Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[Busaholic]

I'm not especially convinced by that, he was happy to associate himself with Boris whilst Boris was popular but I wouldn't have said he shares any particular Boris traits as a politician or individual.

I think it's simply, as has been noted, that the issues around Teesworks, and elsewhere, are quite complex to fully understand, a lot of people value the amenity of a local airport he's seen as having "saved" (despite never using it), there are signs of money being spent on the area (Darlington and Middlesbrough station upgrades), the promise of more to come, the clear progress on clearing the steelworks site, the appearance of a new factory (to make wind turbine foundations), the supine nature of the local press who happily regurgitate puff pieces from his public relations staff without engaging critically with the content, and so on.

It's all quite thin as @DarloRich notes. But it isn't nothing and I can certainly see why he will do well enough, with a split vote, to win.

As someone who only knows the area at all from what I've read in Private Eye and one or two newspapers over the years, why has Labour chosen such an apparently uncharismatic candidate in Chris McEwan to fight T. Dan Houchen? Do they really not want to win the Mayoralty at this stage? That might just be the case, though, if a Tory win there and in the West Midlands stops a coup to replace Sunak before the General Election. Personally, I'd hope Labour aren't thinking in such cynical terms: with comparatively few council seats up for grabs, the Tories hanging on to those plum jobs would get all the publicity and I'm hearing that Sadiq Khan's majority in London may not be so great as previously thought. The General Election is Labour's to lose!

 

[birchesgreen]

I actually do think its good if Labour don't win everything tomorrow, if they did it could lure them into a false sense of security.

 

[YorkRailFan]

North Yorkshire Mayoral Voting Intention:

Skaith (LAB): 41%
Keane (CON): 27%
Cunliffe-Lister (LDM): 11%
Foster (GRN): 11%

https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1785420575449419928?t=6X28BbkezLYvoTbM1f5spw&s=19

This poll is putting Labour ahead of the Tories in York & North Yorkshire. That must be ringing alarm bells in Tory HQ with Sunak's seat being Richmond (Yorks) and North Yorkshire (excluding York which is a Labour safe seat) generally votes Tory.

 

[YorkRailFan]

It comes after the Home Office confirmed Rwanda had agreed to accept an initial cohort of 5,700 asylum seekers under the separate forced returns scheme.

The scheme - which the government argues will deter future migrants from crossing the English Channel in small boats - has been dogged by legal delays.

However, it is finally set to begin in the summer, after legislation to override a Supreme Court ruling entered into force earlier this month.

The Home Office has said 2,143 asylum seekers can immediately be located for detention in the run-up to their flights, as they are reporting to the department.

It has denied losing track of the remaining 3,557, who are subject to a range of different monitoring requirements.

Downing Street insisted on Tuesday it remained confident of their whereabouts, after the figures became public as part of a policy document.

However, a government source admitted it was possible some could abscond before they were detained.

First failed asylum seeker goes to Rwanda voluntarily - BBC News

The asylum seeker received £3,000 and went under a scheme separate to the forced returns scheme.

www.bbc.co.uk

Now they're getting desperate. How is this a deterrent if they're paying the migrants £3,000?

 

[Gloster]

First failed asylum seeker goes to Rwanda voluntarily - BBC News

The asylum seeker received £3,000 and went under a scheme separate to the forced returns scheme.

www.bbc.co.uk

Now they're getting desperate. How is this a deterrent if they're paying the migrants £3,000?

They have given up trying to solve the problem: they just want headlines in the Hate Mail and similar. Reduce it to ‘Rishi keeps his promise as asylum seekers get sent to Rwanda’, and they fool the gullible amongst the readership (i.e. all of them) into believing that they know how to solve everything.

