First_Lexus

Listening to the radio earlier today, there was a painter and decorator who noted that a month ago he had a full order book until March 2025. He then went onto say that the ‘fear’ of Labour’s October Budget combined with their attack on pensioners over the Winter Fuel Payment had seen customer after customer cancel. He now only has work into November. They need to realise, quickly, that confidence and competence are the most important elements for any Government. They’re currently failing on both counts, and so soon after taking office. They’ve talked the country and the economy down. Foreign investment is either very wary or pulling out. It’s a shambles.

The revolt is now growing to include unions… https://news.sky.com/story/government-picking-pockets-of-pensioners-by-cutting-winter-fuel-payments-says-unite-boss-13211672 Meanwhile, back in 2017 when the Conservatives proposed removing the Winter Fuel payment from wealthier pensioners, guess what Labour’s position was…they even put a ‘deaths’ number on it. Funny, they don’t seem to have mentioned that this time, I must have missed it? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13827471/Labours-plan-strip-million-pensioners-winter-fuel-payments-KILL.html

I can’t put my finger on it, but Keir Starmer isn’t likeable at all. Even when he’s delivering bad news he has an odd ‘smirk’ on his face that seems to be saying; ”I can do whatever I like now, and the stupid, little, common, people are tedious and ignorant.” His father was a toolmaker you know…🤔🙄 I hardly agreed with anything Jeremy Corbyn said (or says) but he does speak with an authenticity that Starmer lacks - it’s almost like he believes in something!

@Phil xxkr All candidates should be aware of the legislation, and I’d be surprised if their agents and party officials don’t provide some form of briefing or training. The issue with this legislation as I understand it - and why it looks fierce on paper but isn’t simple - is that it specifically pins the obligation for candidates on damaging the reputation of other candidates through untruths. Thus, the reason the leader of our Council wrote to our new MP and HINTED at the legislation rather than explicitly referencing it, is that during the campaign she promised particular things while seemingly expressing that other candidates would not support those things. She’d have to have known - and it would have to be proved - that she also knew at the time about potential Government policy when coming into power. What does all this mean? It shouldn’t be much of a surprise that all it really means is that the words of politicians during a campaign (frankly at any time) mean nothing. One final point. During the campaign Rachel Reeves noted in a couple of interviews that Labour would have “…the worst economic inheritance since the war.” Yet now the supposed “£22bn black hole” is a huge surprise to them. People will draw their own conclusions as to the honesty and integrity of her and her party.

“We’re making the tough choices now…” Choice = large publicly funded pay rise for train drivers vs maintaining the Winter fuel payment for pensioners. Choice = other large pay rises for public sector workers vs maintaining the Winter fuel payment for pensioners. I’m sorry, and I know this Government has only been in power for a few months, but they really are a total shower. Hopeless. I mean, I feared we’d see this, but not so quickly…

I only found out this was a ‘thing’ a few days ago! In other news the Government ‘aren't expected’ to interfere with the ‘triple lock’ which is expected to increase state pensions by more than inflation, with the rise to be c£400. I can hear Starmer and Reeves now, but imho this doesn’t mitigate the loss of the Winter Fuel payment as pensions would have risen anyway (triple lock having been assured by all main parties during the election campaign). I’m increasingly worried they’ll look to means test the state pension at some stage in the next five years, but I did hear an ‘expert’ on the radio a few days ago noting legally how hard that would be, as the state pension isn’t from general taxation, it is a specific contribution by citizens. Even so, I’ll bet in the almost ten years before I’m eligible I’ll get stuffed by one lot or another!

I’ve only just discovered that Keir Starmer’s middle name is Rodney… …might explain why he’s such a plonker!

I can’t remember the exact quote or who said it, but it was along the lines of ‘If you don’t read a newspaper you’ll be uninformed, but if you do read a newspaper you’ll be mis-informed.” I think it has always been like this. Newspapers aren’t just to report the news, they are to report with opinion. Broadly people read newspapers that confirm their own opinions and bias. ‘‘Twas ever thus! When I started at University one of the Professors instructed us (this was 1990) to buy and read the newspaper that we were LEAST likely to agree with. Broadly he noted (another mis-quote coming!) that we should “…read something so we could understand what our opponents were thinking.”

