Mailman - if you do not vote Conservative, that does not mean you have to vote Labour; there is also Reform. "Ah, but," you will say, "If I vote Reform, then that will split the vote, and Labour will get in by the back door...." Not necessarily; at the last election, the Brexit Party, the precursor to Reform, took their votes from Labour, and had Boris done the honourable thing, and withdrawn his candidates from those seats he was never going to win, Labour would be just a rump of its former self - all the votes that Labour lost did NOT go to the Conservatives. Do not assume that, at the next election, those who switched votes in 2019 will revert to their old ways in 2024; the Conservatives are, quite rightly, going to haemorrhage votes; Reform intends to put candidates in every seat, so just make sure that it is Reform that gets your vote.

My electricity supplier has switched from telephone calls (which I ignore) to emails and text messages (which I also ignore) in its quest to foist a smart meter on me. Now it is offering a £100 credit. How easily can I be bought 😀

It doesn't add up...,
That's the one I had in mind. Hadn't heard that he was a kiddie-fiddler, but after saying it, the article admits there's nothing definitive in evidence. Not a fan of the just the vibe approach to history, the way it's decided that Chopin wrote romantic music so he must have been gay.

tomo,
Local governments might be run a little more carefully if their pensions were to rank lowest in the lineup of creditors when it came to insolvency. I suppose it's exactly the opposite, and still underwritten by the long-suffering taxpayer.

Melbourne had a concrete truck catch fire yesterday. As Cadogan points out, you're not going to solve concrete's CO2 contribution by using electric trucks.

Surely they should have reckoned with the Auk?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Auchinleck

tomo,
Fair enough on "reporter". Another case of drift in word meanings. It *used* to mean a person who relays the facts, but has turned into a synonym for "propagandist".

The only thing Auchinleck meant to me was a commander in WW2 North Africa. Now I can tie it to another place (and another campaign, perchance leading to victory?) Simon Webb is right to criticise the lack of reporting, but what about the lack of policing? Seems to be a pattern. Like with Dublin, it appears the people are replacing the civilised process of leaving it to the police, with something more effective. If/When police start asking themselves do I serve the public, or the government?, that might indicate a nearby tipping point.

On pension investments:

... only 19 per cent of pension savers support their money going towards oil and gas

One reason often used to justify these schemes is the small proportion of people competent to adminster their own portfolios: leave it to the experts. Might it be that that the 19 percent includes *all* the competent people? I suspect so.

In the other article, there are various descriptions along the lines:

require occupational pension schemes to take account of climate change in their investment practices

If the Pensions Minister is correct that the choice "does not need to be between profits or the planet", then surely all they need do is instruct the pension funds to maximise investor returns.

Received a blurb from my state superannuation fund yesterday. They're pretty woke, but I don't get too involved since my stake isn't large in that fund. Was amusing reading between the lines in one section on investor feedback where they started with the usual soft-soap about environmental sustainability, social outcomes, good corporate practices, then:

But fund members said responsible investment should not come at the cost of generating good returns and ensuring investment decisions support the best outcomes for retirees.

blah blah

We thank our members for their robust engagement and for their frank feedback.

Sounds like somebody had his bottom spanked. Unfortunately, I don't think it was taken in the spirit of now go and sin no more.

Listened to the John Anderson interview with John Cleese. Quite enjoyable, and Cleese wasn't psycho-analysing himself quite as much as he usually does in serious interviews. No great surprise that Cleese loathes Trump, but Anderson seemed taken aback when Cleese approved of Biden's thinking. Thinking? While they covered the accurate vision of the future in Life of Brian (I want have babies ... you haven't got a womb ... don't you oppress me), I would have liked them to have contrasted Whoops Apocalypse with today's world (In other news: the President has been taken to hospital for some routine brain surgery).

Tomo,

I had no idea about Auchinleck until 30 second ago when I saw something on the YouTube pointing out there had been rioting there in the last few days.

The last place to get news from is the MSM. I know, sounds awfully conspiracisty right! But the news hasn't been about broadcasting the news for decades but the mfm's opinion on what you should believe.

Sad state of affairs but there you go.

When Labour gets in to power next year, as these "conservatives" are doing a bang up job of getting Starmer installed in to number 10...things will only get worse.

Mailman,
Whatever process led to it, it was an astonishingly stupid question. The po-faced, bovine expression on the interviewer's face while the bloke was giving her a bucketing contributed to my feeling that she was impressively dim.

Here's a critique of a climate propaganda TV doco in Ireland. Nice touch with the UN green helmets coming in to enforce world environmental standards. Let's see them patrolling in China...