Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[DC1989]

The government have announced as part of the 'network north' project to improve transport links in the north of England with the cancelled hs2 money that they are giving London 235million to fill potholes

Good politics

 

[jfollows]

My understanding is that the removed MP is entitled to stand regardless of whether or not their party selects them as the official candidate.

Just about anyone, included the removed MP, can stand as an independent candidate. He'll have to put up his own deposit like anyone else if he does. Since Reform UK is expected to put up a candidate, there is a good chance the Conservatives will lose the by-election, whoever they chose as their candidate.
For example, from https://www.politics.co.uk/reference/elections-and-voting/

Candidates in a UK general election must meet the following criteria: be aged 18 or above, be a British citizen, or a citizen of a Commonwealth country or the Republic of Ireland, and be eligible.

You will not be eligible to be a candidate in a UK general election if: you are subject to bankruptcy restriction orders, you have had your estate sequestrated in Scotland, you are a convicted prisoner of certain offences, you have been found guilty of certain election offences, or you are a eligible to sit and vote in the House of Lords,.

Further, you will not be eligible if you are employed by the Crown in one of the following roles: holder of a politically restricted post in the Civil Service; a police officer; member of the armed forces; a holder of judicial office; a government nominated director of a commercial company; a member of a non-departmental government body

 

[najaB]

My understanding is that the removed MP is entitled to stand regardless of whether or not their party selects them as the official candidate.

Well, anyone is free to run as an independent (provided they aren't excluded for the usual reasons).

 

[Tezza1978]

"Levelling Up" apparently. This rancid, decaying corpse of a government isn't even pretending any more.....

 

[najaB]

"Levelling Up" apparently. This rancid, decaying corpse of a government isn't even pretending any more.....

View attachment 148847

That has to be a parody, no?

 

[SteveM70]

That has to be a parody, no?

Sadly no. I assumed it was but its still there on their Twitter feed

 

[najaB]

Sadly no. I assumed it was but its still there on their Twitter feed

Maybe it's roads in Edgeware or New Barnett funded by Network North (London)?

 

[SteveM70]

Maybe it's roads in Edgeware or New Barnett funded by Network North (London)?

Quite possibly. It's an absolute joke. And that's before we start to think about them conflating capital expenditure and revenue expenditure

 

[D6130]

Plus today, there's much more encouragement within society for victims of bullying/sexual assault to come forward.

I recall a well-publicised case back in 1995, when shortly after her defection to the Lib Dems, Torridge & West Devon Tory MP Emma Nicholson reported having been punched in the stomach in a House of Commons corridor by Lancaster Tory MP Dame Elizabeth Kellet-Bowman. As far as I know, no action was ever taken as there were no witnesses....but it just goes to show that bullying tactics by Tory MPs are nothing new.

 

[nw1]

That has to be a parody, no?

Maybe they mean Network North London, or something. Perhaps it's a bid to try and keep hold of seats such as Duncan Smith's.

 

[Enthusiast]

That clearly is not what we are talking about,

It may not be what you were talking about but I was responding to this:

More likely it's because society at that time tended to brush such behaviour under the carpet...

There's little difference between "brushing such behaviour under the carpet" and having a different view on what makes acceptable behaviour and what doesn't, mainly due to the passage of time and changing attitudes.

....and in any case workplace stress isn't something to laugh about.

I wasn't laughing.

 

[dgl]

"Levelling Up" apparently. This rancid, decaying corpse of a government isn't even pretending any more.....

View attachment 148847

It's the Hovis ad!

 

[jon0844]

Our council will only fix a pothole when it gets to be very dangerous. We have had one all year that isn't considered a risk, but would likely floor a cyclist. As it appeared in the last winter weather, it's clearly going to get worse - and will likely get fixed at some point in the new year - likely after many claims made against the council.

You can drive around and see where all the potholes are going to form already, but of course there's never any preventative measures to stop them appearing (and stop people getting damaged tyres, suspension or cyclists being sent flying) as either the council or central Government have set up a standard measure which is frankly laughable.

As the road budgets have been slashed for so long, of course they need more money to patch and repair but it's a terrible use of the money.

We also now have a number of country roads with blind junctions and no give way signs (knocked down etc) and no line markings, so as you might expect there have been accidents where cars have shot over the junction and into a ditch, and in one case into someone's garden wall, which is no more.