If I put my most cynical head on… - Labour know that many pensioners don’t vote for them, and even those that do will be dead in the next 5-10 years; - I’ve heard Ministers use the phrase ‘for the good of all’ a lot recently. The implication is that, rather than favouring the elderly, they’re on the side of ‘everybody’; - By creating a phoney older vs younger people culture war, they’re hoping to be seen as; - on the side of the young, think planning and house building; - those young people they hope will vote Labour for many more years than the elderly will be able to do. Also worth remembering that very few, if any, of the measures put in place by this Government will be reversed by a future Conservative Government. They’ll simply be able to blame their predecessors as Labour are currently doing…

I’ve been on this planet for quite a while, and have studied politics and political history. I can’t remember - other than Liz Truss - any newly elected Prime Minister losing popularity quite so quickly as Keir Starmer. Partly that’s the ‘internet age’ with everybody wanting everything immediately, partly it’s the magnification of every little thing these days…but I think mainly it’s because of the limited actual mandate he was given and the choices he and his Government have made to date.

It’s quite complex legislation, some of which through precedent applies only to the ‘character’ of a candidate (as I understand it), but there’s a very obvious reason why the oft parroted “£22bn black hole” is a ‘surprise’ to Labour after the election campaign… Our local council leader wrote to our new Labour MP about ‘cast iron’ commitments she made during the campaign, and which were on her website (but which disappeared the day after the election - God bless the internet Time Machine 😂). Essentially he was pointing out that she may have committed an offence if ‘she was aware’ of post-election policy that contradicted her commitments during the campaign if she implied other candidates wouldn’t support or champion those causes, The Representation of the People Act Section 106(1) of the Representation of the People Act 1983 (the “RPA”), provides that: “A person who, or any director of any body or association corporate which— (a) before or during an election, (b) for the purpose of affecting the return of any candidate at the election, makes or publishes any false statement of fact in relation to the candidate’s personal character or conduct shall be guilty of an illegal practice, unless he can show that he had reasonable grounds for believing, and did believe, that statement to be true.” A person convicted of an illegal practice under the RPA is liable to an unlimited fine. Subsection (3) gives the court power to grant an injunction to prevent any repetition of the statement. Where a petition is brought to an Election Court under the RPA, and a candidate who has been elected is found by the Election Court to have been guilty of an illegal practice, then pursuant to section 159(1) of the PRA, the election is void. The ingredients for an illegal practice are that: (a) a person makes or publishes a statement; (b) the statement relates to a candidate; (c) it must be a statement of fact; (d) the statement must be false; (e) the statement is made in relation to a candidate’s personal character or conduct; (f) the statement is made for the purpose of affecting the election of the candidate; and (g) the statement is made before or during an election.

I ‘got away with’ c£650 insurance cost for my 2021 RX450h this year, but was only paying c£300 annually when I got it. That’s low annual mileage, 18 years NCB but living in the Reading area ie South East. Worth trying Chris Knott Insurance as I did, they were competitive. Even so, a ‘Compare the Market’ quote is showing the renewal well into four figures next year… That said, I’ll have my new 2024 Toyota CH-R 1.8 Excel Hybrid by the end of September. Insurance cost for that? Even with Aviva, Admiral, Direct Line etc. it’s down below £300 annually, with a best price (Admiral Essentials) of £257, although the level of cover isn’t what I’d go for personally. That’s more like it, albeit a much smaller, cheaper and less powerful car. No big voluntary or compulsory excesses either, only £100-200 total on pretty much every quote.

Like him or loathe him, this is an interesting watch from Nick Ferrari’s programme yesterday. From about 4m50s…if the pensioners who aren’t currently claiming DO claim (assuming they can answer the 243 questions) then this policy ends up costing the Government an additional £3.8bn rather than saving £1.4bn. Ah, good old fiscal responsibility. Difficult decisions…or incompetent decisions?

