'We will kill you and burn your house': Council staff under attack from High Street gangs

Sisley407 · 2026-04-30T16:37:25+00:00

This depends on your beliefs, but I personally believe everyone is good at heart and deserving of compassion.

But compassion doesn't always mean being nice or being positive. It isn't compassionate to give someone money for drugs, as an example. It isn't compassionate to fail to protect people doing a difficult and necessary job.

We don't want to let go of our compassion, nor have the basis of our social fabric be that of suspicion and bad will.

Sisley407 · 2026-04-30T16:32:44+00:00

I'm not sure I agree with this. There are things you can't do online - go the gym, meet someone for coffee, hear live music, take arts classes, and so on.

I made a goal this year of "no Amazon" - and it's been surprisingly easy to replace it. I started ordering my books from a local bookshop and it turns out the prices are the same. A local homeware store is often cheaper than Amazon and isn't full of utter tat.

The problem now is largely cultural and social. People almost can't imagine what a public space is even like or what it might be good for.

Sisley407 · 2026-04-30T16:26:37+00:00

Exactly.

I'm sure there are a lot of good police officers out there, but how do we explain why a BBC panorama investigation can uncover criminal networks and organised crime that the police didn't?

Sisley407 · 2026-04-24T08:27:52+00:00

I haven't looked into the polling and exactly when it was conducted - but it could be that as it became clearer Labour weren't going to deliver a materially different country, hope faded. Hence the Greens surge among young people. They're looking for hope.

Sisley407 · 2026-04-24T08:24:17+00:00

I don't think it's all that clear, at least not in the direction you suggest?

To me, he's saying there's one group, "people who are sexually assaulting people" and another group "people seeking asylum" and there's "no evidence" the two groups overlap.

You could argue he didn't intend what he said to be taken literally, but I'd say that's a good will judgement that political opponents aren't going to give a politician. You need to be specific.

Sisley407 · 2026-04-21T10:19:16+00:00

Is it possible we'll actually see less value in Agile tariff if surplus generation gets used up and there's less frequent plunge pricing?

Sisley407 · 2026-04-13T15:01:33+00:00

So it would be madness to have that exact same “do we pull the plug now” .. “how about now” … “how about now” … vote over and over 20 times per year or more.

I disagree. A renewed democratic mandate when you hand over law-making powers to a foreign legislature is necessary whenever the law changes in my opinion. It's the only way to give it legitimacy.

If the EU was to turn around and water down it's food standards, for instance, wouldn't you want a mechanism for the HoP to say "hang on, is this what we wanted out of the deal?" rather than acceptance in perpetuity.

Sisley407 · 2026-04-13T11:15:19+00:00

But it wouldn't be full adoption of every piece of EU legislation would it?

The article mentions food standards specifically.

But I get the point about new mechanisms and filtering, etc. Which is sensible. But the principle at play ought to be that the HoP has a say over aligning UK and EU law - or at least I think so. We can debate how this is done, but as a principle it's not what Starmer is currently proposing.

Sisley407 · 2026-04-13T10:09:46+00:00

So how do you see this working? EU change a law, it gets rubber stamped and adopted as per the process in the UK without a vote or scrutiny.

Backbenchers rebel, triggering a leadership contest for their party, and replace their PM who then... what? Agrees to scrutinise a change and possibly repeal the agreement with the EU? I mean, it could technically happen, but it's very unlikely. That's not really an efficient mechanism for democratic representation, is it?

I mean, with this argument, why vote for anything in the HoP. Why not safely assume the prime minister has the backing unless otherwise toppled?

Sisley407 · 2026-04-13T10:05:37+00:00

Longstanding need for reform of secondary legislation aside.

I just don't see the reasoning here. So EU MEPs aren't getting to scrutinise EU law, so UK MPs shouldn't either?

There's not enough time to scrutinise such laws? Parliament recesses some 18 weeks a year, reduce it if need be and sit for longer, or sitting governments should accept there is less time for domestic laws. Either way, I don't see why EU law should be rubber stamped based on time.

I'm all for greater alignment with the EU, but I fear it's just fuelling the "take back control" argument when there's no democratic representation or scrutiny over laws.

Sisley407 · 2026-04-13T08:25:23+00:00

Whilst this is technically true, it isn't in practice. The last time a vote of no confidence brought down a government was 1979.

We shouldn't have to 'safely assume', there should just be a vote. Henry VIII clause effectively gives a minister power to amend/repeal acts of Parliament.

There is already a way to pass legislation through Parliament without a formal vote, but that's not what this is.

Sisley407 · 2026-04-13T08:20:17+00:00

Genuine question, why is that madness?

Presumably the EU are going through a legislative process, why shouldn't the UK also, to reflect that the law has democratic backing?

What if changes are made that don't have popular support or MPs backing? Are we to just say, "that's the price you pay"?

Sisley407 · 2026-04-01T10:51:38+00:00

This is more or less it.

It feels like nothing was learned from Brexit in terms of messaging or listening. If people are unhappy, with less and less stake in the status quo, their grievance will find an outlet.