 

[nw1]

As someone who only knows the area at all from what I've read in Private Eye and one or two newspapers over the years, why has Labour chosen such an apparently uncharismatic candidate in Chris McEwan to fight T. Dan Houchen? Do they really not want to win the Mayoralty at this stage? That might just be the case, though, if a Tory win there and in the West Midlands stops a coup to replace Sunak before the General Election. Personally, I'd hope Labour aren't thinking in such cynical terms: with comparatively few council seats up for grabs, the Tories hanging on to those plum jobs would get all the publicity and I'm hearing that Sadiq Khan's majority in London may not be so great as previously thought. The General Election is Labour's to lose!

I don't think Labour will lose the General Election, surely, not now?

The Angela Rayner controversy, for example, doesn't seem to have had much of an effect.

If Street wins the West Midlands that is presumably because he is regarded highly in that area: apparently he isn't even using "Tory" much in his advertising, as discussed here. I doubt a win for Street will translate to the Tories sweeping the West Midlands at the GE.

Houchen is harder to fathom but has been discussed above, and even he is apparently not using "Tory" in his branding.

The Mail and Express having headlines of "TORY VICTORY" on Friday just because these two keep their jobs is hardly likely to translate to a Tory win at the GE, I wouldn't have thought.

And if Khan has only a narrow majority this will presumably be first and foremost due to Labour voters switching to the Lib Dems or Greens, rather than a ringing endorsement of the Tory.

I actually do think its good if Labour don't win everything tomorrow, if they did it could lure them into a false sense of security.

It's probably for another thread, but how do people think the council elections will go tomorrow?

EDIT: now thread created: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/council-elections-2024.266926/

 

[DynamicSpirit]

First failed asylum seeker goes to Rwanda voluntarily - BBC News

The asylum seeker received £3,000 and went under a scheme separate to the forced returns scheme.

www.bbc.co.uk

Now they're getting desperate. How is this a deterrent if they're paying the migrants £3,000?

Yeah, that really makes no sense to me. If this person has had his/her application rejected, then you'd think the Government would simply deport him/her back to their own country. No need to pay them to go to Rwanda.

 

[JamesT]

Yeah, that really makes no sense to me. If this person has had his/her application rejected, then you'd think the Government would simply deport him/her back to their own country. No need to pay them to go to Rwanda.

As I understand it, you can be from a country where it isn't safe to return you to (e.g. Afghanistan), but you don't meet the criteria to be granted asylum.

 

[edwin_m]

First failed asylum seeker goes to Rwanda voluntarily - BBC News

The asylum seeker received £3,000 and went under a scheme separate to the forced returns scheme.

www.bbc.co.uk

Now they're getting desperate. How is this a deterrent if they're paying the migrants £3,000?

Nice down payment to the people smugglers to get them back to the UK.

 

[YorkRailFan]

On the topic of Andy Street, he has been endorsed by Boris Johnson, along with Ben Houchen.

Andy Street and Ben Houchen go into Thursday’s mayoral elections having run campaigns almost entirely separate from the Conservative party they represent.

But this week the respective high-profile Tory mayors for the West Midlands and Tees Valley have associated themselves with one senior Conservative whose endorsement they appear to relish: the former prime minister Boris Johnson.
Street has sent out a two-page letter to voters in the West Midlands in which Johnson lavishes him with praise and dismisses the Tories’ record in Westminster. Meanwhile, Lord Houchen’s supporters have promoted a video from the former prime minister appealing for voters in the Tees Valley to re-elect him.Both mayors are facing knife-edge votes. If they lose, Tory rebels are expected to mount another attempt to remove Rishi Sunak as prime minister.

Despite the importance of the mayoral results for Sunak, however, it is Johnson to whom both men have turned as the campaign reaches its final stage. In his endorsement of Street, Johnson writes: “Forget about the government. Forget about Westminster. This election is about the next four years in the West Midlands – and who you want in charge. If it were my vote I’d want the person with a record of getting stuff done. And that’s Andy Street.”

He adds: “So ask yourself, is kicking the Tories worth four years of a soft-on-crime high-spending bankruptcy-causing Labour mayor? You might not like everything the Conservatives have done. But you won’t like anything Labour would do.”The letter does not feature the Conservative logo, using the flag of the Black Country instead in its header.