I’m of the opinion that the only real difference between the parties is scrutiny. Outside of Government, there is little except for the most outrageous scandals. Once in Government things change. So, for all of those people who believed Labour would ‘clean up’ Government and restore it to ‘public service’ I’m afraid I have some bad news…there really isn’t much difference. There will inevitably be ‘bad apples’ in all walks of life, albeit within the Palace of Westminster the proportion seems to be rather high… https://news.sky.com/story/labour-mp-defends-himself-as-renters-champion-after-poor-conditions-found-in-his-properties-13206274 It will be interesting to see what Starmer decides to do about MPs such as this example. Very little would be my guess. Vive la difference? Back to Winter Fuel payments and the article in Spectator magazine, I do feel that if Jeremy Hunt had implemented this policy there would have been protest marches organised by SWP across the country with wall to wall media coverage of pensioners in hovels wrapped in blankets. Other than the Newsnight interview and the online petition, to quote Bjork, “…it’s oh so quiet…shhh!” Unfortunately national elections in the UK, USA, France, Greece, Germany etc. are increasingly a choice through gritted teeth of the ‘least worst option.’ Meanwhile, the US election choice and mood is summed up pretty well here. https://news.sky.com/story/forgotten-rust-belt-town-embraces-donald-trump-despite-his-broken-promises-13206487

This is worth a read on a similar path…broadly how are Labour ‘getting away’ with so much when the previous Conservative Government would have been vilified for the exact same policy. It seems few people are willing to publicly pick a fight with Labour. For the moment anyway… https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/labours-age-of-miracles/

Could the new Prius be an option? https://www.toyota.co.uk/new-cars/prius-plugin

I’m afraid, from my perspective, Lexus have lost their way a bit. Putting the theft issue to one side, I bought my first Lexus, an NX300h in 2017. I then had my second in 2018, and my RX450h in 2021. On each occasion Lexus convinced me to change with strong offers, both for my existing vehicle and large discounts on the new vehicle. At the time of moving away from my second NX300h they tried to convince me into the new NX350h. It wasn’t for me. I felt the interior was a quality downgrade, with ‘technology’ for the sake of it rather than because (to borrow from Honda) it ‘…just worked.’ Unimpressed with the new NX I was tempted into the RX450h gen4, one of the last. Why? Yes, a great deal was offered, but also the quality interior I was used to. It felt ‘special’ in an unquantifiable way. It made me feel good when I drove it, or just sat in it. Move forward to the last few months. I’ve had a gen5 RX to test, but was unimpressed when compared with the gen4. That was mainly down to the engine, but again I felt interior quality had been downgraded. With a large reduction in mileage and car use, I decided to downsize but the LBX - nice though it is - is simply too expensive imho. Could I justify almost £10k more for an equivalent spec LBX against a Toyota CH-R? Some might, but not me. The product didn’t justify the price difference in my opinion. I think Lexus have increased prices too much in recent years. My RX was about £55k in 2021, the new one is more like £65k but I can’t see what that increase provides. Similarly the UX, NX and LBX all feel far too pricey against the competition when general quality is increasingly similar. Back when I entered the brand, I felt I was getting something really special. Sorry to say when I came to change I didn’t feel the same way.

I’ve had confirmation from Toyota that my new CH-R has been shipped from the factory in Turkey, and is due to be delivered to me before the end of September. This brings to an end three Lexus in a row - two NX300h and my current RX450h. They’ve been great cars to own, with good dealer service. I feel especially privileged to have owned the RX for three years, and I know I’ll miss it. The power, the silence, the cosseting ride and the quality…but… …my circumstances have changed. I now only drive 2-3k miles a year, and can’t justify such a big car. The Toyota seems like a nice thing, pleasingly premium in most places and certainly good value. For £33k (after discounts and well below the £40k luxury car tax threshold list price) and a very strong trade in deal for my RX, I’ll be taking delivery of a silver and black 1.8 Excel Hybrid. I did consider the LBX, and looked at the UX but couldn’t justify the price difference over the Toyota. Time will tell if that is a good decision. It goes without saying that moving from an RX to a much smaller car comes with compromises, but these were far smaller than I expected and I know I’ll quickly get used to the new car. Obviously the theft issues have left a sour taste in recent months, but that was only part of my reason for downsizing. I’ve enjoyed being an active member on this forum, which has plenty of great members and lively discussion. I’ll still pop in from time to time and give honest feedback on the switch to Toyota. Best wishes all, Ed

Having worked in the NHS for a number of years (not any more, I left almost a decade ago) I’d say qualifications in stakeholder management, budget control and simply following the bl**dy rules would be more useful…😇😬😂

