Dave Watts (T. Hinker) ❎ 🦖🇮🇱

My monologue from today’s The Times at One with ANDREW NEIL @TimesRadio SAY FAREWELL TO ENGLAND’S TWO PARTY SYSTEM Tomorrow’s various elections in England, Scotland and Wales will ignite yet more fires under Keir Starmer’s leadership as Labour goes down in flames in all three nations. But they will also mark something more significant: the demise of the century-old two-party system in England.  In a sense this is just England catching up with the rest of the country: Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have long been multi-party systems. But England joining the multiple-party flock is more significant — and more far-reaching for the direction of British politics.  There was a time — within recent memory — when Labour or the Conservatives could win clear overall majorities in the House of Commons with just over 40% of the vote. Tomorrow Labour and Conservative will be lucky to get 35% of the vote combined.  The latest YouGov poll puts reform on 25%, Labour, Tories, Greens and LibDems clustered behind at 18%, 17%, 15% and 14% respectively. On other words instead of Labour and the Tories winning the lion’s share — way back in the Labour landslide of 1945 they took 97% — votes are spread if not evenly then more generously over five parties.  That alone marks the demise of the two parties. But there’s an added factor. We’re moving to a multi-party system but we still have a first-past-the-post voting system designed for two-party contests.  This is not an argument for proportional representation, which has a myriad of its own problems. But it cannot be denied that a multi-party system with first-past-the-post can result in something of what the Americans would call a ‘crap shoot’.  Consider this. There was a time last year when Reform topped 30% in the polls. Every point above 30% makes it more likely Reform would be the largest party in the Commons, with perhaps even an overall majority.  But Reform, though still in the lead, has fallen back since then, as the latest polls confirm. Imagine at a general election Reform won 25% of the vote and, say, Labour 20%. It is perfectly possible that Labour, given the vagaries of our voting system in a multi-party setting, would end up with more seats than Reform — perhaps a lot more.  For elections to have democratic legitimacy there has to be a broad if not exact correlation between vote share and seats won. But in this case there would not be, raising the spectre of a post-election political crisis — and giving bond and currency markets further cause to wonder if Britain’s fabled political stability was a thing of the past.  One more thing. There is no question we’ve fallen out of love, big time, with Labour and the Tories. Tomorrow will be proof positive of that. But we haven’t really fallen head over heels for the new insurgents either. Reform, as we’ve seen, has fallen back.  Now that the Greens are being subject to proper scrutiny, revealing a disturbing number of nut jobs in their ranks, they too are in some trouble — as evidenced by the plummeting popularity in recent days of Green leader Zack Polanski.  Reform and the Greens will nevertheless be the big winners tomorrow. But even as Labour and the Tories struggle to remain relevant the bloom is already off the insurgents. Which suggests that, come the general election, the vote will be shared every which way.  I shed no tears for the demise of Labour and the Tories. But I have yet to see much salvation in the Greens or Reform. The end of the old-two party system opens new possibilities. But it also creates new uncertainty. We might not regret the passing of the old but as yet we have no idea of the shape of the new.  We are entering a period of political disruption, perhaps even some chaos. It promises to be exciting. But it will also be unnerving. You can understand why those who lend us billions, invest in our country and hold our currency are feeling more than a tad nervous.

Four Palestine Action activists convicted of criminal damage over raid at UK site of Israel-based defence firm bbc.in/3QMrpss

"To Sir with Love" was written especially for the 1967 film of the same name with Sidney Poitier. Lulu, who was only 19 years old, not only sang the track but also acted in the film (it was her film debut, playing one of the rebellious students). She hated all the theme options the producers had chosen and practically forced the composer Mark London (husband of her manager) to write the melody within minutes. The result? The best-selling single of 1967 in the US (5 weeks at #1 on the Billboard charts), but curiously it was never released as a single in the UK.

Silence is complicity. Today in @10DowningStreet we agreed real actions across key institutions to ensure every Jewish person in this country is safe, seen, and free to live their lives. When it comes to antisemitism none of us can be neutral and all of us must speak up.

Today we announce a new policy: In order to deport all illegal migrants in Britain, Reform will need to detain tens of thousands at a time. Migrants will not be able to leave these detention centres, and each will be held there a couple of weeks before being deported. So here’s our promise: A Reform government will not put any migrant detention facilities in any constituency with a Reform MP. Nor will we put them where Reform controls the council. And of the remaining areas, we will prioritise Green controlled parliamentary constituencies and Green controlled councils to locate the detention centres. Put simply, if you vote in a Reform council or Reform MP, we guarantee you won’t have a detention centre near you. If you vote Green, there’s a good chance you will. This is an important exercise in democratic consent, not just for our mass deportation policy, but for where the detention centres are placed. Given @ZackPolanski openly advocates for open borders, I look forward to their warm embrace of this policy. votegreengetillegals.com