dannyrye.bsky.social
Associate Prof in Politics. Londoner in Liverpool. Writing a book about power. Also researching activism, political organisation, UK parties (esp. Labour Party). Otherwise, walking, cricket, music. Views are either mine or someone else's.
193 posts
703 followers
584 following
Prolific Poster
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
The text on defence cooperation, linked to EU law on defence procurement being negotiated, is more concrete. Ditto the provisions on carbon border adjustment and energy, which also entail alignment with EU law. These, with the quid pro quo on fishing, are the economic core of the deal.
comment in response to
post
Come on you Dons!!!
comment in response to
post
Quite
comment in response to
post
As I noted yesterday it is entirely Starmer’s polarising language that has driven this debate. Cooper’s language, in white paper and since, much more measured and balanced. Seems the Home Sec recognises the gravity and sensitivity of this issue but some in Downing St don’t.
comment in response to
post
Once again everyone will pay the price for a govt that refuses to confront the trade-offs it faces. Failing to fix or pay for social care not only makes social care worse, it makes local govt and the NHS worse. I suspect voters will care more abt that than 50k off net migration via care visas.
comment in response to
post
Everyone wants welfare reform until their niece's PIP is cut. Everyone wants fewer universities until their grand kid's gets closed mid-degree.
comment in response to
post
Um, yes. I asked a question. I got an answer, for which I was grateful. That's it.
comment in response to
post
Such a phrase could easily be misinterpreted.
comment in response to
post
Yes, quite. This is why I asked. And yes, rephrasing would be a good idea imo.
comment in response to
post
Not to everyone. I was just asking for clarification, which was provided and gratefully received.
comment in response to
post
Thanks for clarifying.
comment in response to
post
Two comments / questions: 1) an interesting move, yes. There's a political space there potentially to be exploited, but how sincere is it? Is it just opportunism? 2) you refer to the "right wing Jewish press" in your article. Can you explain more precisely what you mean by that term please?