General Election - 4th July 2024

[metalblue]

It was a general comment that was a counterpoint to someone suggesting, without any logical reason, that it would be an unmitigated disaster.

So you can’t define what great looks like but think it will be great? Okaaaaaaaaay.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Yep. Back to measurable improvements across the board similar to 1997-2008, although I suspect it will take a little longer for ag improvements to be discernible by most due to the size of the job and the low base we’re starting at.

I think we'll see a reprise of the early Cameron/Osborne days with a succession of "it's worse than we thought" statements.

I agree that there won't be much obvious overall change for quite a while, probably a year or two. I assume they will spend some of their early Parliamentary time doing things that need doing but got stalled, or that they want to get rid of - easy signs of Doing Stuff.

 

[inbetween]

Yep. Back to measurable improvements across the board similar to 1997-2008, although I suspect it will take a little longer for improvements to be discernible by most due to the size of the job and the low base we’re starting at.

It depends upon whether Labour are going to stick to strict fiscal rules, if they do then very little is going to change. It needs to be remembered that we're not living in the Blair years where debt is low and the country is growing.

Technically we still haven't really recovered from the 2008 crash, it has just got steadily worse and then there was COVID too which was arguably even worse.

It can't be understated how these impacts will seriously hamper any ability to do much, unless of course spending rules are ignored and they open the taps anyway.

 

[metalblue]

For me, getting back to square one would be great.

Sounds a bit like that back to basics that mate ;). Seriously though what is square one for you and do you think that will happen?

I’m not trying to dig anyone out, genuinely interested. I personally have no sense on what the next 5 years are going to bring. So no thoughts on if it’ll be great or not, I’m more in the wait and see camp. I suspect many/most are the same. I don’t like Starmer as a person but that is irrelevant in the context of him being a good PM or not.

 

[metalblue]

Yep. Back to measurable improvements across the board similar to 1997-2008, although I suspect it will take a little longer for improvements to be discernible by most due to the size of the job and the low base we’re starting at.

Ok so “great” was perhaps hyperbole to counter what you saw as hyperbole and “better” would be more apt of your expectations? Or do you think he will need a second term to make things “better” and spend his first term arresting the downward satisfaction trend in our public services?

 

[west didsblue]

So you can’t define what great looks like but think it will be great? Okaaaaaaaaay.

Like I said, it was a throw away response to someone saying it would be an unmitigated disaster. The reality is that if we get back to sound governance without bullshit and lies, it’ll do for me for the next parliament then hopefully improvements will start to be more tangible as time goes on.

 

[west didsblue]

Ok so “great” was perhaps hyperbole to counter what you saw as hyperbole and “better” would be more apt of your expectations? Or do you think he will need a second term to make things “better” and spend his first term arresting the downward satisfaction trend in our public services?

Yes

 

[metalblue]

It depends upon whether Labour are going to stick to strict fiscal rules, if they do then very little is going to change. It needs to be remembered that we're not living in the Blair years where debt is low and the country is growing.

Technically we still haven't really recovered from the 2008 crash, it has just got steadily worse and then there was COVID too which was arguably even worse.

It can't be understated how these impacts will seriously hamper any ability to do much, unless of course spending rules are ignored and they open the taps anyway.

COVID was a whole lot worse for public finances than the financial crisis was. One is real money out the door the other was guarantees that, thankfully, we’re never drawn down on. Of course the subsequent deep recession didn’t help but it’s fairly cyclical - what followed were political choices that dragged on far too long.

 

[metalblue]

Like I said, it was a throw away response to someone saying it would be an unmitigated disaster. The reality is that if we get back to sound governance without bullshit and lies, it’ll do for me for the next parliament then hopefully improvements will start to be more tangible as time goes on.

I suspect that is the limit of ambition right there. He is certainly going to need 2 terms to achieve anything of note. If we can see sustained growth then I’d mark it down as a successful first term with the reward being better public services in term 2. Hardly setting the world alight but - and excluding all domestic politics shit - it’s been, and remains, a time of global volatility.

 

[snorky]

I think here in the Shire the Greens are going to unseat Bungalow Bill Wiggy, Con, who had a shitload majority last outing.

Chowns the Green has been fuckin everywhere! I am voting for her cos of her opinions on the state of the Wye, despite disagreeing with a lot of the Greens policies.

Also Bill is a twat.

 

[TinFoilHat]

Watching The news Agents podcast last night. Matliss said 'a senior labour source' confirmed Starmer's first act as PM will be to flood the house of lords to get legislation passed quickly. A list has already been prepared of various labour supporting people who will be put in.

Just like Blair, he supported getting rid of it until he realised what he could use them for should he get a big majority.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Watching The news Agents podcast last night. Matliss said 'a senior labour source' confirmed Starmer's first act as PM will be to flood the house of lords to get legislation passed quickly. A list has already been prepared of various labour supporting people who will be put in.

Just like Blair, he supported getting rid of it until he realised what he could use them for should he get a big majority.

It’s like PR. Nobody elected would ever actually get rid of it if it becomes beneficial to the elected party.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Sounds a bit like that back to basics that mate ;). Seriously though what is square one for you and do you think that will happen?

Public services and transportation network that is imperfect but broadly functioning.

 

[jim tolmies perm]

Get onto your Town Hall pronto

Done it , they emailed saying sent through company at Heathrow don't know anything else ..

 

[jim tolmies perm]

For me, getting back to square one would be great.

For me simply the removal of UK third country status for ex-pats, be that EEA, single market or customs union, or a new deal which achieves this end
We should have the same rights as Norway or Switzerland
There would of course be a knock on effect for the UK economy in general.

 

[inchy14]

I understand your reservations, my mum has similar perspectives, that side of the family are all small c conservatives. And maybe you’ll be right, who am I to say? Put it this way, if in 20 years Labour have led us down a bad path and the Tories have the swell of public opinion, the shoe will be on the other foot and I might be apprehensive about them in the same way because of my experience of the last 14 years.

All I can ask is that, if in four years we look back and it hasn’t been an unmitigated disaster, that perhaps those who predict the apocalypse will be big enough to introspect and admit they were wrong.

If labour do half as much damage as the tories have then we may as well turn off the fucking lights.

 

[Vic]

Sounds a bit like that back to basics that mate ;). Seriously though what is square one for you and do you think that will happen?

I’m not trying to dig anyone out, genuinely interested. I personally have no sense on what the next 5 years are going to bring. So no thoughts on if it’ll be great or not, I’m more in the wait and see camp. I suspect many/most are the same. I don’t like Starmer as a person but that is irrelevant in the context of him being a good PM or not.

It's simple. Check Labour's achievements against 1997 pledges. Now check current promises, then watch it happen.

 

[Vic]

Watching The news Agents podcast last night. Matliss said 'a senior labour source' confirmed Starmer's first act as PM will be to flood the house of lords to get legislation passed quickly. A list has already been prepared of various labour supporting people who will be put in.

Just like Blair, he supported getting rid of it until he realised what he could use them for should he get a big majority.

I'm available.

 

[Vic]

If labour do half as much damage as the tories have then we may as well turn off the fucking lights.

Even so, doing half the damage as the Tories would be better than letting the Tories do the full damage.

 

[blueparrot]

Ok so “great” was perhaps hyperbole to counter what you saw as hyperbole and “better” would be more apt of your expectations? Or do you think he will need a second term to make things “better” and spend his first term arresting the downward satisfaction trend in our public services?

I'd like to think,and expect,we will see improvements across the board this term, maybe not huge ones but a bit more than just arresting the downward trend.