We should take some lessons from the Germans, who have managed to raise incomes in the East German Laander to levels above many English regions in little more than 20 years.
It required a combination of tax incentives, infrastructure spending, and direct subsidies from the center to local government.
Have they?
Whenever I read about East Germany it's to say they're still in the doldrums regardless of the fact money's been thrown at it for 30 years.
It's far easier to kill a golden goose than create one.
Mecklenburg, in East Germany, has a higher GDP per capita than North East England, and an unemployment rate below 5%. That was certainly not the case when Germany reunified.
What about the rest? Put it this way, would you rather live in Cottbus, Chemnitz (ex-Karl Marx Stadt) or Newcastle?
Check out the link. I don't think there's a single East German Laander that is poorer than the poorest parts of Britain.
Part of that, of course, is because people have left these areas, and moved to Berlin, Hamburg, etc. The fact that German housing is so much cheaper than British makes labour mobility much higher, which helps.
Laender.
Länder.
Is there’s a way of easily typing umlauts, accents or circumflexes on an iPad English language keyboard, I’d be delighted to hear it,
Google, copy, paste.
You and I have an different interpretation of “easy”.
Labour proposals for Lifee Peerages in the Dissolution List are
Bercow Watson Sue Hayman, the defeated Workington MP Katy Clark, North Ayrshire 2010-15 MP and then political secretary to Corbyn Karie Murphy, Corbyn's office director Tony Woodley, former general secretary of Unite the Union 2 SpAd to McDonnell
Labour proposals for Lifee Peerages in the Dissolution List are
Bercow Watson Sue Hayman, the defeated Workington MP Katy Clark, North Ayrshire 2010-15 MP and then political secretary to Corbyn Karie Murphy, Corbyn's office director Tony Woodley, former general secretary of Unite the Union 2 SpAd to McDonnell
Is there’s a way of easily typing umlauts, accents or circumflexes on an iPad English language keyboard, I’d be delighted to hear it,
Matt
In the Standard or Vanilla version, press and hold a letter key on the onscreen keyboard and the options pop up. Slide your finger to the one you want and release, eg for a I can get à ā ä æ å Á Ä etc
Tom Watson??? Really!! Has Operation Midland passed them by?
It’s irrelevant. Which political party was targeted? Watson is many things but ultimately a loyalist. Ex-MPs of a similar type also post here,
OK. Maybe I’m naive in expecting some probity in public life. But Watson played an important role in perpetrating gross injustices to innocent people and in the corrosion of the police’s role in investigating really serious charges.
NFW should he be rewarded with a peerage. We may as well give Sir Fred Goodwin a peerage and let him become a legislator.
FFS!!! Can’t we have some standards somewhere in public life. Just some. Please.
Rather than simply rewarding arse-licking loyalty no matter how dishonest and incompetent.
Honestly, I give up.
You've got a strong point.
Trouble is, look who the Tories have just put in the House of Lords and think how Labour are feeling right now. The view is that the Tories fought a much dirtier election campaign (e.g. the number of dishonest party-funded social media ads) and it worked. At my new CLP, there was a strong feeling that Labour should fight as dirty as the Tories in future.
Plus there is a need to heal, or at least plaster over, internal divisions. Corbyn failing to nominate Watson would not look good.
That's the state of our politics at the moment. Morals don't get a look-in. There's some fault for that in all parties, but Johnson and Cummings are more to blame than anyone else.
Until Labour learn to lose without crying conspiracy they will never win.
Complaining about the media and the Tories - which I assume is what you mean by crying conspiracy - is pretty irrelevant either way. What matters is whether Labour changes.
Docklands incentives and regeneration is the opposite of what is wanted. Docklands = scale benefits from expanding the City. What is wanted = creating lots of jobs in lots of places = the opposite of scale benefits. The discussion earlier about teleworking reminded me about the other side of the ICT revolution: the workers can be anywhere; but conversely, it's just as true that the workers can be in just one place.
Tom Watson??? Really!! Has Operation Midland passed them by?
It’s irrelevant. Which political party was targeted? Watson is many things but ultimately a loyalist. Ex-MPs of a similar type also post here,
OK. Maybe I’m naive in expecting some probity in public life. But Watson played an important role in perpetrating gross injustices to innocent people and in the corrosion of the police’s role in investigating really serious charges.
NFW should he be rewarded with a peerage. We may as well give Sir Fred Goodwin a peerage and let him become a legislator.
FFS!!! Can’t we have some standards somewhere in public life. Just some. Please.
Rather than simply rewarding arse-licking loyalty no matter how dishonest and incompetent.
Honestly, I give up.
You've got a strong point.
Trouble is, look who the Tories have just put in the House of Lords and think how Labour are feeling right now. The view is that the Tories fought a much dirtier election campaign (e.g. the number of dishonest party-funded social media ads) and it worked. At my new CLP, there was a strong feeling that Labour should fight as dirty as the Tories in future.
Plus there is a need to heal, or at least plaster over, internal divisions. Corbyn failing to nominate Watson would not look good.
That's the state of our politics at the moment. Morals don't get a look-in. There's some fault for that in all parties, but Johnson and Cummings are more to blame than anyone else.
