New: Sources from three countries confirm that the Trump Administration has advocated Viktor Orbán for UN Secretary-General. The US has encouraged Orbán to enter the race, even bringing him the initial idea of a joint U.S.-Russia-China candidacy. WSJ: wsj.com/opinion/viktor-orban…

No fatties. No trannies. No beardos. No weirdoes. No wimps. No radicals — JUST WARRIORS.

Can we have Starmer back now please.

We need a Coalition of the Willing To Wear A Proper Shirt At The Very Least. 😂🙄

JD Wetherspoon has banned customers from using their phones on loudspeaker following complaints that the noise is driving people “nuts”. The chain has forbidden its customers from taking calls on loudspeaker mode or playing music on their phones across all 792 of its pubs 🔗 telegraph.co.uk/business/202…

The difficulty I have with much of what Andy Burnham is saying is the severe lack of economic reality being explained to the British people. Some of the measures being announced were already part of Keir Starmer’s programme, while others may help around the edges. But none addresses the fundamental problem facing millions of people: the enormous increase in the cost of living has already happened, and those higher prices have not gone away. This is the part of inflation that politicians rarely explain properly. When you hear that “inflation has fallen”, it does not mean prices have fallen. It means prices are still rising, just more slowly. Take a simple example. If something costing £100 rises by 10%, it becomes £110. If inflation then falls to 2%, the price does not return towards £100. It can rise by another 2% to £112.20. The original increase remains embedded in the price and further inflation is added on top. That is why people hear politicians celebrating lower inflation and wonder why nothing seems cheaper. Unless individual prices actually fall, or we experience broader deflation, lower inflation does not reverse the increases we have already suffered. During the latter period of the Conservative government Britain experienced an extraordinary inflationary shock. Food, energy, mortgages, rents and everyday costs rose substantially. Inflation has since fallen from those exceptional levels, but those accumulated increases remain with us. That is the economic reality from which any serious discussion about the cost of living must begin. There are also pressures beyond Britain's control. We now have a President of the United States imposing tariffs and pursuing policies that are disrupting international trade and creating uncertainty across global markets. Things people reasonably expected to become cheaper have not necessarily done so, and many costs continue to rise. That is why I believe Keir Starmer was right to tell people from the beginning that repairing Britain's economy would be a long and difficult road. There was never a magic switch that could reverse years of accumulated economic damage. But there is another uncomfortable reality Britain will eventually have to confront: Brexit. Whatever side anyone took in the referendum, we now have years of evidence against which to judge the consequences. The idea that Britain could detach itself from its largest neighbouring market and simply replace that economic relationship elsewhere has proved, at the very least, extraordinarily difficult. For me, Britain's long term economic future lies in rebuilding that relationship and ultimately rejoining the European Union. I understand the political danger of saying that, but political difficulty does not make the economic argument disappear. We also need to move beyond an outdated definition of the “working class”, as though Britain were still living in the 1970s. The financial pressure now reaches across enormous sections of society. Obviously those on the lowest incomes suffer most, but people working at almost every ordinary income level are seeing mortgages, rents, food, energy and transport consume more of what they earn. Climate change is adding another pressure. Britain is experiencing increasingly extreme periods of heat, while much of our housing stock was never designed for these temperatures. More people are having to spend money simply trying to keep their homes tolerable. Energy, housing, climate and economic policy are increasingly interconnected. And this is precisely where I believe Andy Burnham has a credibility problem. For all the populist language and the measures he can point to from local government, running the country requires something fundamentally different. It requires a coherent, long term economic strategy capable of addressing the causes, not simply initiatives designed to ease individual symptoms. Where is Burnham's long term plan for growth? Where is his strategy for dealing with the permanent increase in prices caused by the inflationary shock? Where is his answer to American tariffs and an increasingly unstable global trading environment? And, crucially, where does he stand on Britain's future economic relationship with the European Union? These are not peripheral questions. They go to the heart of Britain's future prosperity. It is not enough to promise to “make life easier” without explaining how Britain is going to become wealthier, more productive and more competitive. You cannot continually promise to distribute prosperity without explaining how the economy is going to create it. If Burnham believes Brexit can be made to work, tell us how. If he believes Britain needs a fundamentally closer relationship with Europe, explain what that means. And if he believes rejoining the European Union should ultimately be considered, he should have the courage to say so. Until he confronts these fundamental questions, I do not believe he has established the economic credibility required of a Prime Minister. At the moment there are plenty of words, announcements and promises, but precious little evidence of the long term economic strategy necessary to deliver them. That has to end. Britain needs substance, not slogans, and a credible plan for the next decade rather than another promise for the next few months.