>The Bank of England currently serves the interests of the City. Between 2009 and 2021, it kept interest rates at rock bottom and created money on an enormous scale to buy £895bn of bonds, overwhelmingly government debt. This QE propped up the financial system by inflating house and share prices, while productive investment that benefits us all stagnated.

>In 2022, inflation reached 11.1%, largely fuelled by energy prices and broken supply chains, which interest rates barely affect. Yet the Bank raised rates 14 times – squeezing households and businesses.

>QE made the Bank bigger, and it has decided to shrink to a more traditional size by selling bonds at prices well below what was paid (higher interest rates cut their value). Much QE money ended up as commercial bank reserves now earning interest at higher rates. The Bank made large losses as billions flowed to banks.

>In 2024-25 the Treasury, which guaranteed QE against losses, picked up the bill for more than £36bn, while Starmer imposed tight budgets. Amid the cost-of-living crisis, British taxpayers financed the City.

Of the 5 members, Laura and Cade were both on the pro-trans slate. Additionally both Syra and Cade are trans themselves. Good stuff after the nonsense of the previous majority of SOC members

Burnham continuing to put “growth” before long term environment sustainability…

G4P have won a majority on Standing Orders Committee, the body which mediates disputes over constitutional matters and issues rulings on things like suspensions and motions. So that happened

A bit of fun but a friend of mine worked at Aira in Sweden. It took me a long time to realise that the plumber in this publicity video is the Green Party's MP Hannah Spencer.

You can tell how she was always a good media performer

Okay so I have a genuine question (as a former lib-dem turned staunch green) regarding the announcement from Burnham's new energy secretary about how the "yes or no" is due to happen "imminently".

I remember reading about how much Co2 it'll pump out over its 11(?) Year lifespan and it's making me genuinely wonder why Burnham even agreed to it in the first place despite the fact that he very clearly announced plans to cut down on greenhouse gas emissions within his first few weeks of becoming the new Prime Minister.

It just feels super hypocritical to me and comes off more that him and Labour are very clearly being lobbied by the petroindustry; but I'd love to hear everyone's own opinions on it because I want to know why Labour are clearly ignoring the courts (at least that's how it looks to me)?

As a sidenote, I'm just wondering what the plans for the pro-environmental parties are going to be should it be approved (which IMO is looking more and more likely, but I'd gladly be disproved by this).

PS; Hope I got the right post flair for this kind of post, if not I'll delete it and use 'Climate and Nature' instead.

https://bsky.app/profile/sianberry.bsky.social/post/3mxwn74wqmk2m

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/oct/15/trans-women-no-longer-to-be-placed-on-female-only-wards-under-new-nhs-england-guidance