The Labour Government

[philfodenswristsock]

Not sure I see a problem with a Government improving infrastructure. It may be a small thing, but connectivity in today’s economy is important. It’s like potholes. A small issue, but bloody annoying.

Fair enough I guess... I just wonder sometimes if these strange characters, in-between sipping their flavoured lattes, actually ever take the time to visit the universe we inhabit... you know, the one with a homeless person under every bridge and a very mentally I person riding every bus and a disabled person in every town weighing up the cost of flexible tubing to fit the car exhaust!

 

[Don Karleone]

It's needed some sort of reform for a long time and looks like they've now got the balance right - welfare bill will help those who can work back to work and for those that can' they will be protected. I'm glad Starmer listened to the backbenchers and conceded on some of it - that's what government should always do, Kendal has also promised that disability groups will be consulted on how the criteria should change in the future.

In short, you'll glaze them no matter what. Good to know. Every disability group that I've seen has been against this bill AND the concession.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Read the whole thread - the Tories were a shambles compared with Starmer

 

[Norbert D]

Oh, and another thing that REALLY pisses me off about this lot. They seem to take great pride in boasting about how they are spending X on this and Y on that, as if it's some marvellous achievement. Any **** can take more and more money off people and spend it. It's nothing to boast about.

Bring back Liz Truss! I really wanted my pension to become worthless. I really want the NHS shut down and turds in the rivers and sea.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Bring back Liz Truss! I really wanted my pension to become worthless. I really want the NHS shut down and turds in the rivers and sea.

Ironically her diabolical budget has spooked the bond markets less than our current financial guru. I'd have Liz Truss any day of the week over this shower.

Anyways, matters not. Starmer will be fucked off in less than a year and then we'll have Rayner who will make Labour even more unelectable than the Tories.

 

[metalblue]

Read the whole thread - the Tories were a shambles compared with Starmer

Well given a U-turn is characterised by going back on policy they said they would adopt as part of a leadership campaign let’s go with Starmer’s.


1. Pledge to lift the 2 child cap
2. Scraping tuition fees
3. Abolish universal credit
4. Increasing income tax for top 5%
5. End outsourcing in NHS
6. Nationalise energy
7. Nationalise water
8. Nationalise mail
9. Free movement with EU

So certainly a lot more than 3 if we want to compare apples with apples. It’s not always about the quantity either, sometimes it’s the quality of the u turns that matter.

Anyroad glad to see you’ve got your account back from whoever hacked you yesterday.

 

[threespires]

... and therein lies the crux of this issue.

This Government have rushed in, come out with strategies and proposals that are not fully thought through and impact assessed and rushed them in and then been caught out (again).

.... it really is like sixth form politics.

If they're 6th formers it's an upgrade on the previous reception class shoving crayons up their noses but that's not much of a consolation really.

We need to get to a place where our elections aren't dominated by slogans, misinformation and shit throwing and where a subsequent government isn't focused on the 24 news cycle and they are capable of 'managing' the markets effectively. Easier said than done!

Our short termism is a nightmare. In some countries PR helps with this but it's probably not enough on its own I don't think. We're encouraged in this country not to trust 'unelected bureaucrats' but some public institutions with a more technocratic bent might be what we need to assist our politicians in making smart choices and restoring some level of public trust.

 

[BobKowalski]

If they're 6th formers it's an upgrade on the previous reception class shoving crayons up their noses but that's not much of a consolation really.

We need to get to a place where our elections aren't dominated by slogans, misinformation and shit throwing and where a subsequent government isn't focused on the 24 news cycle and they are capable of 'managing' the markets effectively. Easier said than done!

Our short termism is a nightmare. In some countries PR helps with this but it's probably not enough on its own I don't think. We're encouraged in this country not to trust 'unelected bureaucrats' but some public institutions with a more technocratic bent might be what we need to assist our politicians in making smart choices and restoring some level of public trust.

I would class Starmer as a technocrat, as is the tenor of this Government. It certainly isn’t a slick, PR spin machine :)

They see a problem, apply logic and fiscal prudence and totally miss the human angle. Fortunately, Labour MPs seem keen to remind them.

 

[Norbert D]

Ironically her diabolical budget has spooked the bond markets less than our current financial guru. I'd have Liz Truss any day of the week over this shower.

Anyways, matters not. Starmer will be fucked off in less than a year and then we'll have Rayner who will make Labour even more unelectable than the Tories.

Jeez a Liz the lettuce fan, a lettuce who increased my mortgage by thousands and nearly crashed our pension funds and was only saved by swift action from the BoE. I don’t think we have anything to discuss. Have a nice day.

 

[hilts]

Hello chaps. Haven't posted or even visited here for a LONG time. It was just too depressing to contemplate after this shower won the GE last year. I've been wearing a black armband ever since.

