Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[sor]

Roughly speaking, this is what used to happen. When the geographical areas of police constabularies coincided with local authority boundaries it worked quite well. Over time, that one to one match has been lost with the piecemeal creation of unitary authorities. This resulted in committees with representatives of multiple authorities, giving unclear lines of accountability for the police precepts on council tax bills.

though even before the rise of unitaries you'd still have discontinuties, eg Devon and Cornwall Police being accountable to two county councils (before Plymouth and Torbay split off). Then there's the weirdness where some PCCs are also responsible for the local fire brigade too.

That said, very little about English local governance makes sense, it's all just layer upon layer of bodgery and arbitrary decision making (nothing says that more than the whole "city status" nonsense) - but that's for another thread.

 

[jfollows]

Cheshire is one area for police but now (sadly & wrongly & I voted against it) two separate councils.

 

[nw1]

Steve Tuckwell has started a petition to open a new fish and chip shop in his Uxbridge and South Ruislip constituency, after voting against one in 2019. At this point, I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Who does he think he's going to hand the petition to?

Tory MP who started petition for local fish and chip shop voted against one in 2019

Steve Tuckwell wants to see a local fish and chip shop in his constituency

www.standard.co.uk

Ah, but it'll be Tuckwell's Chippy, a subsidiary of Sunak Enterprises plc, so it'll definitely be OK.

 

[najaB]

How would this board be made up? What advantages do you see having a committee doing it over a single person? (All of whom would presumably expect to be paid or at least get expenses)

Why not an x-person board, chosen according to vote share in local elections plus y independent people?

I suspect expenses for, say, twelve people meeting once a month will be significantly less than a full-time PCC salary.

 

[Silenos]

The police shouldn’t be political, but why shouldn’t those overseeing it? That’s what we elect politicians to do! They set priorities, hopefully with some regard to public opinion expressed through the ballot box.

That oversight already takes place at a national level, by the Home Secretary and more broadly by the relevant Parliamentary committees. What benefit is then gained from additional political oversight at an intermediate (regional or county) level that would outweigh the suspicion of opportunities for political interference?

 

[507021]

Ah, but it'll be Tuckwell's Chippy, a subsidiary of Sunak Enterprises plc, so it'll definitely be OK.

Phish & Chips all round?

 

[JamesT]

Why not an x-person board, chosen according to vote share in local elections plus y independent people?

I suspect expenses for, say, twelve people meeting once a month will be significantly less than a full-time PCC salary.

Might be cheaper, but considerably less democratic to go away from a directly elected person with a manifesto on that specific issue to whichever local councillors fancy it.

That oversight already takes place at a national level, by the Home Secretary and more broadly by the relevant Parliamentary committees. What benefit is then gained from additional political oversight at an intermediate (regional or county) level that would outweigh the suspicion of opportunities for political interference?

Policing has always been overseen in a local basis, from the formation of the watch committees in 1835. Going back to the Peelian principles the police are supposed to be part of their community, appealing to Westminster because you disagree with the priorities of your local force seems a bit roundabout. Especially when part of the funding of the police is a precept on council tax, so very much a local matter.
Or should this all be abolished and the police centrally funded and the Home Secretary given the power to hire and fire all the police chiefs?

 

[takno]

That oversight already takes place at a national level, by the Home Secretary and more broadly by the relevant Parliamentary committees. What benefit is then gained from additional political oversight at an intermediate (regional or county) level that would outweigh the suspicion of opportunities for political interference?

Police Scotland was a bit of a nightmare when it all got centralised. Suddenly police all over Scotland were taking a Glasgow-appropriate approach to policing in some very diverse communities. That meant some really inappropriate firearms policies, an approach to licensing which was horribly aggressive in areas where there had previously been good consensus management, and a complete lack of understanding of the challenges of policing heavily rural areas.

Westminster is a long way from Penzance or Workington in a lot of ways. Local oversight helps.

