18-OCT 2023 : LAB 44% / CON 28% / LDM 9% / REF 7%

[wb61]

Jan 31, 2024 22:35:41 GMT @fecklessmiser said:

“ A builder who killed a customer in a brutal hammer attack after “chronic” delays in building an extension to her home has been jailed for life.

Peter Norgrove was ordered to serve a minimum term of 15 years after admitting the murder of 58-year-old Sharon Gordon, who he left for dead with severe skull fractures.”

How could fifteen years be considered an acceptable minimum sentence for something as horrific as this? The full story is in the Guardian and the murder was clearly premeditated.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/17/schedule/21/enacted

this is the approach that Judges are required to take when sentencing under a life sentence. I am not aware of the particulars of the case and the full sentencing remarks are not available only newspaper quotations. Sentencing someone for Murder would usually involve sentencing remarks lasting up to a half hour in a single victim case, but one thing I noted was that there was a guilty plea, if that was entered on the first occasion it would mean a reduction of 33% as required by other sections in the Sentencing Act 2020. The other things to notice are: (1) 15 years is the minimum term, it is for the parole board to consider parole for the first time after 15 years not automatic release; (2) the sentence is a life sentence which means release is under licence and recall to prison can occur (3) recall does not require a further criminal offence to be committed e.g. recall can follow a failure to comply with any conditions of parole. 

[barbara]

Jan 31, 2024 23:24:48 GMT mercian said:

Jan 31, 2024 22:35:41 GMT @fecklessmiser said:

“ A builder who killed a customer in a brutal hammer attack after “chronic” delays in building an extension to her home has been jailed for life.

Peter Norgrove was ordered to serve a minimum term of 15 years after admitting the murder of 58-year-old Sharon Gordon, who he left for dead with severe skull fractures.”

How could fifteen years be considered an acceptable minimum sentence for something as horrific as this? The full story is in the Guardian and the murder was clearly premeditated.

The death penalty should be brought back for cases like this. Now we're out of the EU we could do it, but I can't see any of the main parties doing so for the foreseeable future. We'll have to wait for a few more murderers released early to do it again and hope for a massive public outcry.

If killing is wrong, how can it ever be right for the state to kill merely as punishment for a such a crime.
If the tarriff for murder is too small then it needs to be changed.

[crossbat11]

Midnight with Mercian has reopened the Hang 'em and Flog 'em debate, I see. With some Colonel Blimp wittering on recently about the reintroduction of a batty version of national service, I'm getting the Sounds of the Seventies in my ears. Rhodes Boyson rides again. Is this the future of Toryism, I wonder? Eat Nigel Farage's lunch as a way of getting the over 90s back on board.

Or put another way, the voice of common sense and the silent majority daring to say what we're all thinking.

In Golf Club bars all over the country. Real voters in the real world.

[neilj]

I've been thinking about Reform of the Lords, my suggestions

Retirement age of 75

Maximum number of 500

30% to be independent experts selected from different sectors, to serve a maximum of 10 years. Appointment process to be completely independent of Government

Rest to be appointed by parties based on vote at last General Election

Process to get rid of Peers, if they bring Parliament into disrepute, to be made by an independent tribunal

I appreciate it won't happen, but wondered if anyone had any other thoughts?

[Deleted]

Feb 1, 2024 8:53:46 GMT crossbat11 said:

Midnight with Mercian has reopened the Hang 'em and Flog 'em debate, I see. With some Colonel Blimp wittering on recently about the reintroduction of a batty version of national service, I'm getting the Sounds of the Seventies in my ears. Rhodes Boyson rides again. Is this the future of Toryism, I wonder? Eat Nigel Farage's lunch as a way of getting the over 90s back on board.

Or put another way, the voice of common sense and the silent majority daring to say what we're all thinking.

In Golf Club bars all over the country. Real voters in the real world.