In his video for Houchen, Johnson does not mention the Conservatives, instead keeping his message focused on the mayor himself. “He is a guy who does what he says he’s going to do,” Johnson says. “Mayor Houchen delivers.”The messages reinforce the central campaign message from both candidates that they are independent from the party they represent and distanced from the unpopular Tory government in Westminster. They also testify to Johnson’s continued popularity among voters the Conservatives normally struggle to reach, many of whom are telling pollsters they intend to vote Labour at the next general election.
Street said last month: “I am a proud Conservative but that is totally different to ‘do I agree with this Conservative government in everything it’s doing?’”

He told the Guardian on Wednesday: “I’ve had a wide range of support including from the prime minister, Boris Johnson, Theresa May and David Cameron. Boris has made it clear in his letter that this is an election about the West Midlands and the choice people have between continuing to support me or ending up with a Labour mayor.”

A Labour source said: “Rishi Sunak’s predecessor telling voters to forget about the government is a damning verdict on the prime minister’s leadership. Both Ben Houchen and Andy Street have distanced themselves from Rishi Sunak but seem very happy to put Boris Johnson’s name up in lights.

Andy Street and Ben Houchen turn to Boris Johnson in mayoral election run-in

Incumbents promote messages of support from ex-PM despite largely avoiding linking themselves with wider Tory party

www.theguardian.com

There goes Street's hope of not being associated with the Tories (I know Johnson isn't a MP anymore but he is still associated with the Tories by the public), same goes for Houchen.

 

[gg1]

On the topic of Andy Street, he has been endorsed by Boris Johnson, along with Ben Houchen.

Andy Street and Ben Houchen turn to Boris Johnson in mayoral election run-in

Incumbents promote messages of support from ex-PM despite largely avoiding linking themselves with wider Tory party

www.theguardian.com

There goes Street's hope of not being associated with the Tories (I know Johnson isn't a MP anymore but he is still associated with the Tories by the public), same goes for Houchen.

I received a very different hand delivered letter from his campaign team a couple of days ago which makes no mention of either Johnson, Brexit or Reform, no Black Country flag either despite the fact I live there.

Maybe he's taken inspiration from George Galloway and is producing different letters for different areas based on what he thinks the local electorate want to hear.

 

[YorkRailFan]

I received a very different hand delivered letter from his campaign team a couple of days ago which makes no mention of either Johnson, Brexit or Reform, no Black Country flag either despite the fact I live there.

Maybe he's taken inspiration from George Galloway and is producing different letters for different areas based on what he thinks the local electorate want to hear.

Johnson only endorsed Street and Houchen today though.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I received a very different hand delivered letter from his campaign team a couple of days ago which makes no mention of either Johnson, Brexit or Reform, no Black Country flag either despite the fact I live there.

Maybe he's taken inspiration from George Galloway and is producing different letters for different areas based on what he thinks the local electorate want to hear.

That wouldn't sound surprising. Especially not now parties have learned from Facebook the art of targetting different voters with different - and potentially even contradictory - messages. Personally I really do think something needs to be done about that. Something like some law that any literature parties print/post online needs to be registered and made available publicly to anyone - so that any voter can, if they wish, see every piece of campaign literature that a party produces for an election.

 

[takno]

That wouldn't sound surprising. Especially not now parties have learned from Facebook the art of targetting different voters with different - and potentially even contradictory - messages. Personally I really do think something needs to be done about that. Something like some law that any literature parties print/post online needs to be registered and made available publicly to anyone - so that any voter can, if they wish, see every piece of campaign literature that a party produces for an election.

The print editions are already subject to publishing and deposit library rules, but agreed that it would be better if there was an easy online repository where they could all be retrieved.