Until Labour learn to lose without crying conspiracy they will never win.
Complaining about the media and the Tories - which I assume is what you mean by crying conspiracy - is pretty irrelevant either way. What matters is whether Labour changes.
Con Facebook ads didn’t win the election - their competence did.
Put another way. You build a train line from the BoE to the Docklands at the end of the 20th century and you can say safely that it is mainly benefiting new businesses. You build the same train line in town X out of 25, and it is largely or mainly benefiting existing commuters who drove or took a slower train. This is also the reason for the cost-benefit analysis skew - new people and new activity could already crowd into rail and road routes that aren't half as busy as the area north and west of London - they don't.
The Saj's utterances in the FT clearly suggest that the government is preparing the ground to blame business when the British economy is laid waste by Brexit. If, as I suspect, the government's key priority is protecting Boris's reputation, then the lad's at least doing his bit.
Tom Watson??? Really!! Has Operation Midland passed them by?
It’s irrelevant. Which political party was targeted? Watson is many things but ultimately a loyalist. Ex-MPs of a similar type also post here,
OK. Maybe I’m naive in expecting some probity in public life. But Watson played an important role in perpetrating gross injustices to innocent people and in the corrosion of the police’s role in investigating really serious charges.
NFW should he be rewarded with a peerage. We may as well give Sir Fred Goodwin a peerage and let him become a legislator.
FFS!!! Can’t we have some standards somewhere in public life. Just some. Please.
Rather than simply rewarding arse-licking loyalty no matter how dishonest and incompetent.
Honestly, I give up.
You've got a strong point.
Trouble is, look who the Tories have just put in the House of Lords and think how Labour are feeling right now. The view is that the Tories fought a much dirtier election campaign (e.g. the number of dishonest party-funded social media ads) and it worked. At my new CLP, there was a strong feeling that Labour should fight as dirty as the Tories in future.
Plus there is a need to heal, or at least plaster over, internal divisions. Corbyn failing to nominate Watson would not look good.
That's the state of our politics at the moment. Morals don't get a look-in. There's some fault for that in all parties, but Johnson and Cummings are more to blame than anyone else.
Until Labour learn to lose without crying conspiracy they will never win.
Complaining about the media and the Tories - which I assume is what you mean by crying conspiracy - is pretty irrelevant either way. What matters is whether Labour changes.
Why will they change though? Each likely winner has explained that the manifesto was near perfect? Or are they all liars?
What struck me was that following the Conservative leadership election and 6 months, 2 of the candidates were no longer in the party. The Labour candidates will remain in labour party until hell freezes over, regardless of their views on the leadership, loyalty triumphs over personal opinion every time.
Tom Watson??? Really!! Has Operation Midland passed them by?
It’s irrelevant. Which political party was targeted? Watson is many things but ultimately a loyalist. Ex-MPs of a similar type also post here,
OK. Maybe I’m naive in expecting some probity in public life. But Watson played an important role in perpetrating gross injustices to innocent people and in the corrosion of the police’s role in investigating really serious charges.
NFW should he be rewarded with a peerage. We may as well give Sir Fred Goodwin a peerage and let him become a legislator.
FFS!!! Can’t we have some standards somewhere in public life. Just some. Please.
Rather than simply rewarding arse-licking loyalty no matter how dishonest and incompetent.
Honestly, I give up.
You've got a strong point.
Trouble is, look who the Tories have just put in the House of Lords and think how Labour are feeling right now. The view is that the Tories fought a much dirtier election campaign (e.g. the number of dishonest party-funded social media ads) and it worked. At my new CLP, there was a strong feeling that Labour should fight as dirty as the Tories in future.
Plus there is a need to heal, or at least plaster over, internal divisions. Corbyn failing to nominate Watson would not look good.
That's the state of our politics at the moment. Morals don't get a look-in. There's some fault for that in all parties, but Johnson and Cummings are more to blame than anyone else.
Until Labour learn to lose without crying conspiracy they will never win.
Complaining about the media and the Tories - which I assume is what you mean by crying conspiracy - is pretty irrelevant either way. What matters is whether Labour changes.
Con Facebook ads didn’t win the election - their competence did.
First clause is correct (but people are still justified in complaining about them) - second clause is not.
We should take some lessons from the Germans, who have managed to raise incomes in the East German Laander to levels above many English regions in little more than 20 years.
It required a combination of tax incentives, infrastructure spending, and direct subsidies from the center to local government.
Have they?
Whenever I read about East Germany it's to say they're still in the doldrums regardless of the fact money's been thrown at it for 30 years.
It's far easier to kill a golden goose than create one.
Mecklenburg, in East Germany, has a higher GDP per capita than North East England, and an unemployment rate below 5%. That was certainly not the case when Germany reunified.
What about the rest? Put it this way, would you rather live in Cottbus, Chemnitz (ex-Karl Marx Stadt) or Newcastle?
Check out the link. I don't think there's a single East German Laander that is poorer than the poorest parts of Britain.
Part of that, of course, is because people have left these areas, and moved to Berlin, Hamburg, etc. The fact that German housing is so much cheaper than British makes labour mobility much higher, which helps.
