mattiloy

In waist size maybe the little chode

Harsh to put the Starmer between Erdogan and Stoltenberg- Honey I shrunk the PM!

Fair dos. But I can tell you now that this wont change a thing. If this is the sum of their ambition, you can expect millions of gallons of sh*t still ending up in the waterways in 2029, bills higher, dividends still paid out. Water supply is a natural monopoly. Nationalise it.

Sure. Very good to signal devolvement of further powers to the regions, appointed a good guy to lead the big nhs review in lord darzi, good that hilary benn has talked up the uk govts neutrality on norirish constitutional matters as per GFA. But Steve Reed was always destined to be one of the least effective members of the government and so it goes. Water is one of the major issues of the day, and its amateur hour.

Watery shite. Nothing will change. Some innovative accountancy. Bonuses will become salary. Water companies will use the investment pot (if they dont just defer spending it until the next parliament) to pay related companies with the same directors, overcharge them and then pay them big fat dividends through that. Steve Reed is an antisemitic idiot.

You look at the voting record of almost any labour MP 2010-2024 and you’ll see that they vote against a net good tory policy because they prefer a net better solution (not least over brexit). Thats how opposition works and its healthy, many ideas that come to light from the opposition in the battleground of ideas in the commons end up being adopted later.

HS2 is a white elephant whose only conceivable purpose was to be to get MPs home quicker to their constituencies in the north on the weekend. The funding should have gone to regional high speed like liverpool to hull. Nuclear power is unnecessary in the uk. Its an island at the far end of the gulf stream. There will never be a day when tidal, solar and wind isnt sufficient if their is sufficient capacity. Not sure where you get that on wind farms. Theyre in their manifesto.

I disagree. The government should take decisions based on the lifetime value- including trying to quantify the nature value of the alternatives and the implied costs of financing- and then make the best decision. Not the one that gives them the best bang for the buck in a moment, or a 5 year term. A lot of the issues with the current state of uk public finances are a product of short term decision making. I understand that the political system disincentivises long term decision making, and that its difficult to quantify things like nature value. But they should always strive to make that decision: Lifetime value of alternative = present value of infrastructure + future value added from nature benefits - present value of cost (including maintenance, financing costs, opportunity cost of funds) Whichever is the greater should be the winner and they should show their workings and lets be honest about it.

Whats the issue? If you are a green MP and your choice is the destruction of a sizeable amount of green space to get electricity from A to B or to not do that, I think its fairly clear that you’d choose to not do that? It is clear that Labour are worried about the greens though, and that over the next 5 years they should expect to be given the Corbyn treatment.

Getting rid of Northern Ireland would save the treasury north of 10bil a year. Sinn Fein is now the largest party in both the westminster election and the assembly. If I’m Hilary Benn, I’m calling that border poll tomorrow.

How did this one fly under the radar? So along with half the NEC and a load of erstwhile political lobbyists and Alistair Campbell’s nephew we now also have Sue Grey’s son MP. Nice and representative. I wonder did Starmer just put a facebook status out saying ’anyone wanna be an MP?’

Share yes, but over half a million fewer votes in quantity. Which is astonishing really. What a mad system, the much maligned 2019 Corbyn, patron saint of losers, persuaded more individual voters to take their arse to the voting booth and cross an X than the all conquering Starmer.