In terms of Facebook ads, I wonder if online advertisers should be required to provide a library of all ads they had featured in a given country, and to provide a link to the library from every advert. While that would be useful for political ads it might be even more useful in keeping companies honest

 

[SteveP29]

It does seem as if, ironically, there's an increasing argument to be made that the NHS is in fact undermanaged, that it may well need more managers rather than fewer and that clinicians would be able to deliver more efficient care if they had less administration and management to worry about it (because it was being done by administrators and managers)!

That being said I wouldn't just throw money at hiring more managers, it needs to be thought through a bit more than that but I do suspect that fixing the NHS might require more management. Perhaps controversially!

Cameron scrapping PCT's was a very foolhardy act.
Passing admin tasks onto receptionists, nurses and doctors only decreased the amount of time available to see to appointments.

 

[Enthusiast]

Cameron scrapping PCT's was a very foolhardy act.
Passing admin tasks onto receptionists, nurses and doctors only decreased the amount of time available to see to appointments.

Well my practice doesn't seem to put too heavy a burden on its nurses and doctors. Its "administration" team consists of the following:

Practice Manager (1)
Practice Operations Manager (1)
Reception Manager (1)
Reception Supervisor (1)
Receptionists/Administrators (6)
Scanner (1)
Secretary/Care Co-ordinator (2)
Clinical Coder (2)
Practice Medicines Co-ordinator (2)
Medical Records Administrator (2)

Those 19 assorted scribes and clerics support the following people involved in (potentially) healing the sick:

Advanced Nursing Practitioner (1)
Practice Nurse (2)
Clinical Pharmacist (1) (although there is no pharmacy)

And now the sharp end:

GP Partner (4)
Salaried GP (1)
GP Registrar (1)
Physicians Associate (1)

Of these seven, just one (a GP partner) works full time. From what I learned during a protracted discussion earlier this year (necessitated because Mrs E required medical attention for what transpired to be quite a serious problem and which our GP practice spectacularly failed to address) the hours worked by the six part time doctors equate to just under two Full Time Equivalents.

So we have nineteen people supporting the equivalent of three doctors, three nurses and a pharmacist. If those medics are over-burdened by administrative tasks when they have nineteen people to handle them, they seriously need to reconsider their business model.

 

[NeilCr]

In terms of clinical pharmacist our practice has one - also no pharmacy

I saw her a couple of weeks ago for my medication review. Must say it was a pleasant experience. Not rushed - we talked through all my meds - any reactions/did I understand what I was taking then for. She made one suggestion which was helpful and I gathered she could change/recommend medication too - within limits.

She also took my blood pressure and authorised a blood test

Chatting to her she said that she had taken over medication reviews from the GPs which opened up more appointments and that the change in approach had generally been welcomed by patients

That of course is just my practice but it, certainly, worked well for me. It was pretty easy to get an appointment with her and she had to follow up something with my GP (which she did)

 

[Enthusiast]

Apparently the clinical pharmacist in my surgery works only part time. Patients cannot book a direct appointment with him; a referral from one of the GPs is required.

 

[NeilCr]

Apparently the clinical pharmacist in my surgery works only part time. Patients cannot book a direct appointment with him; a referral from one of the GPs is required.

Suppose it just goes to show how different GP practices are around the country

She’s full time and I was offered a number of appointments

I’ve seen the job description. It’s a full one and part of her duties involve visiting care homes and patients in their homes

Seems like a good idea to me - here, anyway

 

[RT4038]

Well my practice doesn't seem to put too heavy a burden on its nurses and doctors. Its "administration" team consists of the following:

Practice Manager (1)
Practice Operations Manager (1)
Reception Manager (1)
Reception Supervisor (1)
Receptionists/Administrators (6)
Scanner (1)
Secretary/Care Co-ordinator (2)
Clinical Coder (2)
Practice Medicines Co-ordinator (2)
Medical Records Administrator (2)

Those 19 assorted scribes and clerics support the following people involved in (potentially) healing the sick:

Advanced Nursing Practitioner (1)
Practice Nurse (2)
Clinical Pharmacist (1) (although there is no pharmacy)

And now the sharp end:

GP Partner (4)
Salaried GP (1)
GP Registrar (1)
Physicians Associate (1)

Of these seven, just one (a GP partner) works full time. From what I learned during a protracted discussion earlier this year (necessitated because Mrs E required medical attention for what transpired to be quite a serious problem and which our GP practice spectacularly failed to address) the hours worked by the six part time doctors equate to just under two Full Time Equivalents.