The Colonel Blimp in question was Gen Sir Patrick Sanders ,  head of the British army ( or what is left of it )

He was saying that you & I  have enjoyed a cold war peace dividend which is  over, noting that “over the last 30 years, the army has been halved in size; in the last 12 years, we’ve absorbed a 28% reduction”.

After he proposed National Service ,others have drawn attention to the Norwegian model of National Service.

www.defenseone.com/ideas/2024/01/norway-young-people-compete-serve-military/393599/


Norway is not usually associated with the political caricatures you describe and we can only hope that their awareness of and attention to  the defence risks which Gen. Sanders alluded to , shared by their neighbours in Sweden & Finland not to mention Macron , Sholz et al ; will be replicated here by a Starmer government

Of course it is sadly possible that the PLP in government will be full of the sort of partisan tribalism and vacuous  anti-militarism which we remember and  which your post reminds us of .

[steve]

"For those who enjoy a flutter on the lottery there's a new owner from today.
Allwyn international a Czech based conglomerate that runs a number of international lotteries."

*Can't complain having checked this morning won a handy £150😁

[steve]

"He was saying that you & I have enjoyed a cold war peace dividend which is over, noting that “over the last 30 years, the army has been halved in size; in the last 12 years, we’ve absorbed a 28% reduction”.


National service ended in 1960, there were three decades of the " cold war" after that which didn't require forcing 18 year olds into the military.

I've nothing against military service as it was a close run choice for me between the civilian and military police( I'd have been a commissioned officer) Faith nearly joined the QA's as a nurse teacher when we met , she'd have been commissioned as captain with a guaranteed promotion within a year.

Most of both our families have served in the military , without being forced to.

Just make the terms more attractive.

[wb61]

Feb 1, 2024 9:29:59 GMT colin said:

Feb 1, 2024 8:53:46 GMT crossbat11 said:

Midnight with Mercian has reopened the Hang 'em and Flog 'em debate, I see. With some Colonel Blimp wittering on recently about the reintroduction of a batty version of national service, I'm getting the Sounds of the Seventies in my ears. Rhodes Boyson rides again. Is this the future of Toryism, I wonder? Eat Nigel Farage's lunch as a way of getting the over 90s back on board.

Or put another way, the voice of common sense and the silent majority daring to say what we're all thinking.

In Golf Club bars all over the country. Real voters in the real world.

The Colonel Blimp in question was Gen Sir Patrick Sanders ,  head of the British army ( or what is left of it )

He was saying that you & I  have enjoyed a cold war peace dividend which is  over, noting that “over the last 30 years, the army has been halved in size; in the last 12 years, we’ve absorbed a 28% reduction”.

After he proposed National Service ,others have drawn attention to the Norwegian model of National Service.

www.defenseone.com/ideas/2024/01/norway-young-people-compete-serve-military/393599/


Norway is not usually associated with the political caricatures you describe and we can only hope that their awareness of and attention to  the defence risks which Gen. Sanders alluded to , shared by their neighbours in Sweden & Finland not to mention Macron , Sholz et al ; will be replicated here by a Starmer government

Of course it is sadly possible that the PLP in government will be full of the sort of partisan tribalism and vacuous  anti-militarism which we remember and  which your post reminds us of .

Cost may be a big issue in National Service just considering just pay and ignoring other costs: it cost 1.8 million in 1960 which uprated for inflation only is approaching 34.5 million. 

That is to ignore the fact that weekly pay for a soldier in 1960 was 38 shillings which if we consider amounts to £2 roughly would only be a weekly pay of just over £38 per week, the current rate for a private is about 10 time that amount. That is without considering how the 186,000 current service personnel would begin to train the (approx.) 300,000 in the relevant age groups.

[crossbat11]

Feb 1, 2024 9:29:59 GMT colin said:

Feb 1, 2024 8:53:46 GMT crossbat11 said:

Midnight with Mercian has reopened the Hang 'em and Flog 'em debate, I see. With some Colonel Blimp wittering on recently about the reintroduction of a batty version of national service, I'm getting the Sounds of the Seventies in my ears. Rhodes Boyson rides again. Is this the future of Toryism, I wonder? Eat Nigel Farage's lunch as a way of getting the over 90s back on board.