One of the points made in the Newsnight package I linked in the first page is that it is difficult for nondescript towns to level up unless they are near successful cities. Most of East Germany is in striking distance of Berlin and Dresden and maybe Leipzig will also have halo effects.
Of course the pie can (and does) grow and therefore an economy is not a zero sum game. That is obvious. I'm not saying otherwise. I'm making a different point which is as follows -
To govern is to choose. What does this mean? It means that for every course of action which significantly benefits a group of people or a region there is a price. If there is no price for a course of action which significantly benefits a group of people or a region it will have been done already. It would have been - quite literally - a no brainer.
Now, are any of the big problems we grapple with no brainers? No. By definition they are not because if they were they would have been solved and would thus no longer be problems.
So in this case (our header) the problem is the lack of wealth and opportunity in the North. We agree it isn't a no brainer therefore the actions taken to address it will have a price. They must have a price. We've just proved this. It's not debatable. It's a QED. And the price is to damage the South. "Damage" in this case meaning that if the policies work the South will end up with a lesser share of the "pie" than if the policies had not been enacted. That is the price. What else can it be?
To think that we can significantly boost the North with no adverse impact on the South is like thinking we can have better public services and tax cuts, or that we can fund public spending from the "proceeds of growth" that the spending itself will generate, or that the way to discourage private schools is to "make state schools so good that nobody wants to use them".
These are all platitudes. They are duck-billed platitudes. And they are toxic because what they are really all about is avoiding tough decisions.
Greetings from Bermuda. The current state of the parties here is Progressive Labour Party 24 seats, One Bermuda Alliance 12 seats. Perhaps one or two Labour MPs could move here? The problem is that to buy a property as a non-Bermudan you have to spend at least 5 million dollars.
Labour proposals for Lifee Peerages in the Dissolution List are
Bercow Watson Sue Hayman, the defeated Workington MP Katy Clark, North Ayrshire 2010-15 MP and then political secretary to Corbyn Karie Murphy, Corbyn's office director Tony Woodley, former general secretary of Unite the Union 2 SpAd to McDonnell
We should take some lessons from the Germans, who have managed to raise incomes in the East German Laander to levels above many English regions in little more than 20 years.
It required a combination of tax incentives, infrastructure spending, and direct subsidies from the center to local government.
Have they?
Whenever I read about East Germany it's to say they're still in the doldrums regardless of the fact money's been thrown at it for 30 years.
It's far easier to kill a golden goose than create one.
Mecklenburg, in East Germany, has a higher GDP per capita than North East England, and an unemployment rate below 5%. That was certainly not the case when Germany reunified.
What about the rest? Put it this way, would you rather live in Cottbus, Chemnitz (ex-Karl Marx Stadt) or Newcastle?
Check out the link. I don't think there's a single East German Laander that is poorer than the poorest parts of Britain.
Part of that, of course, is because people have left these areas, and moved to Berlin, Hamburg, etc. The fact that German housing is so much cheaper than British makes labour mobility much higher, which helps.
Laender.
Länder.
Is there’s a way of easily typing umlauts, accents or circumflexes on an iPad English language keyboard, I’d be delighted to hear it,
Google, copy, paste.
You and I have an different interpretation of “easy”.
Some years ago I worked in Germany, and on my return memorised the codes for unlauted characters. E.g. hold ALT key down, make sure NUM LOCK is on, and type 0252 - et voilá, ü (and á is ALT+0225) And ALT+0223 = ß
Labour proposals for Lifee Peerages in the Dissolution List are
Bercow Watson Sue Hayman, the defeated Workington MP Katy Clark, North Ayrshire 2010-15 MP and then political secretary to Corbyn Karie Murphy, Corbyn's office director Tony Woodley, former general secretary of Unite the Union 2 SpAd to McDonnell
Hmmmm
Sue Hayman's a good choice - hope she gets back to the Shadow Cabinet.
Labour proposals for Lifee Peerages in the Dissolution List are
Bercow Watson Sue Hayman, the defeated Workington MP Katy Clark, North Ayrshire 2010-15 MP and then political secretary to Corbyn Karie Murphy, Corbyn's office director Tony Woodley, former general secretary of Unite the Union 2 SpAd to McDonnell
We should take some lessons from the Germans, who have managed to raise incomes in the East German Laander to levels above many English regions in little more than 20 years.
It required a combination of tax incentives, infrastructure spending, and direct subsidies from the center to local government.
Have they?
Whenever I read about East Germany it's to say they're still in the doldrums regardless of the fact money's been thrown at it for 30 years.
It's far easier to kill a golden goose than create one.
Mecklenburg, in East Germany, has a higher GDP per capita than North East England, and an unemployment rate below 5%. That was certainly not the case when Germany reunified.
What about the rest? Put it this way, would you rather live in Cottbus, Chemnitz (ex-Karl Marx Stadt) or Newcastle?
Check out the link. I don't think there's a single East German Laander that is poorer than the poorest parts of Britain.
Part of that, of course, is because people have left these areas, and moved to Berlin, Hamburg, etc. The fact that German housing is so much cheaper than British makes labour mobility much higher, which helps.
One of the points made in the Newsnight package I linked in the first page is that it is difficult for nondescript towns to level up unless they are near successful cities. Most of East Germany is in striking distance of Berlin and Dresden and maybe Leipzig will also have halo effects.