 

[najaB]

Might be cheaper, but considerably less democratic to go away from a directly elected person with a manifesto on that specific issue to whichever local councillors fancy it.

I might agree if people actually went out and voted for them, but with voter participation typically under 15% it's difficult to say with any certainty that PCCs represent what the population that they police really want.

 

[Typhoon]

I might agree if people actually went out and voted for them, but with voter participation typically under 15% it's difficult to say with any certainty that PCCs represent what the population that they police really want.

And most of the under 15% will be party loyalists who vote for the rosette. In the first two elections I managed to vote for someone who I thought might be quite good at the job (including someone who had been chair of the Police Authority, because I thought that continuity might be helpful). I don't think I bothered last time. Information about the candidates was sparse. The incumbent sent a questionnaire out last time, I responded by completing it and adding some comments and questions of my own. I had no response so I guess they recognised that I wouldn't be a convert.

 

[brad465]

Things are now so bad for the Tories that The Daily Mail has done a front page tomorrow claiming Labour are more trusted on the Tories on defence, including the latter now being associated with defence spending cuts:

Tomorrow's Papers Today - UK Front Pages - Latest Newspaper Headlines

All of UK's Tomorrow's Front Pages ✅ Updated Daily between 7PM - 11pm ✅ The Mail, Express, Times, Guardian and many more Proudly supporting #buyapaper

www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk

(Image of tomorrow's Daily Mail front page with headline "Labour more trusted on defence than the Tories!)

 

[edwin_m]

Things are now so bad for the Tories that The Daily Mail has done a front page tomorrow claiming Labour are more trusted on the Tories on defence, including the latter now being associated with defence spending cuts:

The likes of the Telegraph, Express and Mail don't automatically support a Tory government, with the probable exception of election run-up periods. Quite often they are flying a kite for some Tory faction opposed to the leadership, who happen to have the ear of the owner/editor.

 

[The Ham]

The likes of the Telegraph, Express and Mail don't automatically support a Tory government, with the probable exception of election run-up periods. Quite often they are flying a kite for some Tory faction opposed to the leadership, who happen to have the ear of the owner/editor.

Unless they're being supportive of someone like Wallace or some other Tory (Defence or former Defence Minister, and even then it host highlights the infighting in the Tory Party), I'm not sure what comfort the Tory party can take from this?

 

[edwin_m]

Unless they're being supportive of someone like Wallace or some other Tory (Defence or former Defence Minister, and even then it host highlights the infighting in the Tory Party), I'm not sure what comfort the Tory party can take from this?

I neither know nor particularly care what the attitude of the various leadership contenders is to defence spending, but my guess is somebody is doing it to pressure Sunak or to hasten his demise.

 

[The Ham]

I neither know nor particularly care what the attitude of the various leadership contenders is to defence spending, but my guess is somebody is doing it to pressure Sunak or to hasten his demise.

Fair enough (not that I was suspecting that anyone on this thread had any particular insight), however if that is the case their actions in trying to bring down Sunak is likely to also further being about the demise the Tories.

For example, if an individual was supportive of the armed forces and generally supports the Conservatives because they generally have a reputation for supporting the armed forces, then this front page is going to make them at least question if they should vote Tory.

 

[edwin_m]

Fair enough (not that I was suspecting that anyone on this thread had any particular insight), however if that is the case their actions in trying to bring down Sunak is likely to also further being about the demise the Tories.

For example, if an individual was supportive of the armed forces and generally supports the Conservatives because they generally have a reputation for supporting the armed forces, then this front page is going to make them at least question if they should vote Tory.

Could be someone trying to divert votes to Deform UK, or just exhibiting the sort of behaviour that's been more common in Labour in recent years. Or they just realised that the Tories have no hope of winning this time and are trying to shape the future direction in opposition. Or some combination of the above...

 

[nw1]

Fair enough (not that I was suspecting that anyone on this thread had any particular insight), however if that is the case their actions in trying to bring down Sunak is likely to also further being about the demise the Tories.