Or put another way, the voice of common sense and the silent majority daring to say what we're all thinking.

In Golf Club bars all over the country. Real voters in the real world.

The Colonel Blimp in question was Gen Sir Patrick Sanders ,  head of the British army ( or what is left of it )

He was saying that you & I  have enjoyed a cold war peace dividend which is  over, noting that “over the last 30 years, the army has been halved in size; in the last 12 years, we’ve absorbed a 28% reduction”.

After he proposed National Service ,others have drawn attention to the Norwegian model of National Service.

www.defenseone.com/ideas/2024/01/norway-young-people-compete-serve-military/393599/


Norway is not usually associated with the political caricatures you describe and we can only hope that their awareness of and attention to  the defence risks which Gen. Sanders alluded to , shared by their neighbours in Sweden & Finland not to mention Macron , Sholz et al ; will be replicated here by a Starmer government

Of course it is sadly possible that the PLP in government will be full of the sort of partisan tribalism and vacuous  anti-militarism which we remember and  which your post reminds us of .

This is a more nuanced look at the issue of strengthening our military defence capability across Europe with the prospect of a Trump presidency severely weakening the NATO alliance. The author doesn't dismiss the idea of some sort of part time civilian force supporting full time professional military services, but makes the point that the latter is the key element in national security and governments need to make professional full time military service a much more sort after and desirable profession.

This will require investment and promotion. The danger of banging on about civilian armies and national service is that they overrate the potential defence contribution of such a force and it panders to those who think it is some popular ruse to combat juvenile delinquency. Politics, in other words, superseding practical ways to improve our defence and security.

Having doubts about national service is not anti-militarism. That's silly anti-Labour (PLP??) tribalism on your part. Especially when the sceptics are keen to increase and strengthen our professional and full time military services.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/01/europe-defence-army-us-donald-trump-eu

[shevii]

Latest YouGov Westminster voting intention (30-31 Jan)

Con: 23% (+3 from 23-24 Jan)
Lab: 44% (-3)
Lib Dem: 9% (+1)
Reform UK: 12% (-1)
Green: 6% (=)
SNP: 3% (-1)

[moby]

Feb 1, 2024 9:29:59 GMT colin said:

Feb 1, 2024 8:53:46 GMT crossbat11 said:

Midnight with Mercian has reopened the Hang 'em and Flog 'em debate, I see. With some Colonel Blimp wittering on recently about the reintroduction of a batty version of national service, I'm getting the Sounds of the Seventies in my ears. Rhodes Boyson rides again. Is this the future of Toryism, I wonder? Eat Nigel Farage's lunch as a way of getting the over 90s back on board.

Or put another way, the voice of common sense and the silent majority daring to say what we're all thinking.

In Golf Club bars all over the country. Real voters in the real world.

Norway is not usually associated with the political caricatures you describe and we can only hope that their awareness of and attention to  the defence risks which Gen. Sanders alluded to , shared by their neighbours in Sweden & Finland not to mention Macron , Sholz et al ; will be replicated here by a Starmer government

Of course it is sadly possible that the PLP in government will be full of the sort of partisan tribalism and vacuous  anti-militarism which we remember and  which your post reminds us of .

The problem with the UK is its class structure; in this case the close association of the military with royalty. If you are a republican, like me, how would joining the army ever be possible?

[domjg]

Feb 1, 2024 9:29:59 GMT colin said:

Feb 1, 2024 8:53:46 GMT crossbat11 said:

Midnight with Mercian has reopened the Hang 'em and Flog 'em debate, I see. With some Colonel Blimp wittering on recently about the reintroduction of a batty version of national service, I'm getting the Sounds of the Seventies in my ears. Rhodes Boyson rides again. Is this the future of Toryism, I wonder? Eat Nigel Farage's lunch as a way of getting the over 90s back on board.

