Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[mongers]

Sorry the 'what is that' was more still bafflement at the pricing. As including a station I can't possibly travel from first (as you can only wake between it and Elizabeth line) making it cheaper is whack.

I know what a 2 for 1 is as my husband and I use all the time.

 

[Sheilbh]

Corbyn of course declares on the side of Hamas:

[...]

What a tool. I'd say it was worth Johnson and his minions' rampage to avoid Corbyn as PM.

Wanted to remove from that thread but I saw he also referred to it as "events" in Israel which is quite the euphemism.

I like Rayner but one of my issues with her is that obviously she was relatively close to Corbyn and claims that there would have been no difference in Britain's policy to Ukraine under a Corbyn or Johnson. Which I think, looking at all of Corbyn's politics in his entire life and his response to Ukraine as a backbencher, is demonstrably bullshit.

It was the worst choice the parties have ever given to the British public but I think the sense that Corbyn was basically not to be trusted on foreign policy and security was a big part of why people picked Johnson over him.

Edit: And of course Corbyn has hosted Hamas and Hezbollah in Parliament before. Much like his support for Sinn Fein and IRA figures over the SDLP, or radical violent groups in South Africa over the ANC, he always seems like one of the English radicals who is very careless with other people's blood and lives - which I find a fairly despicable tradition

[Josquius]

Corbyn of course declares on the side of Hamas:

[...]

What a tool. I'd say it was worth Johnson and his minions' rampage to avoid Corbyn as PM.

Wanted to remove from that thread but I saw he also referred to it as "events" in Israel which is quite the euphemism.

Context and speaker matters of course. He probably meant it in a dumb way. But what's wrong with saying events in Israel otherwise?
What else could it be called? Invasion is over egging it and terrorist attack also seems a bit of an oversimplification.
 There's also the broader context to consider. It's a perpetual mess... Which though accurate would not be an appropriate word to use.

[Sheilbh]

Context and speaker matters of course. He probably meant it in a dumb way. But what's wrong with saying events in Israel otherwise?
What else could it be called? Invasion is over egging it and terrorist attack also seems a bit of an oversimplification.
 There's also the broader context to consider. It's a perpetual mess... Which though accurate would not be an appropriate word to use.

Attacks, violence, loss of life etc something that acknowledges rather than obfuscating the fact of what has happened.

[Sheilbh]

Totally spearate - but I was just reading about Sharon White stepping down from John Lewis. It talked about the fact that she grasped the nettle her predecessors hadn't on shutting down some unprofitable stores.

But inevitably, given that she barely survived a vote of no confidence before stepping down it broadly wasn't positive. Some suggesting that her background (she was hired from the civil service) wasn't right for a retailer - some saying she was "too clever for retail". That retail is all in the detail - it's "shopkeeping not management theory". Criticisms of bringing in "all theory people", no clear strategy and allowing things to be briefed that sort of went against the core brand (like selling part of the company so it wouldn't be staff owned anymore). Plus suggestions that she was too used to the "comfortable decorum of civil service life" and not able to take hard decision quickly enough. Plus apparently results might not be looking good so she wanted to jump before she was pushed (as I say, she'd already narrowly survived one vote of no confidence).

Then at the end noting that she's not likely she'll get a big payout as she apparently has another, more attractive job lined up - and the rumours are it's to be cabinet secretary for a new Labour government...

I'm sure she'll be very good but those criticisms don't inspire too much hope for a new head of the civil service...

[Josquius]

Tories =Debenhams.

[Richard Hakluyt]

Tories are more like Wilko these days 

[Maladict]

With airlines apparently cracking down on people just staying at said layover and not continuing flight.

That doesn't work. You won't be getting your checked luggage back without a hefty fine and you're voiding your return ticket.

It does work and is a thing that some people do.

https://jacksflightclub.com/travel-hub/what-is-hidden-city-airfare-ticketing

But yes, generally shouldn't bring checked luggage unless known your luggage isn't checked all the way through.

That link agrees with what I wrote. It would only work on the return leg (which means you end up in a different place from where you started, unless you book another, one-way flight) and only if your luggage isn't checked through, which is almost never.
Hardly sounds like a massive travel hack.

[Gups]

This thread has jumped the shark

[garbon]

With airlines apparently cracking down on people just staying at said layover and not continuing flight.

That doesn't work. You won't be getting your checked luggage back without a hefty fine and you're voiding your return ticket.

It does work and is a thing that some people do.

https://jacksflightclub.com/travel-hub/what-is-hidden-city-airfare-ticketing

But yes, generally shouldn't bring checked luggage unless known your luggage isn't checked all the way through.

That link agrees with what I wrote. It would only work on the return leg (which means you end up in a different place from where you started, unless you book another, one-way flight) and only if your luggage isn't checked through, which is almost never.
Hardly sounds like a massive travel hack.

Airlines are pissed off enough to crackdown so...

[Tonitrus]

On the checked luggage complication...I haven't flown with a checked bag (except a couple times for work, which require carrying too much crap) in forever.  And most doing this don't factor that in.

[Sheilbh]

Obviously

HS2 services to Manchester may run slower than normal trains

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/oct/07/sunaks-plan-to-run-part-of-hs2-on-existing-track-may-be-slower-than-existing-service

[Josquius]

Britain is a country in decline. Trains of the future will be slower, more expensive, and less comfortable than trains of today.
Thus is the tory way.

[Josquius]

Back to the actual topic of the brexit thread. Planning


Seen elsewhere.

"planning and associated processes like public inquiries that were often the focus of narratives of delay,...[but] it is often the time spent organising finance that is the major determinant of infrastructure project temporalities, especially for sectors such as nuclear power (Hatchwell, 2015) and major rail schemes where potentially controversial balances between public and private funding must be struck." [Marshall and Cowell 2016). In short it suits everyone to blame planning, and its not without blame, but solid research suggests first, its small beer when looked across the timeframe of design and delivery of major projects, and second its been the focus of large scale reform because its the visible bit of the delay [and it does no harm to politicians to kick planners]. Government flip-floppery on the other hand means endless consultants reports, absence of a secure skills base etc.

Linking off to https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0263774X16642768#bibr41-0263774X16642768

To which my thoughts are yes. Technically. But this financial divvering is an ideological choice from the way the tories try to avoid paying fir anything normally. It's not as inherently baked into the system as the broken way planning works.

Thoughts?

[Duque de Bragança]

Obviously

HS2 services to Manchester may run slower than normal trains

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/oct/07/sunaks-plan-to-run-part-of-hs2-on-existing-track-may-be-slower-than-existing-service

 

The gift that keeps on giving?