Burnham

[Pross]

Burnham still on Mamdani manoeuvres by announcing restrictions on vape and betting shops.

What next for Newport?

Oi!

They have lots of coffe shops and Greggs too.

(The relatively recently refurbished market is supposedly genuinely quite good with lots of independent food places but have never been in there myself as I usually aim to get through the town and out as soon as possible).

 

[briantrumpet]

Oi!

They have lots of coffe shops and Greggs too.

(The relatively recently refurbished market is supposedly genuinely quite good with lots of independent food places but have never been in there myself as I usually aim to get through the town and out as soon as possible).

Not as many coffee shops, not even as many Caffé Neros as certain streets in Leeds, as I'd expected.

 

[Psamathe]

It feels like it would have been very easy to build in exemptions (especially when it would be very small numbers such as people who kill emergency workers in the line of duty) ...

Apparently not. There is no law covering killing of emergency workers and politicians cannot direct the law to be applied differently on an individual basis (eg responding to petitions). Similarly, they cannot retrospectivley change the law (creating a law applying to emergency service workers).

So any exemptions have to apply to all convicted of the same offence.

But they might (apparently) try eg exclude those with sentences longer than some threshold but then it's been said that they wouldn't be releasing enough to create the prison space they need.

I'm not a lawyer and thus just repeating reports I've seen/heard from those more knowledgeable.

 

[Dorset Boy]

Burnham still on Mamdani manoeuvres by announcing restrictions on vape and betting shops.

What next for Newport?

Which of the many Newports?

 

[Dorset Boy]

Will Burnham go to Burnham on Sea this week?

(I doubt it as it's not in the north-west).

 

[Pross]

Apparently not. There is no law covering killing of emergency workers and politicians cannot direct the law to be applied differently on an individual basis (eg responding to petitions). Similarly, they cannot retrospectivley change the law (creating a law applying to emergency service workers).

So any exemptions have to apply to all convicted of the same offence.

But they might (apparently) try eg exclude those with sentences longer than some threshold but then it's been said that they wouldn't be releasing enough to create the prison space they need.

I'm not a lawyer and thus just repeating reports I've seen/heard from those more knowledgeable.

Strange as they have specific laws for crimes committed against emergency workers. The other thing people keep forgetting is that parliament is in recess so there is a limit on what the government can do with anything at present (presumably why Burnham is focussing on little details for the time being).

 

[Psamathe]

Strange as they have specific laws for crimes committed against emergency workers. The other thing people keep forgetting is that parliament is in recess so there is a limit on what the government can do with anything at present (presumably why Burnham is focussing on little details for the time being).

(Just scanning today's news (and links)

On Monday, Downing Street said the prime minister had “pushed hard on what more we could do” but it was not possible to exempt “one or two offenders” from early release, as manslaughter of an emergency worker was not a stand-alone offence. Instead, if they wanted to block the release of Cole and Bowers then every offender with a manslaughter conviction would be affected.
(from https://www.theguardian.com/law/202...early-release-scheme-pc-andrew-harper-killers)

 

[Psamathe]

(Crossing many threads but ...)
I guess recent weather will be making it harder for Burham to approve more North Sea hydrocarbon extraction (which he is rumoured to favour). Repeating heat waves with Met Office heat warnings, lots of reports of empty rivers and reservoirs, hose pipe bans. Polling apparently shows the public were already supportive of Climate measures but this summer has really pushed those concerns higher up public agenda.

So were Burnham to approve new drilling, irrespective of any justification eg we need the gas anyway, etc. it would be making it so much easier for those opposed to argue their objections and get headline coverage.

 

[Pblakeney]

(Crossing many threads but ...)
I guess recent weather will be making it harder for Burham to approve more North Sea hydrocarbon extraction (which he is rumoured to favour). Repeating heat waves with Met Office heat warnings, lots of reports of empty rivers and reservoirs, hose pipe bans. Polling apparently shows the public were already supportive of Climate measures but this summer has really pushed those concerns higher up public agenda.

So were Burnham to approve new drilling, irrespective of any justification eg we need the gas anyway, etc. it would be making it so much easier for those opposed to argue their objections and get headline coverage.

In my opinion we are still in the transition period where we need both.
Not utilising the resources we have is just cutting off our noses to spite our faces.

 

[icowden]

Apparently not. There is no law covering killing of emergency workers and politicians cannot direct the law to be applied differently on an individual basis (eg responding to petitions). Similarly, they cannot retrospectivley change the law (creating a law applying to emergency service workers).

Well there is now - that was the point of introducing "Harper's Law". A terrible piece of legislation which just says people must go to prison for life regardless of the circumstances. That's the problem with knee jerk legislation.

It was pointed out at the time that no additional law was needed. This was just crowd pleasing. The Tories just endlessly campaigned on throwing people in prison for everything without any regard to whether it was a appropriate or whether there were sufficient prison places, or whether it would be a good idea in any way.

We have a textbook example for the "throw everyone in prison" approach. It's called the USA and the outcomes do not suggest that crime is reduced. Far from it.

 

[briantrumpet]

Which of the many Newports?

@Prossport

 

[Psamathe]

In my opinion we are still in the transition period where we need both.
Not utilising the resources we have is just cutting off our noses to spite our faces.

I'm uncertain and think it's more complex.
A few aspects I've not seen widely reported:

1. If we do permit new drilling the message to the rest of the world from rich country is "do as we say not as we do". Difficult to expect other countries to address hydrocarbon emissions when we just grant new drilling licenses.

2. But importing LNG for energy generation is apparently more polluting than burning coal

“The idea that coal is worse for the climate is mistaken – LNG has a larger greenhouse gas footprint than any other fuel,” said Robert Howarth, an environmental scientist at Cornell University and author of the new paper.
Drilling, moving, cooling and shipping gas from one country to another uses so much energy that the actual final burning of gas in people’s homes and businesses only accounts for about a third of the total emissions from this process, the research finds.
(from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/04/exported-liquefied-natural-gas-coal-study)

3. It would not have an effect on the amount of gas we import (or trivial impact)

New North Sea drilling would barely reduce UK gas imports at all, data shows

4. It won't affect the cost we pay (well reported).

etc.

Personally I think the "Do as I say not as I do" argument particularly important. whatever the justification case, when we tell other countries struggling with their economies to make sacrifices and "cut back", whilst we are not our voice becomes hypocritical.

 

[Dorset Boy]

In my opinion we are still in the transition period where we need both.
Not utilising the resources we have is just cutting off our noses to spite our faces.

Absolutely.
We need obviously to continue the transition to renewables and not slow down the progress, but things like revised building regs are helping there, and we continue to invest in offshore wind etc.
However, we should still use the resources we have available rather than import gas from thousands of miles away.
It's not an either or.

Norway have taken up the supply of gas to Europe that used to come from Russia, but no criticism of them on here that I have seen, in fact building their sovereign wealth fund on the back of it has been lauded.

 

[Pross]

@Prossport

Fortunately I don't actually live there (or maybe I do technically but would never admit to it)

 

[Dorset Boy]

@Prossport

Ahh, so Newnewnewport as their rugby fans used to chant.