The Labour Government

Vic said:
That's the only plan I know of. I don't understand all the rejoicing. Apart from people living near a couple of new stations between East Didsbury and Stockport (Heaton Mersey and Cheadle Heath?) why would anyone use it to commute to Manchester? 40 minutes by tram from Mersey Square to St Peter's Square or 8 minutes by train from Edgeley to Piccadilly...

View attachment 159006
Click to expand...
It is quite niche, but I’d have loved it when I was up in Shaw and having a night out in Stockport with friends.

It does give Stopfordians the choice, I guess.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
Good question. There are a couple of markers that you can compare future growth to. Firstly past growth, which since 2000 has been averaging about 1.8 to 2% per annum and secondly Labour's stated annual target of 2.5%.

IMHO I would say annual growth of less than 1.8% would be dissapointing, 1.8% to 2.5% would be good and greater than 2.5% great.
Click to expand...

And then you can throw in which inflation figure do they use in determining how much actual real growth there has been and what % increase in population has there been.
Not to be a downer but if we are quite a bit behind in terms of public services, waiting for social care to have some sort of plan, new investment in defence, infrastructure and more then I'm not sure we can see any kind of meaningful felt progress.
 
hilts said:
And then you can throw in which inflation figure do they use in determining how much actual real growth there has been and what % increase in population has there been.
Not to be a downer but if we are quite a bit behind in terms of public services, waiting for social care to have some sort of plan, new investment in defence, infrastructure and more then I'm not sure we can see any kind of meaningful felt progress.
Click to expand...
True, you could also add in national debt ratio and growth per capita. But the fact is you have to start somewhere.
 
Vic said:
That's the only plan I know of. I don't understand all the rejoicing. Apart from people living near a couple of new stations between East Didsbury and Stockport (Heaton Mersey and Cheadle Heath?) why would anyone use it to commute to Manchester? 40 minutes by tram from Mersey Square to St Peter's Square or 8 minutes by train from Edgeley to Piccadilly...

View attachment 159006
Click to expand...
Not everyone works in town.
Getting to Salford Quays or Trafford Park will be a lot easier from Stockport , and people commuting to Stockport from large areas of South Manchester will use it too.
It will also be useful for Stopfordian swamp dwellers.
 
Vic said:
That's the only plan I know of. I don't understand all the rejoicing. Apart from people living near a couple of new stations between East Didsbury and Stockport (Heaton Mersey and Cheadle Heath?) why would anyone use it to commute to Manchester? 40 minutes by tram from Mersey Square to St Peter's Square or 8 minutes by train from Edgeley to Piccadilly...

View attachment 159006
Click to expand...
Will be interesting to see how they can rewrite the Green Book, such that a 40 minute journey on a tram is preferable to 8 minutes on a train.
 
west didsblue said:
Not everyone works in town.
Getting to Salford Quays or Trafford Park will be a lot easier from Stockport , and people commuting to Stockport from large areas of South Manchester will use it too.
It will also be useful for Stopfordian swamp dwellers.
Click to expand...
Not a lot easier. Train to Piccadilly and onto tram to the Quays would be as quick. Re commuters to Stockport, they'd probably have to live near the tram line and near Stockport centre to be tempted to leave the car at home. I reckon the 3 mile extension will cost £500,000 minimum.

I thought Stockport was blue...
 
Out of all the main parties they seem to be the most solidified despite having far more MPs.

Reports of their demise may be greatly exaggerated.

Of course, their demise might be accelerated by any semblance of an opposition, but they seem to all be cats in a sack, Lib Dem’s aside.
 
Hamilton by-election had the SNP huge odds on favourites, with Reform in 2nd on about 5-1 and Labour out at 10s.

Result, Labour win.

So, you’d think the big story is how Labour came from so far behind, elected by the people of Hamilton who seemed set against them? Well, no. Turns out on Sky that the big story was how well Reform did, even though it was written as a two-horse race.

People may wonder why Reform have been doing so well in the polls, well it’s because they are getting so much support from the media.
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
Hamilton by-election had the SNP huge odds on favourites, with Reform in 2nd on about 5-1 and Labour out at 10s.

Result, Labour win.

So, you’d think the big story is how Labour came from so far behind, elected by the people of Hamilton who seemed set against them? Well, no. Turns out on Sky that the big story was how well Reform did, even though it was written as a two-horse race.

People may wonder why Reform have been doing so well in the polls, well it’s because they are getting so much support from the media.
Click to expand...

The media narrative before the result was how well Reform are doing. The narrative after the result is how well Reform is doing. The narrative was never going to change because of the actual result. The media want/need drama. A Reform Govt would be Trump lite drama. They want six different PM’s in a decade, economy melting down, a face-off with a lettuce and tension with Europe.

A somewhat colourless Labour Govt with a huge majority winning a by-election makes for a dull story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top