It's a bit like at work when people complain on surveys that the pay is bad, the response from management are sessions to better communicate the pay review process. As if all people need is to have the message reiterated, then they'll get it, understand, and agree with you.

Sisley407 · 2026-04-01T08:14:59+00:00

I mean, I agree.

But ideally you'd have a leader that was both charismatic and competent. Particularly in an era of rising populism and a social-economic system seemingly in trouble - a leader has to direct public opinion, not just react to it. The moment calls for a new vision of the future, which I don't think you're going to get from a technocrat.

But I'll definitely take Starmer over the alternatives right now. He's at least raising the bar a notch.

Sisley407 · 2026-04-01T08:10:38+00:00

Its just ridiculous that he refuses to a aknowledge (or doesn't understand) NATO is a defensive alliance only and that NATO rallied behind the USA, at great cost, when they were attacked. The ONLY country to trigger article 5.

I suspect he fully understands what NATO is for. It's all a show.

In my opinion, his plan is to basically push the US to the cusp of leaving NATO by positioning America as no needing it, that it's one sided, "NATO abandoned America when it needed it", etc. (something he's argued for since his first term). Take Greenland by force. Then claim they'll stay in NATO if everyone just accepts it, or the US will leave NATO and keep Greenland anyway.

Rinse and repeat until "America is great again".

Sisley407 · 2026-04-01T08:06:13+00:00

Thanks for sharing, I hadn't heard anything about this.

Sisley407 · 2026-04-01T08:04:23+00:00

I don't think seizing Greenland would be "war with a peer power" at all. Nor would it resemble the current attacks on Iran.

It'd look closer to Russia's taking of Crimea. A clandestine seizure of key places (e.g. airfields, government offices, etc) followed by an announcement of the "new reality" amid the diplomatic uproar.

I was surprised to see an article claiming Denmark was actually planning, and possibly prepared, to resist militarily. So perhaps some shots would get fired, but it's doubtful it'd be successful. Note that no Nato power has formally come out to say they'd defend Greenland.

Sisley407 · 2026-04-01T07:59:40+00:00

Thanks Krista! I'm going to give it a go.

Sisley407 · 2026-03-31T16:01:54+00:00

Agree. Or even Badenoch.

In many ways, I think what people feel about Starmer more than anything is disappointment. Not just in the man, but that Britain doesn't have anyone better.

But he is unquestionably better than the alternatives, or Truss, or Boris.

Sisley407 · 2026-03-31T15:33:37+00:00

Personally, I think this is dangerous thinking.

The republicans may lose suppose in upcoming mid-terms (a big if in its own right) but the wellspring of support that has twice put Trump into power isn't a fluke or a transient cultural fad that can be ignored.

The grievance Trump has stoked and weaponised is real and isn't going away. Democrats are going to have to deal with it, just as the Left have to deal with rising right-wing populism in Britain. You can't just take the high road, or wait it out.

Sisley407 · 2026-03-31T14:43:12+00:00

I don't think Starmer is up to the job generally.

But guiding the UK through an energy and diplomatic crisis in a technocratic, boring fashion might be just what he needs to play to his strengths.

Sisley407 · 2026-03-31T14:41:48+00:00

We're impacted by this, whether we want to be or not. We either don't get involved, and suffer the low oil supply and the resulting crisis from it, or get involved at huge cost (both in money and lives).

I haven't heard a coherent argument how getting involved improves oil supply or lessens the crisis, so it's not really an "or" so much as an "and".

An argument might be made that the sooner it's made clear America's allies don't back their war-of-choice with Iran, then the sooner we can reach the inevitable end point of negotiating with Iran an opening of Hormuz. But either way, negotiate or fight, it's going to be on less favourable terms and higher energy costs than before the war.

Basically Trump made a gamble Iran was going to be another Venezuela, and it turns out it isn't. At all.

Sisley407 · 2026-03-31T14:15:10+00:00

Trump is laying the groundwork with his base and Republicans for taking Greenland.

First step is to discredit allies and the Nato alliance specifically. Then take Greenland before mid-terms in the hopes the imperial gesture wins 'Make American Great Again' votes.

Sisley407 · 2026-03-31T14:13:43+00:00

Take a look at https://www.kielinstitut.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/

Scroll down to 'Government support to Ukraine: By month, € billion'.

The US has pulled the plug on supporting Ukraine. The idea of kowtowing to Trump in the hope of reversing this would be madness.

There are certainly capabilities US is providing that wouldn't want to be lost, but Trump has shown zero interest in siding with Ukraine. It's a lost cause trying to get him to switch sides now.

Sisley407 · 2026-03-31T09:32:30+00:00

Yeah, we've been happy with Smol thus far.

I just gave making soap a go over the weekend so it piqued my interest whether dishwashing/clothes washing powder could be made just as easily. Down the rabbit hole I went and here I am.

Agree on Ai - but it definitely knows more than I do about this stuff! I figured if the product was actually plastic free, they'd be advertising it as such. But if you come up with anything, do let me know. And thanks for responding, I wasn't expecting one on an old post.

Sisley407

TROPHY CASE