Maybe HS2 funding, which would have been for something lasting 100-200 years can go towards some paint, which will last six months.

-----

Edit: I see 31.7p Lee needed to have it explained that lower inflation isn't putting more money into people's pockets.

 

[edwin_m]

The government have announced as part of the 'network north' project to improve transport links in the north of England with the cancelled hs2 money that they are giving London 235million to fill potholes

Well, I guess the potholes are being "levelled up" to match the rest of the road...

 

[bspahh]

Our council will only fix a pothole when it gets to be very dangerous. We have had one all year that isn't considered a risk, but would likely floor a cyclist. As it appeared in the last winter weather, it's clearly going to get worse - and will likely get fixed at some point in the new year - likely after many claims made against the council.

Have you tried reporting the pothole using https://www.fillthathole.org.uk/ or the instructions at https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/pothole-claims/

It doesn't get more funding for your council to fix potholes, but increases the chance that the pothole that you report gets fixed sooner rather than later, so they don't have to pay out compensation if it causes some damage.

 

[jon0844]

Yes, all reported and they say it isn't considered bad enough (depth and width).

 

[brad465]

Downing Street must look like a doughnut ring:

Home Office rows back on salary threshold for family visa

The minimum salary for a family visa to come to the UK will go up to £29,000 next spring, instead of £38,700.

bbc.co.uk

The government has rowed back from increasing the earnings threshold for people who want to come to the UK on family visas to £38,700 a year.
Home Secretary James Cleverly had announced that someone who wanted to bring their partner or dependant to the UK would need to earn that amount.
But a document published on Thursday said the threshold would now be set at £29,000 "as part of an initial implementation".
The current figure is £18,600.
The move will take effect in the spring.
Ministers have been under pressure to tighten controls on legal migration after the number of people coming to the UK reached record levels in 2022.
Home Office minister Lord Sharpe of Epsom disclosed the new figure in a written statement to the House of Lords, saying: "Family life must not be established here at the taxpayer's expense and family migrants must be able to integrate if they are to play a full part in British life.
"The minimum income requirement has not been increased for over a decade and no longer reflects the level of income required by a family to ensure they are self-sufficient and do not need to rely on public funds."

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Downing Street must look like a doughnut ring:

Home Office rows back on salary threshold for family visa

The minimum salary for a family visa to come to the UK will go up to £29,000 next spring, instead of £38,700.

bbc.co.uk

They've obviously done a bit of listening - which is something. Even so £29K still feels to me much too high as a requirement for a spouse visa, and it seems they've merely delayed £38K, not withdrawn it. I can understand the rationale behind wanting £38K as a salary requirement for a skilled worker visa, but not for a spouse visa - that is just ridiculously high.

Since the delay in raising the salary requirement to £38K will presumably take us past the general election, I wonder what Labour's attitude will be about whether to keep it.

 

[jon0844]

I can understand the rationale behind wanting £38K as a salary requirement for a skilled worker visa, but not for a spouse visa - that is just ridiculously high.

But as we've discovered, they're issuing skilled worker visas to people with zero skills from India and Africa in order to fill jobs in specific sectors, like care.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

But as we've discovered, they're issuing skilled worker visas to people with zero skills from India and Africa in order to fill jobs in specific sectors, like care.

Who do you mean by 'they'? I'm pretty sure it's not the Government doing that, but unscrupulous employers taking advantage of unintended loopholes in the system. And I would imagine that raising the salary threshold to £38K for skilled worker visas would make that less likely to happen since - who's going to want to pay £38K to someone who is unskilled!

 

[SteveM70]

They've obviously done a bit of listening - which is something.

I guess the trick is to do the listening before announcing the policy, rather than chucking it out there and putting the fear of god into loads of people and then rowing it back a couple of days later

 

[jon0844]

Who do you mean by 'they'? I'm pretty sure it's not the Government doing that, but unscrupulous employers taking advantage of unintended loopholes in the system. And I would imagine that raising the salary threshold to £38K for skilled worker visas would make that less likely to happen since - who's going to want to pay £38K to someone who is unskilled!

Who issues the visas? Who closes the loopholes? Who doesn't step in to stop it?