The Berlin-Hamburg line is good, and the Berlin-Leipzig-Dresden line has a lot going on. But the metro area of Leipzig is smaller than Leeds or Sheffield - so geography is not the explanation for poor-towns here. By the way, Leipzig is more halo-ey than Dresden. It got the new ICE line, and it has four or five college towns to its west.
Thanks for posting this. It really didn't make the case for devolution it was trying for (though admittedly it didn't have long to do it). It did put me off ever visiting Scunthorpe High Street though. Jeesh. Thanks 1960's.
Of course the pie can (and does) grow and therefore an economy is not a zero sum game. That is obvious. I'm not saying otherwise. I'm making a different point which is as follows -
To govern is to choose. What does this mean? It means that for every course of action which significantly benefits a group of people or a region there is a price. If there is no price for a course of action which significantly benefits a group of people or a region it will have been done already. It would have been - quite literally - a no brainer.
Now, are any of the big problems we grapple with no brainers? No. By definition they are not because if they were they would have been solved and would thus no longer be problems.
So in this case (our header) the problem is the lack of wealth and opportunity in the North. We agree it isn't a no brainer therefore the actions taken to address it will have a price. They must have a price. We've just proved this. It's not debatable. It's a QED. And the price is to damage the South. "Damage" in this case meaning that if the policies work the South will end up with a lesser share of the "pie" than if the policies had not been enacted. That is the price. What else can it be?
To think that we can significantly boost the North with no adverse impact on the South is like thinking we can have better public services and tax cuts, or that we can fund public spending from the "proceeds of growth" that the spending itself will generate, or that the way to discourage private schools is to "make state schools so good that nobody wants to use them".
These are all platitudes. They are duck-billed platitudes. And they are toxic because what they are really all about is avoiding tough decisions.
Rubbish. There is no limit to the size of the pie. If successful, the reinvigorated economies of the North would support London's economy with increased demand for banking, insurance, marketing and PR, etc.
London will not notice a small reduction in Government largesse. The regions on the other hand will benefit hugely.
"42% of voters say they believe Johnson is doing a better job as Prime Minister then they expected when he first took on the job. A third (33%) say he is performing badly, as expected, or worse than they expected. Further to this, two in five (39%) say their opinion of Johnson has become more positive since the general election."
Weird fishing expeditions in that poll. Where do you think Lisa Nandy was born? Does Jess Phillips remind you more of Winston Churchill or Nelson Mandela? Massive "other" responses, which I presume contains lots of don't knows.
Tom Watson??? Really!! Has Operation Midland passed them by?
It’s irrelevant. Which political party was targeted? Watson is many things but ultimately a loyalist. Ex-MPs of a similar type also post here,
OK. Maybe I’m naive in expecting some probity in public life. But Watson played an important role in perpetrating gross injustices to innocent people and in the corrosion of the police’s role in investigating really serious charges.
NFW should he be rewarded with a peerage. We may as well give Sir Fred Goodwin a peerage and let him become a legislator.
FFS!!! Can’t we have some standards somewhere in public life. Just some. Please.
Rather than simply rewarding arse-licking loyalty no matter how dishonest and incompetent.
Honestly, I give up.
You've got a strong point.
Trouble is, look who the Tories have just put in the House of Lords and think how Labour are feeling right now. The view is that the Tories fought a much dirtier election campaign (e.g. the number of dishonest party-funded social media ads) and it worked. At my new CLP, there was a strong feeling that Labour should fight as dirty as the Tories in future.
Plus there is a need to heal, or at least plaster over, internal divisions. Corbyn failing to nominate Watson would not look good.
That's the state of our politics at the moment. Morals don't get a look-in. There's some fault for that in all parties, but Johnson and Cummings are more to blame than anyone else.
I’m not making a party political point. In a week when we have learnt about the GMP’s failings and more about Rotherham and Midland, all of it scandalously disgraceful, I just despair that it is never the right time for any sort of morality or even basic competence. On and on it goes: they started it, we need to get our own back, it’s not fair, it’s our turn now etc.
I think I will vomit if I ever have to hear again from any of these useless, lying rotten gits, the phrase “lessons have been learnt”. Let’s be done with the lot of them, put the Mafia in charge and make Berlusconi President. It would be marginally more honest than this nauseating self-serving hypocrisy.
Don't worry - many of those involved will get their honours.
Since we can't prosecute members of the Upper 10,000, put all those involved on the suitable registers, so they will fail Enhanced CRB checks, or similar.
....or that the way to discourage private schools is to "make state schools so good that nobody wants to use them".
These are all platitudes. They are duck-billed platitudes. And they are toxic because what they are really all about is avoiding tough decisions.
When some of the Free Schools became so successful that they started pulling in middle class children who would have otherwise gone to private schools, the response from the Left was interesting - They were failing in being diverse enough, because the measure of diversity was free school meals. And that the good results were just middle class, heavily tutored children who would have succeeded anyway.
Greetings from Bermuda. The current state of the parties here is Progressive Labour Party 24 seats, One Bermuda Alliance 12 seats. Perhaps one or two Labour MPs could move here? The problem is that to buy a property as a non-Bermudan you have to spend at least 5 million dollars.