For example, if an individual was supportive of the armed forces and generally supports the Conservatives because they generally have a reputation for supporting the armed forces, then this front page is going to make them at least question if they should vote Tory.

Indeed, the Mail is going to turn off more potential Tories through this story than gain Tory votes for banging on about Rayner.

Could be someone trying to divert votes to Deform UK, or just exhibiting the sort of behaviour that's been more common in Labour in recent years. Or they just realised that the Tories have no hope of winning this time and are trying to shape the future direction in opposition. Or some combination of the above...

Perhaps.

Incidentally regarding Reform the Express seem to be coming out against them, or at least yesterday they were, as they are perceived as an electoral threat.

"VOTING REFORM MEANS THE END OF BREXIT" or some such screamed the Express, apparently an article written by Iain Duncan Smith, majority 1262, down from 2438 in 2017, yet apparently standing again - so clearly Reform are a personal threat to himself. (I'm amazed he isn't doing the chicken run in all honesty, as the chance of him retaining the seat must be near zero given it swung away from the Tories in 2019).

In that case, bring on those Reform votes!

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Indeed, the Mail is going to turn off more potential Tories through this story than gain Tory votes for banging on about Rayner.



Perhaps.

Incidentally regarding Reform the Express seem to be coming out against them, or at least yesterday they were, as they are perceived as an electoral threat.

"VOTING REFORM MEANS THE END OF BREXIT" or some such screamed the Express, apparently an article written by Iain Duncan Smith, majority 1262, down from 2438 in 2017, yet apparently standing again - so clearly Reform are a personal threat to himself. (I'm amazed he isn't doing the chicken run in all honesty, as the chance of him retaining the seat must be near zero given it swung away from the Tories in 2019).

In that case, bring on those Reform votes!

Daily Express flip flop from one day to the next even more of useless rag than the Daily Mail. Mind you it only has a paper circulation of 147k so hardly a big influencer.

 

[takno]

Daily Express flip flop from one day to the next even more of useless rag than the Daily Mail. Mind you it only has a paper circulation of 147k so hardly a big influencer.

It's owned by the Mirror Group, so it's not really at the beck and call of an evil proprietor. They're basically just flip-flopping based on whatever they think will sit most easily with whatever portion of their readership still hasn't died on any given day.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

It's owned by the Mirror Group, so it's not really at the beck and call of an evil proprietor. They're basically just flip-flopping based on whatever they think will sit most easily with whatever portion of their readership still hasn't died on any given day.

Oh hadn't realised its wasn't still owned by Desmond. Clearly has a freer hand than the Mirror does.

 

[brad465]

As much as I despise Gullis, Tice might have landed himself in hot water with what looks like open blackmail:

https://twitter.com/TiceRichard/status/1774351897660371196

With a special Easter message to Tory MP Jonathan Gullis: Given the multiple bits of embarrassing personal information we have on you, I suggest you pipe down on your attacks against me.

 

[The Ham]

Daily Express flip flop from one day to the next even more of useless rag than the Daily Mail. Mind you it only has a paper circulation of 147k so hardly a big influencer.

It's bigger impact is of from the likes of the BBC and others taking about the front page.

 

[Silenos]

It's bigger impact is of from the likes of the BBC and others taking about the front page.

An important point. Newspapers have a pretty low circulation now, but they still drive the broadcast media agendas. And of course some have a substantial online presence.

 

[Snow1964]

Latest UK poll has Conservatives crashing to 155 seats if General Election was held tomorrow, and lots of Cabinet ministers would lose their seats including

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt is forecast to lose his seat of Godalming and Ash (formerly South West Surrey). Boundary changes mean the seat is now a very close contest with the Lib Dems.

Mr Hunt has a majority of 8,817 votes, but the poll shows he will lose to the Lib Dem candidate.

Commons leader Penny Mordaunt is another big name Tory MP forecast to lose her seat of Portsmouth North.

She holds a majority of 15,780 votes, but that is predicated to be overturned by the Labour candidate.

