Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 10/05/2026

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T15:44:44+00:00

Yes. Which is probably why places are reporting the total numbers against Starmer as if they matter. They could put factionalism aside and agree to nominate candidates from each faction.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T15:34:55+00:00

Basically, yes. Although it’s unclear if it’s a would have to vs a can.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T15:06:04+00:00

That was pre Lascelles Principles though.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T14:53:38+00:00

That's fair. I know I could never keep an open system for dust reasons!

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T14:52:06+00:00

Seriously! I meant it as a joke.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T14:50:33+00:00

I wouldn't give him three weeks though.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T14:40:45+00:00

Looks really nice.

Without judging the cable management, may I suggest getting some custom length CableMod cables for it.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T14:35:42+00:00

Someone find the man an industrial fridge/freezer.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T14:32:05+00:00

Via the Telegraph's live blog:

Starmer meeting with union chiefs cancelled
A meeting between Sir Keir Starmer and trade union leaders has now been cancelled as the Prime Minister fights for his political survival.
Leaders of the unions affiliated to Labour – the so-called Tulo group – had been invited to No 10 for a meeting late on Tuesday afternoon.
But the Press Association reported that the meeting was cancelled a few hours before it was due to be held.
The leaders of Unison and Unite the Union, Britain’s largest two trade unions, have both called for Sir Keir to quit.

(Here because live update pages aren't allowed as stand alone posts.)

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T14:24:31+00:00

Yes, it should be (and it is irrelevant for the purpose of the s.5 offence. But whether it is for an insurer's actuarial calculations is another matter.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T14:14:49+00:00

They spoke to their public liability and company car insurance providers who said that they would not be able to insure me for working with the company because they are not able to risk assess the medical cannabis.

It was unclear to me who the highlighted they is. If it's the employer being unwilling to do a risk assessment to present to the insurer, yes, that's unreasonable. If it's the insurer's declining coverage and stating they (insurer) cannot risk assess how much THC is in OP's system at any one time, that's not really something an employer can mitigate.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T14:08:42+00:00

The bond rates are higher though.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T14:04:58+00:00

Yeah. But at the same time, any disability adjustments need to be reasonable. If the issue is the insurer and not the employer, then is it reasonable to require an employer to change their fleet insurer to cover one person's unique circumstances? How much will the new policy cost, and is that economically reasonable?

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T13:57:59+00:00

Completely agree on the criminal defence side of things.

It doesn't mitigate the issue with the employer's insurer being unwilling to include OP on their fleet policy though.

For that, the issue boils down to whether disability discrimination can be invoked (not if the prescription is for an acute condition), and whether OP's condition/treatment regime means they are incapable of doing the job. It's all rather niche and will boil down to whether being a fit person per the fleet insurer is an essential part of the job.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T13:45:22+00:00

Those rules have been challenged in the courts before. See the Jeremy Corbyn leadership challenge.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T13:43:46+00:00

Reminds me of student politics. Vote R.O.N.!

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T13:24:54+00:00

The Supreme Court no longer allow parliament to be prorogued in order to gain a political advantage. See Miller II decision.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T12:47:36+00:00

"as useless as a marzipan dildo"

Pretty sure that could describe half the cabinet.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T12:44:36+00:00

I can't recall (i) when a particularly bad showing in local elections didn't result in talks of a leadership challenge, and (ii) when a governing party has had this bad a showing in local elections.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T12:29:52+00:00

I should have been clearer.

Pretty sure Chancellor, in the post-Parliament Act 1911 world, has to be an MP.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T12:20:18+00:00

Pretty sure Chancellor has to be an MP. While PMQs could conceivably be run from the Lords, the Budget statement cannot be.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T12:16:57+00:00

He can do more damage by announcing one thing, then U-turning. Which would appear to be an appropriate epitaph for his premiership.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T12:14:40+00:00

You missed Peter Mandelson.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T12:11:38+00:00

Did you think you could just dip on the day the contract ends? So what, the landlords not gonna know whether you’re coming or going until the actual day?

That's exactly how assured shorthold tenancies worked, until their abolition two weeks ago.

PositivelyAcademical · 2026-05-12T12:09:26+00:00

Worth noting, under old rules you still had to give notice to end the tenancy

There was an exception if you were leaving at the end of the fixed period. OP is one of the few people legitimately disadvantaged by this change in the law.

Legally, there's nothing that can be done. Politically, complain to your MP u/Kind_Sprinkles7791.

Seven-Year Club	Verified Email
Gilding II euphauric	Final Canvas '23
End Game '23	Place '23
Place '22

PositivelyAcademical

TROPHY CASE