That's nothing: Since independence the only two parties to form the government of Barbados are the Democratic Labour Party and the Barbados Labour Party. It's been 26 years since anyone else even won a seat.
Labour have nominated Bercow for a peerage. Makes sense to make the alliance open after he has been working as a member of the Opposition for several years now.
Not exactly keeping with the idea of winning Labour Leavers back though. He was one of the ringleaders in changing the rules to overturn democracy.
Labour have nominated Bercow for a peerage. Makes sense to make the alliance open after he has been working as a member of the Opposition for several years now.
Not exactly keeping with the idea of winning Labour Leavers back though. He was one of the ringleaders in changing the rules to overturn democracy.
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
Labour have nominated Bercow for a peerage. Makes sense to make the alliance open after he has been working as a member of the Opposition for several years now.
Not exactly keeping with the idea of winning Labour Leavers back though. He was one of the ringleaders in changing the rules to overturn democracy.
Labour have nominated Bercow for a peerage. Makes sense to make the alliance open after he has been working as a member of the Opposition for several years now.
Not exactly keeping with the idea of winning Labour Leavers back though. He was one of the ringleaders in changing the rules to overturn democracy.
If Labour nominates him, is it as a Labour peer?
I wouldn't have thought so, given situations like a PM's resignation honours including Peers for parties other than the PM's, or like John Mann, who apparently sits as an unaffiliated Peer despite being elevated to be an adviser to a Tory government and still retaining membership of the Labour party.
Labour have nominated Bercow for a peerage. Makes sense to make the alliance open after he has been working as a member of the Opposition for several years now.
Not exactly keeping with the idea of winning Labour Leavers back though. He was one of the ringleaders in changing the rules to overturn democracy.
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
Remoaner negativity will have held back BJ's noble efforts to pull the north towards the sunny uplands, nailed on.
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
Hard to say. If people broke the habit of a lifetime to vote Conservative it is more significant an act than more casual floating voters, and it might be easier to retain such voters than it could be, or Boris deserves. It seems to me that with defectors - either of representatives, former party loyalists or just lifelong voters - there are varities of reactions to finally taking the plunge and voting for someone else. Some will swiftly have remorse about what they did, appalled they allowed frustration or anger to see them vote for a party they always thought was horrid, and quickly reverse course. Others will have become more mercenary with their vote, no longer voting out of habit but not bought into some new loyalism, and so if the new lot do not deliver will return home on a transactional basis. And others will feel a sense of relief at finally making a change that they had probably unconsciously been working toward for some time, feel it is right, and as part of their new sense of identity will be much much harder to shift away from their new choice, even if the new lot do not deliver much.
My guess is that quite a few of the areas taken by the Tories in December, being part of a longer term trend, will be fairly safe for the Tories even if they do not massively deliver. After all, they stayed Labour a long time despite not being delivered to. But it's not hopeless for Labour to take some back at least.
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
Dunno. Will Labour still be pushing Marxism and a general contempt for Britain next time?
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
Remoaner negativity will have held back BJ's noble efforts to pull the north towards the sunny uplands, nailed on.
Sure that will be one of the arguments that will be put forward, but how effective do you expect it to be?
Thanks for posting this. It really didn't make the case for devolution it was trying for (though admittedly it didn't have long to do it). It did put me off ever visiting Scunthorpe High Street though. Jeesh. Thanks 1960's.
The best way to invigorate areas is to get lots of young graduates staying there. Having an ugly town centre is an underrated barrier to this. Perhaps the billions thrown at the North could go towards town beatification? I have an American friend from Greenville, South Carolina who always talks about how his hometown was reinvigorated by a foresighted mayor relandscaping the riverfront
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
Remoaner negativity will have held back BJ's noble efforts to pull the north towards the sunny uplands, nailed on.
As ever, all the adverse effects of Brexit will be blamed on those who opposed it...
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
If Boris at least makes an effort to bridge the gap, it will be more than Labour has visibly delivered over recent decades of cheap talk.....
Of course, it is possible that the North advances with Boris's help, but London continues to move ahead even more rapdly. I suppose you will still see that as failure. Those Northern voters on the other hand might be rather more inclined to see it as progress.
Thanks for posting this. It really didn't make the case for devolution it was trying for (though admittedly it didn't have long to do it). It did put me off ever visiting Scunthorpe High Street though. Jeesh. Thanks 1960's.
The best way to invigorate areas is to get lots of young graduates staying there. Having an ugly town centre is an underrated barrier to this. Perhaps the billions thrown at the North could go towards town beatification? I have an American friend from Greenville, South Carolina who always talks about how his hometown was reinvigorated by a foresighted mayor relandscaping the riverfront
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
If Boris at least makes an effort to bridge the gap, it will be more than Labour has visibly delivered over recent decades of cheap talk.....
Of course, it is possible that the North advances with Boris's help, but London continues to move ahead even more rapdly. I suppose you will still see that as failure. Those Northern voters on the other hand might be rather more inclined to see it as progress.
Yes, what is missing from this thread is that at lase this Govt seems to be serious about making the regions more prosperous, and I for one support that. We have heard it before and all that seemed to happen was public sector jobs moved from London to the regions. They may fail and distort the market but at this stage I think they should be supported and encouraged.