Or put another way, the voice of common sense and the silent majority daring to say what we're all thinking.

In Golf Club bars all over the country. Real voters in the real world.

The Colonel Blimp in question was Gen Sir Patrick Sanders ,  head of the British army ( or what is left of it )

He was saying that you & I  have enjoyed a cold war peace dividend which is  over, noting that “over the last 30 years, the army has been halved in size; in the last 12 years, we’ve absorbed a 28% reduction”.

After he proposed National Service ,others have drawn attention to the Norwegian model of National Service.

www.defenseone.com/ideas/2024/01/norway-young-people-compete-serve-military/393599/


Norway is not usually associated with the political caricatures you describe and we can only hope that their awareness of and attention to  the defence risks which Gen. Sanders alluded to , shared by their neighbours in Sweden & Finland not to mention Macron , Sholz et al ; will be replicated here by a Starmer government

Of course it is sadly possible that the PLP in government will be full of the sort of partisan tribalism and vacuous  anti-militarism which we remember and  which your post reminds us of .

I think the tories have the edge in 'anti-militarism' wouldn't you say, in terms of actions and not just their vacuous words? 

[Deleted]

Feb 1, 2024 9:50:54 GMT wb61 said:

Feb 1, 2024 9:29:59 GMT colin said:

The Colonel Blimp in question was Gen Sir Patrick Sanders ,  head of the British army ( or what is left of it )

He was saying that you & I  have enjoyed a cold war peace dividend which is  over, noting that “over the last 30 years, the army has been halved in size; in the last 12 years, we’ve absorbed a 28% reduction”.

After he proposed National Service ,others have drawn attention to the Norwegian model of National Service.

www.defenseone.com/ideas/2024/01/norway-young-people-compete-serve-military/393599/


Norway is not usually associated with the political caricatures you describe and we can only hope that their awareness of and attention to  the defence risks which Gen. Sanders alluded to , shared by their neighbours in Sweden & Finland not to mention Macron , Sholz et al ; will be replicated here by a Starmer government

Of course it is sadly possible that the PLP in government will be full of the sort of partisan tribalism and vacuous  anti-militarism which we remember and  which your post reminds us of .

Cost may be a big issue in National Service just considering just pay and ignoring other costs: it cost 1.8 million in 1960 which uprated for inflation only is approaching 34.5 million. 

That is to ignore the fact that weekly pay for a soldier in 1960 was 38 shillings which if we consider amounts to £2 roughly would only be a weekly pay of just over £38 per week, the current rate for a private is about 10 time that amount. That is without considering how the 186,000 current service personnel would begin to train the (approx.) 300,000 in the relevant age groups.

I was addressing principles rather than detail Clearly cost is a factor but politics is about priorities isn't it ?

If you agree with view that current defence risks are a priority then the money will have to be found.

[Deleted]

Feb 1, 2024 10:18:03 GMT moby said:

Feb 1, 2024 9:29:59 GMT colin said:

Norway is not usually associated with the political caricatures you describe and we can only hope that their awareness of and attention to  the defence risks which Gen. Sanders alluded to , shared by their neighbours in Sweden & Finland not to mention Macron , Sholz et al ; will be replicated here by a Starmer government

Of course it is sadly possible that the PLP in government will be full of the sort of partisan tribalism and vacuous  anti-militarism which we remember and  which your post reminds us of .

The problem with the UK is its class structure; in this case the close association of the military with royalty. If you are a republican, like me, how would joining the army ever be possible?

How do Norwegian republicans resolve that dilemma i wonder ? 

[Deleted]

Feb 1, 2024 10:23:40 GMT domjg said:

Feb 1, 2024 9:29:59 GMT colin said:

The Colonel Blimp in question was Gen Sir Patrick Sanders ,  head of the British army ( or what is left of it )

He was saying that you & I  have enjoyed a cold war peace dividend which is  over, noting that “over the last 30 years, the army has been halved in size; in the last 12 years, we’ve absorbed a 28% reduction”.