So we have nineteen people supporting the equivalent of three doctors, three nurses and a pharmacist. If those medics are over-burdened by administrative tasks when they have nineteen people to handle them, they seriously need to reconsider their business model.

Are all those in the administration team full time? (as you are giving a GP full time equivalent figure). 8 full time in reception seems rather a lot, for instance?

 

[Enthusiast]

Are all those in the administration team full time? (as you are giving a GP full time equivalent figure). 8 full time in reception seems rather a lot, for instance?

I doubt it. It's quite a small office in the surgery and there's not room for that many all at once.

But there are nineteen people supporting eleven medics and I doubt the FTE ratio among them is lower than that of the GPs (3FTE from 7 bodies).

 

[ainsworth74]

Well my practice doesn't seem to put too heavy a burden on its nurses and doctors. Its "administration" team consists of the following:

Practice Manager (1)
Practice Operations Manager (1)
Reception Manager (1)
Reception Supervisor (1)
Receptionists/Administrators (6)
Scanner (1)
Secretary/Care Co-ordinator (2)
Clinical Coder (2)
Practice Medicines Co-ordinator (2)
Medical Records Administrator (2)

Those 19 assorted scribes and clerics support the following people involved in (potentially) healing the sick:

Advanced Nursing Practitioner (1)
Practice Nurse (2)
Clinical Pharmacist (1) (although there is no pharmacy)

And now the sharp end:

GP Partner (4)
Salaried GP (1)
GP Registrar (1)
Physicians Associate (1)

Of these seven, just one (a GP partner) works full time. From what I learned during a protracted discussion earlier this year (necessitated because Mrs E required medical attention for what transpired to be quite a serious problem and which our GP practice spectacularly failed to address) the hours worked by the six part time doctors equate to just under two Full Time Equivalents.

So we have nineteen people supporting the equivalent of three doctors, three nurses and a pharmacist. If those medics are over-burdened by administrative tasks when they have nineteen people to handle them, they seriously need to reconsider their business model.

Though that's a GP practice so a private matter for the surgery as the NHS have little direct control unlike say an NHS hospital which is more what I was driving at.

 

[Snow1964]

Looks like the Conservatives have got Transport Secretary Mark Harper on Laura Kuenssberg show this morning.

No doubt will be lots of nothing fluffy words about election results, and no positive policy.

 

[birchesgreen]

Looks like the Conservatives have got Transport Secretary Mark Harper on Laura Kuenssberg show this morning.

No doubt will be lots of nothing fluffy words about election results, and no positive policy.

I bet he'll say Labour didn't really win.

 

[D6130]

I bet he'll say Labour didn't really win.

Let's hope that after their inevitable defeat in the forthcoming general election, the loony right of the Tory party don't organise an armed storming of the Palace of Westminster!

 

[nw1]

Sunak appears to be (according to the Times, re-reported by the BBC radio bulletin) claiming that a hung parliament is one possibility following the relatively narrow lead for Labour in the local elections.

This of course forgets one thing. Many of the council seats were for Independents, who will not be significantly represented in the GE.

It seems to me that the Tory Party are in denial and are firing off in the wrong directions. Sunak is saying this, and Braverman is claiming they did badly because they were not right-wing enough. Few seem to be admitting that perhaps the Tories are too right wing and not concerned enough about people's real problems. You're also hearing them claim that they've got lots of exciting things to do in the next 5 months. Well they haven't done anything worthwhile in the past 4.5 years, why will they in the next 5 months?