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
Remoaner negativity will have held back BJ's noble efforts to pull the north towards the sunny uplands, nailed on.
Sure that will be one of the arguments that will be put forward, but how effective do you expect it to be?
I'm under the impression that Leavers gave up on caring about whether their arguments were persuasive to anyone else sometime ago.
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
Remoaner negativity will have held back BJ's noble efforts to pull the north towards the sunny uplands, nailed on.
As ever, all the adverse effects of Brexit will be blamed on those who opposed it...
If Brexit turns out to be crap, then yes, that is undoubtedly what will happen. The question is how many people believe that.
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
If Boris at least makes an effort to bridge the gap, it will be more than Labour has visibly delivered over recent decades of cheap talk.....
Of course, it is possible that the North advances with Boris's help, but London continues to move ahead even more rapdly. I suppose you will still see that as failure. Those Northern voters on the other hand might be rather more inclined to see it as progress.
More than likely Brexit will be another harrowing of the North, while the more knowledge based economy of London and other metropolitan areas is more immune.
But they knew what they were voting for, so shrug...
Yes, what is missing from this thread is that at lase this Govt seems to be serious about making the regions more prosperous, and I for one support that. We have heard it before and all that seemed to happen was public sector jobs moved from London to the regions. They may fail and distort the market but at this stage I think they should be supported and encouraged.
Surely all the governments of the last 40+ years have been "serious" about making the regions more prosperous. It was so easy, I'd have thought someone would have worked out how to do it by now (and if there's an answer, I don't think it involves leaving the EU)
Yes, what is missing from this thread is that at lase this Govt seems to be serious about making the regions more prosperous, and I for one support that. We have heard it before and all that seemed to happen was public sector jobs moved from London to the regions. They may fail and distort the market but at this stage I think they should be supported and encouraged.
Surely all the governments of the last 40+ years have been "serious" about making the regions more prosperous. It was so easy, I'd have thought someone would have worked out how to do it by now (and if there's an answer, I don't think it involves leaving the EU)
Well I do not think the May govt cared or had a plan, Cammo had the Northern Powerhouse (I have no clue what this is apart from a few Mayors) but it ignores the SW, Wales, Scotland, Midlands and the rest. Blair and Brown just moved Govt departments to the Scotland, Newcastle, NI.
Yes, what is missing from this thread is that at lase this Govt seems to be serious about making the regions more prosperous, and I for one support that. We have heard it before and all that seemed to happen was public sector jobs moved from London to the regions. They may fail and distort the market but at this stage I think they should be supported and encouraged.
Surely all the governments of the last 40+ years have been "serious" about making the regions more prosperous. It was so easy, I'd have thought someone would have worked out how to do it by now (and if there's an answer, I don't think it involves leaving the EU)
As @AlastairMeeks has pointed out in the header. It may be easier to injure successful areas like Brum was in 1960, than to develop the backward areas.
If course, as many have pointed out, it isn't a zero sum game. Indeed it could well be a negative sum game.
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
Remoaner negativity will have held back BJ's noble efforts to pull the north towards the sunny uplands, nailed on.
Sure that will be one of the arguments that will be put forward, but how effective do you expect it to be?
I'm under the impression that Leavers gave up on caring about whether their arguments were persuasive to anyone else sometime ago.
That's irrelevant as to whether others think leavers' arguments will be effective. It's no different than speculating on whether the standard GE arguments - its time for change, no time to rock the boat etc - next time will be effective.
Clearly investing in the North is a terrible idea - nothing to do with the fact that it's Boris doing it. Reminds me of the sudden disapproval of cohabitation from remainers here, with the fiery denunciations about him 'moving his latest trollop' into Downing Street. When it comes to Boris, anything he says or does is going to be wrong.
Yes, what is missing from this thread is that at lase this Govt seems to be serious about making the regions more prosperous, and I for one support that. We have heard it before and all that seemed to happen was public sector jobs moved from London to the regions. They may fail and distort the market but at this stage I think they should be supported and encouraged.
Surely all the governments of the last 40+ years have been "serious" about making the regions more prosperous. It was so easy, I'd have thought someone would have worked out how to do it by now
Quite so. All the manifestos had vague guff like that, and none of it more than aspiration that as you note is longstanding.
Clearly investing in the North is a terrible idea - nothing to do with the fact that it's Boris doing it. Reminds me of the sudden disapproval of cohabitation from remainers here, with the fiery denunciations about him 'moving his latest trollop' into Downing Street. When it comes to Boris, anything he says or does is going to be wrong.
Investing in the North is a good idea - much like Thatcher got Nissan to invest in Sunderland. A very good idea indeed.
A pity that the government is now doing something which risks undoing that successful investment. Still that is what people, especially in Sunderland, have voted for.
Now - how are successful companies going to be persuaded to repeat the exercise in the light of conditions today and in the years to come? Cars may very well not be the answer. Maybe digital connectivity is the way to go. Indeed, it may. But then there are all those pesky rules about data transfer and data sharing, issues which fall outside any FTA, and which may not even be covered in a bare bones deal with the EU, let alone in one with the US. So how are investors and companies supposed to plan and invest?