A loss for Ms Mordaunt would be particularly embarrassing as she has been already a two-time contender for the party leadership, and has been touted as a potential successor to Rishi Sunak.

Defence Secretary Grant Shapps is another big-name cabinet minister forecast to lose his seat of Welwyn Hatfield.

The prolific cabinet minister, rumoured to be angling for the party leadership, holds a majority of 10,955 votes, but that seat is forecast to be yet another Labour gain.

Former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith is also predicted to lose his seat of Chingford and Woodford Green that he has held since 1992.

At the 2019 general election, Mr Duncan Smith won a slim majority of 1,262 votes, and Labour is forecast to decimate that and take the seat.

Other cabinet ministers set to lose their seats include:

• Transport Secretary Mark Harper;
• Justice Secretary Alex Chalk;
• Science Secretary Michelle Donelan;
• Wales Secretary David TC Davies;
• Chief whip Simon Hart;
• Attorney General Victoria Prentis;
• Veterans minister Johnny Mercer;
• Illegal migration minister Michael Tomlinson.

Politics latest: Big Tory names predicted to lose seats in another disastrous poll for Sunak

A mega new YouGov poll has forecast Labour would win more than 400 seats if the general election were held tomorrow. The Conservative Party would crash to just 155 seats, meaning 210 sitting MPs would lose their jobs - among them multiple cabinet ministers.

news.sky.com

 

[Urobach]

Latest UK poll has Conservatives crashing to 155 seats if General Election was held tomorrow, and lots of Cabinet ministers would lose their seats including

Politics latest: Big Tory names predicted to lose seats in another disastrous poll for Sunak

A mega new YouGov poll has forecast Labour would win more than 400 seats if the general election were held tomorrow. The Conservative Party would crash to just 155 seats, meaning 210 sitting MPs would lose their jobs - among them multiple cabinet ministers.

news.sky.com

No tears shed here if Shapps has his Portillo moment

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Latest UK poll has Conservatives crashing to 155 seats if General Election was held tomorrow, and lots of Cabinet ministers would lose their seats including

Politics latest: Big Tory names predicted to lose seats in another disastrous poll for Sunak

A mega new YouGov poll has forecast Labour would win more than 400 seats if the general election were held tomorrow. The Conservative Party would crash to just 155 seats, meaning 210 sitting MPs would lose their jobs - among them multiple cabinet ministers.

news.sky.com

Im looking forward to all that lot being trounced by another party

 

[simonw]

Latest UK poll has Conservatives crashing to 155 seats if General Election was held tomorrow, and lots of Cabinet ministers would lose their seats including

Politics latest: Big Tory names predicted to lose seats in another disastrous poll for Sunak

A mega new YouGov poll has forecast Labour would win more than 400 seats if the general election were held tomorrow. The Conservative Party would crash to just 155 seats, meaning 210 sitting MPs would lose their jobs - among them multiple cabinet ministers.

news.sky.com

That link doesn't work.

 

[bspahh]

That link doesn't work.

It works for me.

This is the original story from Yougov

YouGov MRP – Labour now projected to win over 400 seats​

Patrick EnglishDirector of Political Analytics
April 03, 2024, 3:19 PM GMT+1

Our latest UK general election 2024 MRP projects a 154 seat majority for Labour​

New MRP figures released today from YouGov project that, if the country were voting in a general election tomorrow, Labour would win 403 seats nationwide. Crossing the 400-seat line is a significant milestone for Keir Starmer’s party in what is our second MRP projection this year.
Their Conservative rivals would win just 155 seats according to our model, down from 169 in our January projection, suggesting that the electoral situation is getting worse, rather than better, for Rishi Sunak and the Conservatives as we draw closer to the election.

 

[ainsworth74]

Really wish Rishi would hurry up and announce the date of the election. Need to get the day after booked off from work!

 

[simonw]

It works for me.

This is the original story from Yougov

Thanks, just comes up with a story about NATO for me.