow though.

What do you need pounds for though?  I'm still earning in GBP and I'd quite like 6 zlotys for every 1!

[darrenm]

9 minutes ago, blandy said:

We can see already that both parties are analysing and targetting those voters. They need them. And those voters need the parties to address their circumstances. 

Just as point of observation, and I think it's more valid in this thread than anywhere else, if both parties are forever tied on 40/40, then Labour can never win. They'll need something truly groundbreaking to get enough people from entrenched positions while Scotland is all SNP. As we know, FPTP favours the Tories so they'll need to beat even Corbyn's record breaking English vote in 2017 to win. There's no path to power while trying to nibble at the edges of Tory voters.

[HanoiVillan]

15 minutes ago, blandy said:

I'm confident that both Labour and the tories know these seats and those voters are needed - hence all the "levelling up" stuff from Bunter, and the approach from Starmer that people are complaining/commenting about in this thread - too Brexity, or too slow to condemn this, or abstaining on that...

We can see already that both parties are analysing and targetting those voters. They need them. And those voters need the parties to address their circumstances. 

We are in complete agreement on the question of 'are these constituencies important' and 'will they be the focus of a lot of political messaging between now and 2024'. No argument whatsoever. I just don't agree that the Conservatives' majorities in those seats are built on the votes of voters who are so financially insecure that post-Brexit food price rises will create noticeable hardship.

[blandy]

11 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I just don't agree that the Conservatives' majorities in those seats are built on the votes of voters who are so financially insecure that post-Brexit food price rises will create noticeable hardship.

That's fine, because I haven't claimed that.

[HanoiVillan]

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

That's fine, because I haven't claimed that.

All I can suggest is that you should reread the post you initially responded to in this chain. My comment was about 'the worst off' suffering in the context of food price rises, and you responded that the government in fact need the votes of these people because of 'the red wall'. So you will see why I came to the conclusion I did.

Anyway, we should leave this here.

[blandy]

33 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

All I can suggest is that you should reread the post you initially responded to in this chain.

Gotcha. I mean it the other way round to your reading. You say the Government doesn't need the votes of the poor, [paraphrasing] - I counter that in the red wall seats which they won (poor seats, by and large) they do need poor people to vote for them. The tories had a big lead over Labour in C2DE voters nationwide (48% v 33%) and many of those particular Red wall seats are stacked full of struggling C2DE voters. (Skilled, Semi-skilled and unskilled manual workers, State pensioners, casual workers, the unemployed on state benefits...).

They don't need the votes of the poor in Richmond, or Henley on Thames etc., you're right and I agree - I wasn't meaning to imply they did (if I did)  - but they do in those new Red Wall marginals.

[OutByEaster?]

2 hours ago, darrenm said:

Just as point of observation, and I think it's more valid in this thread than anywhere else, if both parties are forever tied on 40/40, then Labour can never win. They'll need something truly groundbreaking to get enough people from entrenched positions while Scotland is all SNP. As we know, FPTP favours the Tories so they'll need to beat even Corbyn's record breaking English vote in 2017 to win. There's no path to power while trying to nibble at the edges of Tory voters.

I'd agree. I don't think Labour's best chance of winning lies in them persuading voters that they're the lesser of two evils - but the truly groundbreaking thing that might be the best chance of a Labour victory is the dislike of the nation for the incumbent - the leader who can most influence Labour's ability to win an election might well be Boris Johnson.

 

[sidcow]

Sooooo, Boris has extended the talks and there is a small uptick in the mood music. 

If his intention was to walk away with no deal regardless he's had the perfect opportunity to walk away with the mutually agreed deadline passing. 

I am now in the camp that he knows no deal is economic suicide so after playing his best poker face he's just going to cave in on what he needs to in order to get whatever deal we can and then hold it up as a victory he's masterminded. 

[chrisp65]

6 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Sooooo, Boris has extended the talks and there is a small uptick in the mood music. 

If his intention was to walk away with no deal regardless he's had the perfect opportunity to walk away with the mutually agreed deadline passing. 

I am now in the camp that he knows no deal is economic suicide so after playing his best poker face he's just going to cave in on what he needs to in order to get whatever deal we can and then hold it up as a victory he's masterminded. 