There may well be answers. It would be nice if the government would give some indication of what those might be.
Whenever I read about East Germany it's to say they're still in the doldrums regardless of the fact money's been thrown at it for 30 years.
It's far easier to kill a golden goose than create one.
Mecklenburg, in East Germany, has a higher GDP per capita than North East England, and an unemployment rate below 5%. That was certainly not the case when Germany reunified.
What about the rest? Put it this way, would you rather live in Cottbus, Chemnitz (ex-Karl Marx Stadt) or Newcastle?
Check out the link. I don't think there's a single East German Laander that is poorer than the poorest parts of Britain.
Part of that, of course, is because people have left these areas, and moved to Berlin, Hamburg, etc. The fact that German housing is so much cheaper than British makes labour mobility much higher, which helps.
Laender.
Länder.
Is there’s a way of easily typing umlauts, accents or circumflexes on an iPad English language keyboard, I’d be delighted to hear it,
Google, copy, paste.
You and I have an different interpretation of “easy”.
Some years ago I worked in Germany, and on my return memorised the codes for unlauted characters. E.g. hold ALT key down, make sure NUM LOCK is on, and type 0252 - et voilá, ü (and á is ALT+0225) And ALT+0223 = ß
On a Mac for common diacritical and other forms just hold down the letter key and a little popup appears and you can select the variant you want with the mouse or by hitting the number key associated with it in the popup.
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
If Boris at least makes an effort to bridge the gap, it will be more than Labour has visibly delivered over recent decades of cheap talk.....
Of course, it is possible that the North advances with Boris's help, but London continues to move ahead even more rapdly. I suppose you will still see that as failure. Those Northern voters on the other hand might be rather more inclined to see it as progress.
So an effort, and failure to level, is still reason to vote Conservative. As long as we're clear this regional policy is BS, that's fine.
It was a stupid idea when RLB proposed it and it is a stupid idea now.
It's a really good idea but if it happens I will be sad. York is one of those cities that I've always wanted to live in and if that happens prices will rise so fast I'll never be able to afford it...
It was a stupid idea when RLB proposed it and it is a stupid idea now.
It's a really good idea but if it happens I will be sad. York is one of those cities that I've always wanted to live in and if that happens prices will rise so fast I'll never be able to afford it...
It will have an endless parade of civil servants up and down the M1 as they are needed by both Houses of parliament. It is the equivalent of the EU Strasbourg boondoggle.
It was a stupid idea when RLB proposed it and it is a stupid idea now.
It's a really good idea but if it happens I will be sad. York is one of those cities that I've always wanted to live in and if that happens prices will rise so fast I'll never be able to afford it...
It will have an endless parade of civil servants up and down the M1 as they are needed by both Houses of parliament. It is the equivalent of the EU Strasbourg boondoggle.
I see your point, but the House of Lords and the House of Commons are effectively two separate institutions and there's no real need other than convenience for them to be in the same building. The civil servants that service them exclusively can move to York: it's a beautiful city and if they don't want the job I'll do it...
It was a stupid idea when RLB proposed it and it is a stupid idea now.
It's a really good idea but if it happens I will be sad. York is one of those cities that I've always wanted to live in and if that happens prices will rise so fast I'll never be able to afford it...
It will have an endless parade of civil servants up and down the M1 as they are needed by both Houses of parliament. It is the equivalent of the EU Strasbourg boondoggle.
I see your point, but the House of Lords and the House of Commons are effectively two separate institutions and there's no real need other than convenience for them to be in the same building. The civil servants that service them exclusively can move to York: it's a beautiful city and if they don't want the job I'll do it...
It shows Rebecca Long-Bailey has "won the argument".
If Boris were serious rather than vindictive, Birmingham might be easier for their Lordships to get to from around the country but perhaps that is the point.
Greetings from Bermuda. The current state of the parties here is Progressive Labour Party 24 seats, One Bermuda Alliance 12 seats. Perhaps one or two Labour MPs could move here? The problem is that to buy a property as a non-Bermudan you have to spend at least 5 million dollars.
The3 luvvies will love it - Toynbee on the next flight.
If the North is as poorly-off as today compared to London, will everyone accept BJ is a failure and not vote for him next time, or is it just cheap talk?
Remoaner negativity will have held back BJ's noble efforts to pull the north towards the sunny uplands, nailed on.
Sure that will be one of the arguments that will be put forward, but how effective do you expect it to be?
I'm under the impression that Leavers gave up on caring about whether their arguments were persuasive to anyone else sometime ago.
That loud bang everyone just heard was my irony meter exploding.
Is there going to be a Dissolution Honours List? Or was it just Nicky Morgan and Zac Goldsmith? Don't mind, but every so often somewhere someone burbles about i
It was a stupid idea when RLB proposed it and it is a stupid idea now.
And what if the House of Lords refuse to go?
They can’t. Parliament meets in the place where it is summoned by the Sovereign. London only became settled as that location in the seventeenth century. Previously it met in a wide variety of locations - in the fifteenth century it met in Coventry more often than it did in London.