 

[jfollows]

We could be heading towards a small economic recession, thought necessary by some as a cost of controlling inflation, but nonetheless it could end up that we're in a "technical" recession following two consecutive quarters of negative growth (4Q23 followed by 1Q24) and this could happen at a "bad" time for the Conservatives to call an election in spring 2024.
It's a numbers game, but the Conservatives have been crowing recently about how "they" have prevented the economy going into recession whilst everyone knows the pain of food and energy bills, so it'd only be just if they suffered because we actually ended up in a technical recession even though nobody would actually feel any worse off.
It'd be something for their opponents to throw at them for sure, if they were all campaigning for an election.

The estimates for GDP have been revised down today:

• 2Q23 0% growth (previously +0.2%)
• 3Q23 -0.1% (previously 0%)

which could lead to a "technical" recession earlier - if 4Q23 is also a contraction.
Of course, Rishi will spin this that it's only "technical", it's only a "mild" recession anyway, the economy is well-placed for the future, etc.
What were his 5 pledges again .....?

 

[ainsworth74]

They've obviously done a bit of listening - which is something. Even so £29K still feels to me much too high as a requirement for a spouse visa, and it seems they've merely delayed £38K, not withdrawn it. I can understand the rationale behind wanting £38K as a salary requirement for a skilled worker visa, but not for a spouse visa - that is just ridiculously high.

Since the delay in raising the salary requirement to £38K will presumably take us past the general election, I wonder what Labour's attitude will be about whether to keep it.

The other thing that strikes is that this is surely just woeful politics? The right wing of his own party will hate this softening of the position so will earn him more ire from that side (though it will probably earn some brownie points with the One Nation block to be fair), whilst on the lefty/liberal side of the political equation they're still going to be hacked off at the massive rise in the first place even if it now isn't quite such a significant rise as it was before.

I do feel like situations like this reveal how new Sunak is to politics (only elected as an MP in 2015 remember and didn't enter cabinet until 2019) as it just feels daft to have gone about this in this way when all it will do is annoy far more people than it is ever likely to impress whilst also still being, arguably, bad policy to boot.

 

[Richard Scott]

Who issues the visas? Who closes the loopholes? Who doesn't step in to stop it?

I've seen programs on TV about enforcement officers that do go around to find people who are employed by these sorts of people and large fines are issued; so it isn't as if it's being ignored, or even encouraged, as some people on here would have you believe.

 

[najaB]

so it isn't as if it's being ignored, or even encouraged, as some people on here would have you believe.

It's not being ignored, but it definitely isn't enforced as much as it could be. I have one friend who has been worked for at least a dozen different employers despite her visa not allowing it.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It's not being ignored, but it definitely isn't enforced as much as it could be. I have one friend who has been worked for at least a dozen different employers despite her visa not allowing it.

The problem then is, how do you enforce the rules better? Neither the employee who is knowingly working against their visa conditions, nor the employer who is unscrupulously employing that person (often because they can then get away with paying below the minimum wage) is going to willingly run and tell the Home Office, so the Home Office is basically reliant on tip-offs, random checks (which are typically denounced on the left as intrusive and draconian) or long expensive investigations etc. Maybe there is more that can be done, but I don't think there are any easy options for completely preventing this kind of abuse of visa conditions.

 

[WelshBluebird]

The problem then is, how do you enforce the rules better?

You don't. You relax the rules so those people can legally work and so they are then much more likely report rogue employers! This also means they are more likely to be able to support themselves (rather than rely on family or the state).

 

[Typhoon]

Just about anyone, included the removed MP, can stand as an independent candidate.

He could apply to join Reclaim on the condition he was their candidate. It would make up for Bridgen leaving.

Jeff

 

[jon0844]

You don't. You relax the rules so those people can legally work and so they are then much more likely report rogue employers! This also means they are more likely to be able to support themselves (rather than rely on family or the state).

This is all being done because we can't get people from the UK to fill these jobs and the Government is absolutely not going to allow freedom of movement, for fear of admitting Brexit was a disaster.

So we end up with blind eyes being turned to solve the problem to the detriment of those we bring in to do the most needed jobs. Many are clearly going to be mistreated and used, and it's obvious that there's going to be more scandals to be revealed in the future.

It's a total joke, but not unexpected at this point.