Ah, I can see what you’ve done here. You’ve presumed there’s some form of plan or strategy.

I think he’ll know what’s happening tomorrow morning, when he wakes up tomorrow morning. At that point, he won’t know what the plan is for the afternoon.

There will at some point, be a chance for an ‘off guard’ Churchillian photo from the official photographer and a chance to quickly ruffle his hair off camera, before he goes on camera.

 

[LondonLax]

7 hours ago, sidcow said:

Sooooo, Boris has extended the talks and there is a small uptick in the mood music. 

If his intention was to walk away with no deal regardless he's had the perfect opportunity to walk away with the mutually agreed deadline passing. 

I am now in the camp that he knows no deal is economic suicide so after playing his best poker face he's just going to cave in on what he needs to in order to get whatever deal we can and then hold it up as a victory he's masterminded. 

Yes if No Deal was the plan it would have happened by now. It’s obviously a bluffing tactic. 

[Xann]

4 hours ago, LondonLax said:

Yes if No Deal was the plan it would have happened by now. It’s obviously a bluffing tactic. 

Most likely scenario.

No Deal was the plan, and the Tory donors and disaster capitalists were ready to make stacks of lovely lolly from hard times for the general populace.

Then Covid came and they made an early windfall, what what.

Now they're looking at the Brexit dip and shitting themselves because the coffers are dry already.

Questions will be asked.

Quote

 

Millions of medical gowns bought for the NHS at the end of the first lockdown for £122m have never been used.

The gowns were ordered by the government from a supplier which had set up just a month earlier, and no other companies were asked to bid for the contract.

 

BBC - Yesterday

[Davkaus]

How and why have £122m of gowns not been used when we've seen hospitals being delivered repurposed bin bags to use as gowns over the last couple of months?

[Chindie]

And kink gear used instead of actual scrubs.

There needs to be one helluva enquiry into the 'bidding' processes this government has presided over.

Unfortunately there's bugger all chance there will be. Loot and pillage your country. Scum.

[chrisp65]

1 minute ago, Davkaus said:

How and why have £122m of gowns not been used when we've seen hospitals being delivered repurposed bin bags to use as gowns over the last couple of months?

Short version:

you can either supply the exact gown we’ve specified or something similar we will need to approve

they delivered something similar, there’s no capacity to test them and therefore they can’t be approved

In a smaller simpler world, you’d offer a dozen gowns, get them signed off and then deliver the other £121,999,950 worth once signed off. But hey, what do I know.

 

You’d have to look at the whole thing, for instance, who wrote the spec and did they understand what they’d written. There is a vast sea of opportunism going on here, companies are having money thrown at them to do the NHS admin and they don’t know what they are doing. It’s not always as obvious as the newly set up supplier, that could be relatively legit, as long as have a good idea the spec or the contract was a wrong un.

 

 

[Xann]

I'd look at who's making money in the supply chain?

[Mark Albrighton]

 

[fightoffyour]

3 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

Short version:

you can either supply the exact gown we’ve specified or something similar we will need to approve

they delivered something similar, there’s no capacity to test them and therefore they can’t be approved

In a smaller simpler world, you’d offer a dozen gowns, get them signed off and then deliver the other £121,999,950 worth once signed off. But hey, what do I know.

 

You’d have to look at the whole thing, for instance, who wrote the spec and did they understand what they’d written. There is a vast sea of opportunism going on here, companies are having money thrown at them to do the NHS admin and they don’t know what they are doing. It’s not always as obvious as the newly set up supplier, that could be relatively legit, as long as have a good idea the spec or the contract was a wrong un.

 

 

Or even more simply, the new company never had any gowns and never intended to supply anyway because no one will look into it.

[chrisp65]

1 minute ago, fightoffyour said:

Or even more simply, the new company never had any gowns and never intended to supply anyway because no one will look into it.

The gowns do exist, they are part of what has filled Felixstowe Port, just sat there for weeks clogging up space, causing mayhem for the just in time import / export trade.

 

[fightoffyour]

1 minute ago, chrisp65 said:

The gowns do exist, they are part of what has filled Felixstowe Port, just sat there for weeks clogging up space, causing mayhem for the just in time import / export trade.

 

Ah sorry. Well the above is even worse. Of course they could just be empty shipping containers  and that would be worse still.