But the reason it is a silly idea is because the Lords and the Commons have to be close together for certain practical reasons, e.g. the state opening of Parliament. So if he sends the Lords to York, he can’t prorogue, for ex...
Actually - even though it clearly comes out of Cummings’ small brain, maybe it isn’t such a silly idea.
Comments
Matt
In the Standard or Vanilla version, press and hold a letter key on the onscreen keyboard and the options pop up. Slide your finger to the one you want and release, eg for a I can get à ā ä æ å Á Ä etc
Thànks!
What struck me was that following the Conservative leadership election and 6 months, 2 of the candidates were no longer in the party. The Labour candidates will remain in labour party until hell freezes over, regardless of their views on the leadership, loyalty triumphs over personal opinion every time.
To govern is to choose. What does this mean? It means that for every course of action which significantly benefits a group of people or a region there is a price. If there is no price for a course of action which significantly benefits a group of people or a region it will have been done already. It would have been - quite literally - a no brainer.
Now, are any of the big problems we grapple with no brainers? No. By definition they are not because if they were they would have been solved and would thus no longer be problems.
So in this case (our header) the problem is the lack of wealth and opportunity in the North. We agree it isn't a no brainer therefore the actions taken to address it will have a price. They must have a price. We've just proved this. It's not debatable. It's a QED. And the price is to damage the South. "Damage" in this case meaning that if the policies work the South will end up with a lesser share of the "pie" than if the policies had not been enacted. That is the price. What else can it be?
To think that we can significantly boost the North with no adverse impact on the South is like thinking we can have better public services and tax cuts, or that we can fund public spending from the "proceeds of growth" that the spending itself will generate, or that the way to discourage private schools is to "make state schools so good that nobody wants to use them".
These are all platitudes. They are duck-billed platitudes. And they are toxic because what they are really all about is avoiding tough decisions.
🚨
Labour has nominated John Bercow, Tom Watson and Karie Murphy for peerages
All appear on Corbyn's eight-strong Dissolution Honours list, obtained by The Sunday Times. Vetting begins soon
Bercow was 1st Speaker not to enter the Lords upon resigning for 230 yrs (1/4)
Show this thread
(and á is ALT+0225)
And ALT+0223 = ß
CON: 47% (+2)
LAB: 30% (-3)
LDM: 9% (-3)
GRN: 4% (+1)
BXP: 3% (+1)
Via @OpiniumResearch, 15-17 Jan.
Changes w/ GE2019.
London will not notice a small reduction in Government largesse. The regions on the other hand will benefit hugely.
Since we can't prosecute members of the Upper 10,000, put all those involved on the suitable registers, so they will fail Enhanced CRB checks, or similar.
Not exactly keeping with the idea of winning Labour Leavers back though. He was one of the ringleaders in changing the rules to overturn democracy.
My guess is that quite a few of the areas taken by the Tories in December, being part of a longer term trend, will be fairly safe for the Tories even if they do not massively deliver. After all, they stayed Labour a long time despite not being delivered to. But it's not hopeless for Labour to take some back at least.
How are you all doing?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.greenvilleonline.com/amp/344009001
Of course, it is possible that the North advances with Boris's help, but London continues to move ahead even more rapdly. I suppose you will still see that as failure. Those Northern voters on the other hand might be rather more inclined to see it as progress.
But they knew what they were voting for, so shrug...
If course, as many have pointed out, it isn't a zero sum game. Indeed it could well be a negative sum game.
A pity that the government is now doing something which risks undoing that successful investment. Still that is what people, especially in Sunderland, have voted for.
Now - how are successful companies going to be persuaded to repeat the exercise in the light of conditions today and in the years to come? Cars may very well not be the answer. Maybe digital connectivity is the way to go. Indeed, it may. But then there are all those pesky rules about data transfer and data sharing, issues which fall outside any FTA, and which may not even be covered in a bare bones deal with the EU, let alone in one with the US. So how are investors and companies supposed to plan and invest?
There may well be answers. It would be nice if the government would give some indication of what those might be.
There hasn't been a decider yet in the tournament.
If Boris were serious rather than vindictive, Birmingham might be easier for their Lordships to get to from around the country but perhaps that is the point.
Opinium - Scotland
Con: 39
Lab: 9
LibD: 3
SNP: 45
Green: 3
Pity the base size is only 114.....
VI By EURef vote
Remain/Leave:
Con: 20 / 73
Lab: 48 / 11
LibD 18 / 2
OA (Among Own VI - Con on Johnson, Lab on Corbyn etc.))
Johnson: +7 (+88)
Corbyn: -40 (+16)
Sturgeon: -12 (+70)
Davey: -9 (+40)
Farage: -20 (+83)
Best PM
OA (among own VI)
Johnson: 41 (91)
Corbyn: 14 (49)
Cyberpunk 2077's been delayed too. So it and FFVII won't be going head to head after all. Suspect Square Enix are the one's most pleased by that.
Don't mind, but every so often somewhere someone burbles about i
But the reason it is a silly idea is because the Lords and the Commons have to be close together for certain practical reasons, e.g. the state opening of Parliament. So if he sends the Lords to York, he can’t prorogue, for ex...
Actually - even though it clearly comes out of Cummings’ small brain, maybe it isn’t such a silly idea.