I think it’s less about the subject studied and more about a lack of ‘real’ life experience prior to politics. Too many of those that rise to Cabinet (on all sides) have trodden the same path, ie University, involvement in student politics, followed by a ‘job’ with either an arms length public body, party body, charity or similar. From there they become a PPC and then into Parliament. Thus they are seemingly ‘groomed’ for their political career without ever having ‘lived life.’ There are exceptions - Angela Rayner being a notable one - but then again I’m not too keen on her either! 😂 The days of MPs having a career BEFORE public service seem to have long since gone. Shame! One other point. Has anybody noticed how many MPs go into office with ‘normal means’ but leave office seemingly quite wealthy? I wonder how that happens…😇🤔

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/are-labour-about-to-u-turn-on-the-winter-fuel-payment/ Starmer is fast discovering what we all knew. Government is difficult, and a big majority comes with its own challenges. Labour will usually prioritise the ‘young’ over the ‘elderly’ as it knows more of its support is likely to come from younger (less experienced and more naive?) voters. The choice has been made. Public sector pay increases at the expense of the Winter Fuel Allowance. It’s a clear decision point, and one which I feel they’ll live to regret. They are, after all, only the ‘current’ Government…

Agree with this having owned two NX300h. It’s absolutely at its best, and most refined, driven in a relaxed manner. I’d say if you are an ‘aggressive’ driver then look elsewhere, but if not it’s pretty much perfect. Wafting along shows it in its most natural environment. Beautifully made - personally I think higher quality interior than the latest generation - quite practical and comfortable. Make sure you get an insurance quote before purchase as I think it’s affected by the Canbus issue (but could be wrong, plenty of info on the forum if you search). ES is definitely affected.

I think there was - in Britain at least - a ‘sweet spot’ between 1966 and 1973 where there was enough optimism in the world, (threat of nuclear war aside 🫠) positive changes in attitudes for issues like equality, and technological advancements to make things ‘better’ without technology and changes in attitudes for the sake of change making things ‘worse.’ I said earlier that I felt the arguments between cyclist and motorist are indicative of the confrontational nature of society these days. I fear it’s actually worse than that. Earlier in the week I listened to an interview with a new Junior Minister about entering Government. Ignore whether you support the new Government or not, she was speaking about the vile abuse she receives via e-mail and on social media. What has become of a society that thinks that’s acceptable? She also noted she’d had ‘training’ of how to walk towards and on camera, such is the fear of an ‘Miliband bacon sandwich’ photograph going viral. Again, what’s become of us? Where is the substance and the ability to disagree and debate with civility? Watch any YouTube channel about politics, and the exact same interview with the exact same politician will be edited to show either ‘what a car crash’ it was or alternatively ‘how they ridiculed the interviewer.’ This is what people now watch and believe - there is increasingly less desire to watch and understand all sides and come to a decision, with decisions seemingly made ‘for the viewer’ depending on their existing views. Thus the beast is fed, and we’re all poorer for it.

I’m pretty sure that lights on bicycles at night are already a legal requirement. They’re also legally obliged to obey the rules of the road - red traffic lights, no entry signs, one way streets etc. I think the problem is a lack of enforcement (and importantly a lack of the will to enforce) of existing laws rather than a lack of laws themselves. Cost impacts aside, I’d like to think that any Government who GENUINELY pledged to reintroduce police walking regular ‘beats’ in local areas, building relationships with communities and offering advice, direction and support for things like this would be electorally very popular. Appreciating that it was the early 1970s, but as a child I vividly remember the local policeman (and it was pretty much always a man back then!) walking up our road almost every morning at about the time people were leaving for work and school. Everybody knew him. He was visible, and friendly, and did once tell my brother off for riding his bicycle on the pavement! I also remember that when slightly older, he was instead given a ‘panda’ car for his ‘beat’ (a pale blue and white Allegro), I assume because of fewer police and bigger areas to cover. I am now of an age where I fully accept I look at elements of the past with rose tinted spectacles…but I’m also pretty sure that a lot of things were better. Not everything that’s for sure, but we should be willing to revert and appreciate that ‘modern’ and ‘efficient’ isn’t always ‘better.’