After he proposed National Service ,others have drawn attention to the Norwegian model of National Service.

www.defenseone.com/ideas/2024/01/norway-young-people-compete-serve-military/393599/


Norway is not usually associated with the political caricatures you describe and we can only hope that their awareness of and attention to  the defence risks which Gen. Sanders alluded to , shared by their neighbours in Sweden & Finland not to mention Macron , Sholz et al ; will be replicated here by a Starmer government

Of course it is sadly possible that the PLP in government will be full of the sort of partisan tribalism and vacuous  anti-militarism which we remember and  which your post reminds us of .

I think the tories have the edge in 'anti-militarism' wouldn't you say, in terms of actions and not just their vacuous words? 

Well I know what you mean. I would describe it as neglect.

And a dreadful complacency.

[Deleted]

Feb 1, 2024 10:05:04 GMT crossbat11 said:

Feb 1, 2024 9:29:59 GMT colin said:

The Colonel Blimp in question was Gen Sir Patrick Sanders ,  head of the British army ( or what is left of it )

He was saying that you & I  have enjoyed a cold war peace dividend which is  over, noting that “over the last 30 years, the army has been halved in size; in the last 12 years, we’ve absorbed a 28% reduction”.

After he proposed National Service ,others have drawn attention to the Norwegian model of National Service.

www.defenseone.com/ideas/2024/01/norway-young-people-compete-serve-military/393599/


Norway is not usually associated with the political caricatures you describe and we can only hope that their awareness of and attention to  the defence risks which Gen. Sanders alluded to , shared by their neighbours in Sweden & Finland not to mention Macron , Sholz et al ; will be replicated here by a Starmer government

Of course it is sadly possible that the PLP in government will be full of the sort of partisan tribalism and vacuous  anti-militarism which we remember and  which your post reminds us of .

This is a more nuanced look at the issue of strengthening our military defence capability across Europe with the prospect of a Trump presidency severely weakening the NATO alliance. The author doesn't dismiss the idea of some sort of part time civilian force supporting full time professional military services, but makes the point that the latter is the key element in national security and governments need to make professional full time military service a much more sort after and desirable profession.

This will require investment and promotion. The danger of banging on about civilian armies and national service is that they overrate the potential defence contribution of such a force and it panders to those who think it is some popular ruse to combat juvenile delinquency. Politics, in other words, superseding practical ways to improve our defence and security.

Having doubts about national service is not anti-militarism. That's silly anti-Labour (PLP??) tribalism on your part. Especially when the sceptics are keen to increase and strengthen our professional and full time military services.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/01/europe-defence-army-us-donald-trump-eu

I entirely agree that full time military strength should be increased.

I think Sanders' view of things derived from perceived lessons the war in UKraine ie  , unless a standing army of Chinese Communist Party dimensions is contemplated, a citizen military has to be there in reserve.

[steve]

"The problem with the UK is its class structure; in this case the close association of the military with royalty. If you are a republican, like me, how would joining the army ever be possible?"

As a republican myself I don't see the dilemma.

When you affirm in the police service you swear to serve the king ( queen in my case) in the office of constable but this for me was only in respect to their status as notional head of state in other words you were swearing to the head of state to protect the public with fairness and integrity.

The army oath of allegiance does swear  personal fealty but if you're not so enamoured with the Windsor clan  you can read it as just pledging to obey lawful orders.

It doesn't really matter who the head of state is you're essentially swearing to be a public servant.

I know military personnel can be more fixated on the trappings of monarchy but this doesn't have to prevent a republican serving.

[robbiealive]

crossbat11

"Having doubts about national service is not anti-militarism. That's silly anti-Labour (PLP??) tribalism on your part." [Hasn't  the Tory party run down army numbers? It will soon be the size of a large Premiership football attendance. Perhaps we can recruit directly from the West Brom terraces.)

One might expect Labour MPs (the PLP) to be tribalists!
It's the old problem on this site (as with alla Turca) summed up in:

"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye;
and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."

