The Labour Government

Vic said:
So Labour's commitment to Telford-style local inquiries was the right one and they should have ignored Baroness Casey's recommendation for another (limited) inquiry. (If it was all a stitch-up Baroness Casey wouldn't have come up with that recommendation....)
Click to expand...
Sorry I don’t know what your point is or how it relates to what I put
 
Gray said:
Let’s face it this constant flow of people entering our country illegally is beginning to wear thin with the population. The useless French are doing nothing to prevent it, despite us paying them millions, because they don’t want them either.

There is going to be a serious backlash at the next General Election.
Click to expand...
Maybe we should declare war on the French?
 
mackenzie said:
Obviously, but the question should be WHY that person made the mistake. Mistakes like this are rarely done in isolation, there had to have been a chain of events that led to it. And my money is on cost cutting, regardless of which Government.
Click to expand...
So let’s blame the last lot for the cost cutting
 
Kirkstall Blue said:
It is a legitimate debate for the Labour government in power, the lad was only nineteen going on fifty yrs old to look at him and was about to be deported. “The prison service have been losing prisoners for years 86 prisoners have escaped this year higher than the previous year”. To quote the news this escape is a high profile one for the government.

It will be due to staff cuts or inexperienced people handling high risk prisoners.
Click to expand...
I don’t see what it has to do with the government
 
Gray said:
Let’s face it this constant flow of people entering our country illegally is beginning to wear thin with the population. The useless French are doing nothing to prevent it, despite us paying them millions, because they don’t want them either.

There is going to be a serious backlash at the next General Election.
Click to expand...

Is that a surprise to you? I was saying on here in the run up to the referendum that the result of leaving the EU would mean that nobody there would care. We were giving them the perfect way out of any responsibility for stopping people coming here because we were voting our way out of returning them.

Of course the common response was I didn't know what I was talking about and Project Fear.
 
WRicko said:
Nothing to do with the government tho
Click to expand...
Not directly. But the entire system, whether thats councils, social services, the police, immigration seems to be failing.

Ridiculous errors like this do reflect poorly on the people in charge - the government. It’s only natural for people to blame them.

If a major mistake in a government run department happens, do you only blame the one individual who made the mistake?
 
So Starmer sacked Powell after Rayner was sacked and now she's Deputy Leader?

Bit awkward that.

Powell was my MP for years in Manchester Central and did an ok job. She did genuinely care about the student population in the area and Hulme and the regeneration of Castlefield so we'll see how she's goes
 
WRicko said:
Sorry I don’t know what your point is or how it relates to what I put
Click to expand...
You'd said "enquiries don’t work in this country aside from politicians not implementing the changes they suggest"

Labour said that there'd been an inquiry (Jay) and they were implementing its recommendations (whereas Johnson had called it spaffing millions up the wall, and Truss and Sunak - and Badenoch as minister for women - had done nothing).

www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk

A new inquiry into child sexual exploitation isn't needed – but government action is | Institute for Government

There should not be a new inquiry into child sexual exploitation.
www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk

Labour instead got Baroness Casey to review what had been done and what more needed to be done - presumably not expecting her to say there should be another national inquiry (thus proving her independence). People have then gone mad over what she actually recommended ("keep it focussed", "make it wider", "ignore white grooming gangs", "include non-gang CSE - i.e. within families") and the whole issue is now a "political football" ("We won" - Badenoch) - indeed some survivors being used thus.

So I'm suggesting that Labour's approach (pre-Casey) had been right - no "national" inquiry but do more local inquiries like Telford. https://www.telford.gov.uk/children...nto-telford-child-sexual-exploitation-iitcse/
 
Cheadle_hulmeBlue said:
Not directly. But the entire system, whether thats councils, social services, the police, immigration seems to be failing.

Ridiculous errors like this do reflect poorly on the people in charge - the government. It’s only natural for people to blame them.

If a major mistake in a government run department happens, do you only blame the one individual who made the mistake?
Click to expand...
Even if you assume that this mistake is not just a mistake or a series of them but something more systemic it’s not like the government oversea specific minor systems. Even if you an assume they had some affect from a budget point of view. Dont the last lot take the blame. What have or haven’t the current government done ?
 
We've got Guardiola said:
Blimey 16.6% turnout. Even Labour party members can't be arsed.
Click to expand...
The turnout was 16% of eligible voters, which isn’t the same as the membership.

People in affiliated unions, socialist societies, all manner of left wing crackpots can vote in leadership contests as long as they pledge loyalty to the dear leader when they cast their vote.

Actual membership is around 330,000, down massively since honest Keith took over. So more than half of the membership couldn’t be arsed voting.

None of the above is who I’d be voting for.
 
Do think even this early in it's term we are in existential crisis territory for Labour at the moment. Not because of anything they've done per se but because of what has been boiling up for decades.

If you assume that the 'Great Compression' ground to a halt in the mid 70s and started to go into reverse at the start of the 80s we've only had one sustained period of Labour government since. Blair was in charge for most of that and through some clever sleight of hand was able to swerve the underlying issues for the party and the country. However, post the financial crisis, that option to play both ends simply isn't there for Labour. As it is currently seeing, attempting to ameliorate decline for the vast majority simply isn't working. The alternative of returning to it's original purpose of reducing inequality is undoubtedly extremely difficult given the nature of global financial systems. However that seems to me the pretty binary choice it faces.

Post 2008 and Covid, there is no wriggle room or illusory third way anymore, like there seemingly was for New Labour. The bald choice is you are either stewards of rising inequality, hoping that fiddling in the margins will see you as less malevolent and keep you in power, or you stand against it.

For all it's recent troubles I think you can easily make a case that it's less chaotic, malign or irresponsible than previous recent administrations; but that is irrelevant because it simply isn't going to be enough for them as they are finding out.

I think they need to revisit their core position on rising inequality or face irrelevance much sooner than their current parliamentary majority would suggest.

(Once again I feel duty bound to point out that Reform is not the answer. It's the equivalent of having had a couple of fingers chopped off in the blender, then deciding to then put your tackle in it).
 
Last edited:
threespires said:
Do think even this early in it's term we are in existential crisis territory for Labour at the moment. Not because of anything they've done per se but because of what has been boiling up for decades.

If you assume that the 'Great Compression' ground to a halt in the mid 70s and started to go into reverse at the start of the 80s we've only had one sustained period of Labour government since. Blair was in charge for most of that and through some clever sleight of hand was able to swerve the underlying issues for the party and the country. However, post the financial crisis, that option to play both ends simply isn't there for Labour. As it is currently seeing, attempting to ameliorate decline for the vast majority simply isn't working. The alternative of returning to it's original purpose of reducing inequality is undoubtedly extremely difficult given the nature of global financial systems. However that seems to me the pretty binary choice it faces.

Post 2008 and Covid, there is no wriggle room or illusory third way anymore, like there seemingly was for New Labour. The bald choice is you are either stewards of rising inequality, hoping that fiddling in the margins will see you as less malevolent and keep you in power, or you stand against it.

For all it's recent troubles I think you can easily make a case that it's less chaotic, malign or irresponsible than previous recent administrations; but that is irrelevant because it simply isn't going to be enough for them as they are finding out.

I think they need to revisit their core position on rising inequality or face irrelevance much sooner than their current parliamentary majority would suggest.

(Once again I feel duty bound to point out that Reform is not the answer. It's the equivalent of having had a couple of figures chopped off in the blender, then deciding to the put your tackle in it).
Click to expand...
1st para nails it
 
  • Like
Reactions: BTH
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