They must believe that Robbins has nothing to incriminate them, I guess?

That's quite hard to believe, of course.

But, seriously, this is hardly better. The civil servants should have insisted it was reported to ministers, at least. And the Govt is deeply incompetent and dysfunctional if it cannot access the results from vetting procedures.

This was the ambassador to Washington! And no one thought to ask?

I'm not an expert but I'd suggest that next time they vet a person, *someone* gets informed of the result. Maybe that might help the system work, I dunno.

If that's true, it's a level of incompetence that is rather breathtaking.

Polanski is probably better equipped to do so than Corbyn ever was, I think.

I thought "all mouth and no trousers" meant all bravado, no performance.

To give it to them, Pogrund and Maguire really have been pursuing this reporting consistently for a while now.

The difference is that it is landing.

But Thangam Debbonaire is an odd participant to this, no? Having lost to a Green wave.

Speaking against the motion, maybe?

This is the kind of thing that undermines the BBC, imo.

Their calculation was more that the press would support the war regardless, I think. This has been largely true, but public opinion is so firmly against it that this is not enough.

I think both are true; the Greens haven't really been targeted and Polanski is a better politician than Corbyn.

Given that the Greens are aiming for 40-50 seats in 2029, and not an overall majority, it is possible that they won't be subject to the same level of criticism as Labour were in 2019.

People are annoyed with Labour. But more people just can't stand Reform.

It's strong cultural signalling though right? It recalls a previous time *and* annoys liberals.

Burn up with frustration? Really? Why does he care? As in, I don't get what the issue is for him.

As you say, this has been happening for years now.

The media doesn't scrutinise parties who support the status quo and repeat lines about the "nation's credit card".

Lab in 2024 were pretty upfront about not having governing plans. Few cared.

As Greens we do need to be aware that different rules will apply to us.

Surely it's just what they want and believe? It was never about effective electoral strategy, they just hate progressives etc.

The line that this was smart politics was just a cover to do what they wanted anyway. That's why it doesn't change when it isn't "working".

I remember you writing that the Tories in power were *hurt* by an overly supportive press.

I was trying to make a similar point here; dismissal of Greens distorts their view of the actual position. But you know the people and I don't.

This would require a huge shift from Labour. Can't see it happening tbh.

The polls - such as they were - did not seem to have predicted this result at all well. Are you going to analyse that? Would be interesting.

I think this is downstream of the dismissive attitude Labour has to the left generally and the Greens specifically.

Very hard to get a clear idea of this however.

One big issue is whether AI acts as a multiplier regardless of competence. In that case, productivity gains would be lost amidst a pile of drek (that you will need an AI to sort).

Ie, what if we use AI to create lots of work for other AIs?

I honestly don't get the appeal of Janan Ganesh columns.

He wants a return to austerity/Osborne economics, can't stand the left and is pretty misanthropic.

I can understand why that pov has appeal for a rather tiny yet privileged slice of the electorate, but it's so grindingly predictable.

Well said George. I'd only add:

There is a home for progressives in the Green party.

Claim to fame!

From the perspective of a Green, this is also somewhat wrong-headed. For the sake of the country, we want Starmer+McS gone, but for the party they are and were one of our biggest assets.

I really thought that insiders in politics and the media knew about all of this and approved. I guess the Mandelson scandal has made people re-assess, but its still odd.

I really think that the system is selecting for individuals who are flawed in this way. IMO, it is both systemic and personal.

There really seems to have been a journalistic agreement not to push this stuff too hard in the past, which has now completely broken. You broke it, afaict.

Would be interested to hear your perspective on this. Sure others would too.

I *think* McS et al would hate you for either being too left wing (despite Corbyn blah blah blah) or at least for being far, far too friendly to Corbynites.

You are left wing enough for them (and for me).

I think we agree more than disagree.

They hate social liberals because they enable the left, afaict. Eg, Ed Milliband is to be hated because he allowed Corbyn to happen.