For heathens on here unfamiliar with biblical exegesis, the beam refers not to a shining light (as I thought as a puzzled child!) but to a large timber. graham will explain.
The notion of a citizen army sounds very French Revolutionary. I don't know how effective such forces have been in practice. Anyway we are not going to have one.

& I note we are spared another debate on capital punishment a la mercian . That's not going to happen either.

[leftieliberal]

Feb 1, 2024 10:18:03 GMT moby said:

Feb 1, 2024 9:29:59 GMT colin said:

Norway is not usually associated with the political caricatures you describe and we can only hope that their awareness of and attention to  the defence risks which Gen. Sanders alluded to , shared by their neighbours in Sweden & Finland not to mention Macron , Sholz et al ; will be replicated here by a Starmer government

Of course it is sadly possible that the PLP in government will be full of the sort of partisan tribalism and vacuous  anti-militarism which we remember and  which your post reminds us of .

The problem with the UK is its class structure; in this case the close association of the military with royalty. If you are a republican, like me, how would joining the army ever be possible?

Actually, the Army is the only service you could join. Since Cromwell there has been no Royal Army, unlike the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force.

[Deleted]

Feb 1, 2024 10:05:04 GMT crossbat11 said:

Feb 1, 2024 9:29:59 GMT colin said:

Having doubts about national service is not anti-militarism.

Of course not.

I was refering to it when accompanied by stuff like :

"With some Colonel Blimp wittering on recently about the reintroduction of a batty version of national service, I'm getting the Sounds of the Seventies in my ears. Rhodes Boyson rides again. Is this the future of Toryism, I wonder? Eat Nigel Farage's lunch as a way of getting the over 90s back on board."

[steve]

"Deal reached over EU’s €50bn Ukraine support package after leaders overcome Viktor Orbán objections"

While Orban's objections didn't prevent continuing military aid The European Union has sent €28 billion worth of military aid to Kyiv so far and committed about €21.2 billion more for this year, it did prevent longer term investment to aid in the recovery from war criminal Putin's invasion of Ukraine.

It's gratifying to see movement on this.

[leftieliberal]

inews.co.uk/opinion/british-muslim-spoil-ballot-vote-labour-2882063
One polling issue that has not been discussed as far as I can recall is the support in the Muslim communities for Labour.
The question I have, that those with good links in the Muslim communities may be able to answer, is will mass abstentions lose seats for Labour? My own suspicion is that unless Muslims put up independent candidates, no-one else will notice as constituencies with large numbers of Muslims are heavily Labour anyway.

[alec]

crossbat11 - "With some Colonel Blimp wittering on recently about the reintroduction of a batty version of national service.."

Yes, I caught the tail end of that particular nonsense. I didn't catch all the details, but I assume it's the usual - so bloated, overweight old git calling for immediate national service for someone else? Quelle surprise, as they say in La Belle France.

[neilj]

Savanta (polls a little contrary to day, but both YouGov and Savanta have a similar end result)

NEW Westminster Voting Intention

📈19pt Labour lead

🌹Lab 46 (+3)
🌳Con 27 (-2)
🔶LD 10 (=)
➡️Reform 9 (+1)
🌍Green 3 (-1)
🎗️SNP 2 (-1)
⬜️Other 4 (=)

2,279 UK adults, 26-28 January

(chg 19-21 January)

[Deleted]

"Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves said she would cap the tax at 25% but could cut it to boost "competitiveness".

"Ms Reeves said Labour would keep two more recent government announcements.
The party plans to keep full expensing, allowing companies to write off new investment costs, as announced by Chancellor Jeremy Hunt in the Autumn Statement. The annual investment allowance announced by Mr Hunt, enabling companies to deduct some investments from taxable profits, will also remain in place."

BBC

[steve]

Ed Davey has apologised for the first time for his role as a minister in the Horizon scandal, with the Liberal Democrat leader saying he was “sorry I did not see through the Post Office’s lies”.

