The objection is not that it is inaccurate, but that the evidence of small scale criminality is elevated into a major issue, and that it is published during an election campaign when one party wants to make this an election issue, despite being irrelevant to the election.
With five political parties in contention, a government can be elected with under a quarter of the votes cast
This is undemocratic and dangerous.
This petition is calling for a national commission to review reform to our voting system.
Please sign.
petition.parliament.uk/petitions/76...
Is that not what I said?
have you read the article?
But, as Jackson points out, his coverage is not inaccurate. Its the framing that distorts.
The article points out that very little of his coverage was about RUK
The problem is that the audience is not journalists, its casual viewers looing only at headlines
The programme was not always clear about who came from which agency. They presented it as an EA decision. As I understand it it was agreed between DEFRA and EA to ease workloads. I don't think it makes a difference to the argument, but I have amended the text
Not a new idea. I remember in 1950 my father driving round Wembley in a van with a loudspeaker on the roof caling on people to vote Labour.
Not guilty. Only Irish ancestor in five generaitons is one great great grandfather from Co Down. Otherwise all Ayrshire or Fife.
Gosh, he's Irish. Enough said!
Relevance?
Have you read the story? It was not immigration that broke Britain.
Strange to use a photo of Rotterdam. There is nowhere in the North East like that.
Who wrote that terrible headline?
We can debate whether MPs who switch parties ought to face a byelection. But Jenrick is a special case. In 2024 he won as a Conservative with 39% of the vote. Reform came third with only 15%. The electors of Newark were clear, they didn't want a Reform MP. Surely a byelection would be proper
a clear majority of elected MPs have considered and approved. It seems likely that a majority of peers agree. This is not scrutiny, it's abuse of power.
This bill has had over 130 hours of scrutiny, plus 5 days of expert evidence in committee. Many of the amendments are clearly wrecking.
Please read the story. How is requiring a pregnancy test appropriate for a request to die. That is not scrutiny, it's obstruction.
Is that not what he said?
But oil and gas companies don't have this technology.
Pear dree
what environmental impact? Can you give references? Most people think there are none, at least compared with most alternatives (solar, wind, nuclear)
Can AI be creative? For the first day of Christmas I tested it, asking Perplexity AI to write a short story about a partridge and a pear tree.
There is a proper debate about whether this is, or is not, a good thing. But I have read worse by real people.
eastangliabylines.co.uk/lifestyle/cu...
You will get that from us for the other eleven days (and the following 354 days). This was a test. I have read a lot of stuff much less engaging written by real people.
Long term our survival as a species depends on finding inexhaustible energy sources. That's what geothermal offers.
Difficult to see how the whole human race torgether could make any impact on the huge volume of molten material down there. We only live on the top metre of a globe. Most of the 6,000 km below us is hot.
if we were to ever exhaust geothermal energy the planet would be dead. But it is inconceivable that we could ever do that.
