I think probably the interest rate is higher, but the value as a proportion of the starting value on LHS is less significant, compared with the periods you mention. If you look at the monthly interest rates at the bottom, it seems to support this notion.

Brent crude is a light, sweet oil. UK oil is extracted from same oilfields as Norways - little difference in quality - and the major extraction from both is Brent crude

A handy explainer on Brent quality is here: https://kimray.com/training/types-crude-oil-heavy-vs-light-s...

> Brent crude is a light, sweet oil.

Brent is yesterday's story....

All the oil that would come from the prospective fields if extra drilling were to be permitted would absolutely be the heavy, viscous, waxy stuff.

I am going to have to ask you for a source this time.

He could be referencing this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Letter_of_Marque

I think the quotes is to say that these people who say that they are pronatalist have revealed preferences that indicate that it is not a serious concern for them.

Most western democracies have exactly the same fault, maybe having unscrupulous, shameless legislators are the end state of the current models of democracy being practiced.

Which manifesto commitments have been blocked in this parliament?

> Which manifesto commitments have been blocked in this parliament?

To be clear, I didn't say they "blocked," I said:

> though the Lords recently have been playing silly buggers around the Employment Rights Act

This was a manifesto commitment which, while it eventually went through, it was touch and go for a little bit. Reporting at the time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f412kJChC6g

Okay, though to be fair to me, you said just after

> and ignoring the Salisbury Convention (which is that they shouldn’t block manifesto commitments)

which is what attracted my question.

Thanks for the link. I haven’t watched it, but I will observe that a lot of the modern legislation that comes out of the commons should properly attract the attention of the Lords, as it doesn’t get nearly enough attention from the commons.

I totally agree, the upper chamber can and should make amendments to legislation. In this case, they made a generally good amendment to the Employment Rights Bill (allowing "at-will" dismissal up to the first 6 months rather than the initially proposed total ban).

However after that amendment was accepted, Conservative Peers (who hold a majority) initially voted against the bill again: https://bectu.org.uk/news/prospect-slams-house-of-lords-for-...

It was eventually passed a week later when the Lords accepted the Commons amendments but that second block on 11th December shouldn't have happened.

That is the only disappointing aspect of the site. It's genius.

RIP Dan

And is a decidedly superior breakfast.

The word "trillionaire" does not appear in the discussion. Not good form to imply quotes where there are none.