Not sure if Andy Street has said anything yet, but I suspect he might be the voice of reason within the party. (Could he become a future party leader, I wonder - he seems to be a rare example of a relatively popular Tory).

Admittedly no-one would take a move back to the centre at this late stage seriously. Really what they ought to do is recognise they will lose, do nothing except call a GE ASAP (June 27th has a nice ring to it), and re-group, hopefully as something more centrist.

 

[jfollows]

Sunak appears to be (according to the Times, re-reported by the BBC) claiming that a hung parliament is one possibility following the relatively narrow lead for Labour in the local elections.

This of course forgets one thing. Many of the council seats were for Independents, who will not be significantly represented in the GE.

It seems to me that the Tory Party are in denial and are firing off in the wrong directions. Sunak is saying this, and Braverman is claiming they did badly because they were not right-wing enough. Few seem to be admitting that perhaps the Tories are too right wing and not concerned enough about people's real problems. You're also hearing them claim that they've got lots of exciting things to do in the next 5 months. Well they haven't done anything worthwhile in the past 4.5 years, why will they in the next 5 months?

Not sure if Andy Street has said anything yet, but I suspect he might be the voice of reason within the party. (Could he become a future party leader, I wonder - he seems to be a rare example of a relatively popular Tory).

Admittedly no-one would take a move back to the centre at this late stage seriously. Really what they ought to do is recognise they will lose, do nothing except call a GE ASAP (June 27th has a nice ring to it), and re-group, hopefully as something more centrist.

Yes, he's talking complete rubbish and I'm sure even he knows that - a fantasy "projection" by Sky based on partial local election results in which turnout is poor and people vote more for smaller parties, and the mistake Sky made was not to come up with the figure but to invent a figure for number of seats won "if people voted the same across the entire country, not including Scotland for which we invented something else". If they'd stuck to coming up with a figure without making this stupid projection then it'd have been fair enough.

Conservatives are going to lose and Labour will get a large majority, based on all the real polls and projections that have been done properly, rather than on this silly figure which should never have seen the light of day.

For example, Electoral Calculus currently predicts 472 Labour versus 85 Conservative (https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html).

 

[JamesT]

Yes, he's talking complete rubbish and I'm sure even he knows that - a fantasy "projection" by Sky based on partial local election results in which turnout is poor and people vote more for smaller parties, and the mistake Sky made was not to come up with the figure but to invent a figure for number of seats won "if people voted the same across the entire country, not including Scotland for which we invented something else". If they'd stuck to coming up with a figure without making this stupid projection then it'd have been fair enough.

Conservatives are going to lose and Labour will get a large majority, based on all the real polls and projections that have been done properly, rather than on this silly figure which should never have seen the light of day.

The projection Sky are using comes from a university professor who's been doing this for a while.

is the video of his segment for those that want to make up their own mind.
His main point is that at similar points of the election cycle, there were far larger gaps between the two when the following election resulted in a large parliamentary majority.
All the polls have to take into account differences between those they're polling and what an actual election result would be. Is there evidence that what he's basing it on is less accurate than those?

 

[ainsworth74]

It's even worse than just being a generous interpretation of the information available, a big risk for Labour is complacency, people not voting becuase "it's in the bag". By suggesting a hung parliament is possible that could well encourage Labour voters to turn out to make sure they win.

The only way it makes sense is if it's aimed at his own party to try and make sure the rebels remain dormant but suggesting it's not as bad as it is.

 

[Snow1964]

Sunak appears to be (according to the Times, re-reported by the BBC radio bulletin) claiming that a hung parliament is one possibility following the relatively narrow lead for Labour in the local elections.

Yes it appears Labour are not picking up enough votes (vote percentage) in areas they need to win. People may be fed up with current Government but that doesn't mean they will automatically vote Labour instead.

You only need few percent scattering votes between LibDem, Reform, and Greens etc and and it leaves Labour candidates in some marginals struggling to swing the seat to winning margin.