Writing in the Guardian, Davey, whose business minister role from 2010 to 2012 involved oversight of the Post Office, said officials had initially advised him to not meet Alan Bates, who led the campaign into the unjust targeting of post office operators.

“The Horizon Post Office scandal is the greatest miscarriage of justice of our time, and I am deeply sorry for the families who have had their lives ruined by it,” Davey wrote.

I fell for Post Office lies – and I’m sorry. But I won’t be silent as Tories prey on victims’ trauma

“As one of the ministers over the 20 years of this scandal, including my time as minister responsible for postal affairs, I’m sorry I did not see through the Post Office’s lies – and that it took me five months to meet Alan Bates, the man who has done so much to uncover it.”

Davey wrote: “The Post Office is owned by the government but not run by it, so the official advice I was given when I first became a minister in May 2010 was not to meet Mr Bates. He wrote again urging me to reconsider, and I did then meet him in October.

“But he shouldn’t have had to wait. When Mr Bates told me his concerns about Horizon, I took them extremely seriously and put them to the Post Office. What I got back were categorical assurances – the same lies we now know they were telling the sub-postmasters, journalists, parliament and the courts.”



So over to jib to explain why the only minister with direct involvement with the horizon scandal in twenty years to actually apologise should be singled out for obviously partisan criticism, while all other ministers before and since are given a get out of jail free card.

[pjw1961]

Feb 1, 2024 12:20:12 GMT colin said:

"Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves said she would cap the tax at 25% but could cut it to boost "competitiveness".

"Ms Reeves said Labour would keep two more recent government announcements.
The party plans to keep full expensing, allowing companies to write off new investment costs, as announced by Chancellor Jeremy Hunt in the Autumn Statement. The annual investment allowance announced by Mr Hunt, enabling companies to deduct some investments from taxable profits, will also remain in place."

BBC

Just to say as someone who is well to the left of Reeves politically, I don't have a problem with either of those as a way to encourage badly needed investment. The only thing to watch will be companies manipulating the system to simply avoid tax (which always happens unfortunately).

[alec]

Ukraine: The EU has brushed past Orban's opposition and has agreed the delayed package of aid to Kyiv. It was interesting to see the briefings last week over this, with 'leaked' documents from Brussels suggesting that the EU were working up a plan to shaft the Hungarian economy as part of the blocs response to Orban's love affair with Putin. Love them or loathe them, the EU are good at applying pressure.

Meanwhile, on the battle front, video has emerged in the last hour or so of Russian missile corvette being rather comprehensively destroyed by a Ukrainian naval drone. And in the last few days, the US has also supplied Ukraine with a batch of new high accuracy long distance bombs that can be ground launched with a range of around 100 miles. They are getting these because the Republicans are blocking any further aid from US military stocks, but this weapon is so new the US doesn't have any yet, so Biden can arrange the purchase of these. There was also some talk yesterday of a Russian assault in Donetsk leading to and very large number of losses of tanks and other equipment, plus lots of explosions across Crimea and other parts of Russia itself.

As ever though, the caveats; the Russian leadership remains unconcerned about losses and human suffering, and as in past conflicts, their view of life as cheap means they are willing to throw lots of people at this, regardless of the death toll, and so it goes on.

[alec]

pjw1961 - agreed. The investment rules are helpful. It was one of Osborne's biggest mistakes to slash capital investment allowances when he arrived in No 10. Stupid.

[mercian]

Feb 1, 2024 8:53:42 GMT barbara said:

Jan 31, 2024 23:24:48 GMT mercian said:

The death penalty should be brought back for cases like this. Now we're out of the EU we could do it, but I can't see any of the main parties doing so for the foreseeable future. We'll have to wait for a few more murderers released early to do it again and hope for a massive public outcry.

If killing is wrong, how can it ever be right for the state to kill merely as punishment for a such a crime.
If the tarriff for murder is too small then it needs to be changed.

It isn't always wrong. For instance if a violent criminal broke into my house and attacked me or my family I would feel justified in killing him if I had to.