Just wondered how the die-hard Labour supporters on here thought it was going? Clearly Labour have a huge majority but since only 1 person in 5 able to vote, actually voted for them, they have no popular mandate and it shows in the polls.

Do you think the current ombi-shambles are just teething troubles, whilst they lay the foundations for long term success? Or as I do, the symptoms of a bunch of clueless socialist idiots who couldn't run a piss up in a brewery, let alone a country. For a party who put GROWTH as their main priority, I cannot imagine a set of policies better tuned to delivering the absolute oppposite.

There was no need to put socialist anywhere in that post tbh. In a thought cloud I'm not sure it would appear with the current cabinet.

 

[Norbert D]

Well given a U-turn is characterised by going back on policy they said they would adopt as part of a leadership campaign let’s go with Starmer’s.


1. Pledge to lift the 2 child cap
2. Scraping tuition fees
3. Abolish universal credit
4. Increasing income tax for top 5%
5. End outsourcing in NHS
6. Nationalise energy
7. Nationalise water
8. Nationalise mail
9. Free movement with EU

So certainly a lot more than 3 if we want to compare apples with apples. It’s not always about the quantity either, sometimes it’s the quality of the u turns that matter.

Anyroad glad to see you’ve got your account back from whoever hacked you yesterday.

Starmer has scored some own goals that’s for sure but did he really say he would do what you have listed? This is the top 12 from the Brexit Broadcasting Cohort..

Labour manifesto 2024: 12 key policies analysed

BBC correspondents analyse key policies in the Labour manifesto.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Norbert D]

Read the whole thread - the Tories were a shambles compared with Starmer

Those mug shots are like something from Crimewatch. Quite appropriate really.

 

[threespires]

I would class Starmer as a technocrat, as is the tenor of this Government. It certainly isn’t a slick, PR spin machine :)

They see a problem, apply logic and fiscal prudence and totally miss the human angle. Fortunately, Labour MPs seem keen to remind them.

That's an interesting perspective and I can sort of see where you're coming from, they're certainly crap at the politics. I'm not wholly convinced they are competent technocrats though and the problem might be they're failing between the two stools? A quick example off the top of my head: I had a look to see whether they'd modelled the risk in the welfare bill of carers chucking in the towel and the knock on fiscal impact of more people coming into direct state care. The OBR and a number of charities pointed out this was one of a number of holes in the modelling. A properly technocratic government with a bit of an evilcorp bent would factor in the fact that the unpaid carer army are by far the cheapest unit cost in our welfare system and should be supported/exploited as much as possible if you want to keep costs down in the mid to long term.

In fairness I'll take a half arsed technocrat as PM over an utterly untrustworthy narcissistic arsehole or a deluded dingbat but that's not a high bar tbh and I think I'd like strong political vision and nous backed up by a decent quality beaurocracy if Santa can arrange it.

 

[BigJoe#1]

Read the whole thread - the Tories were a shambles compared with Starmer

Disagree. I'm afraid both parties have proven themselves to be highly incapable of managing the economy. As I have said before and has been said on here recently short termism and self protection is the only game in town - which even to the less informed amongst us is a recepie for disaster.... as the last two decades have proven.

The best option we have is PR where they will be forced to work collaboratively - even that, the best option would be full of hope rather than expectation.

 

[hampshireblue]

Ironically her diabolical budget has spooked the bond markets less than our current financial guru. I'd have Liz Truss any day of the week over this shower.

Anyways, matters not. Starmer will be fucked off in less than a year and then we'll have Rayner who will make Labour even more unelectable than the Tories.

Well not quite the case. Bond Markets were relatively benign when Truss did what she did. They are significantly more volatile now worldwide, but Reeve's budget, whilst markets did rise a bit and subsequently fell back, had nowhere near the affect on mortgages, bonds etc. Nice to see you back-I think!

 

[philfodenswristsock]

The trouble with Starmer is, with a delicious irony, this empty husk of a knackered HR secretary, masquerading as a top line politician, the type of person who epitomises the dead from the neck up, front line political operator, representing the 'uniparty' or the 'single transferable party'... ran on a manifesto of "Change".
For most of us, the concept of change means actually sorting some of the nations problems out. For the spotty faced, greasy haired, pubescent Labour strategy geniuses however, the concept of change simply meant getting rid of the toffs, replacing them with a slightly more snide version who drop their Ts a little more regularly, but ultimately, representing the same interests, turning a blind eye to the same problems and pointing the finger at the same vulnerable people down a few rungs on the class ladder! The ACTUAL changes needed in this country would make an interesting thread, I wouldn't mind betting a group of football fans would have a far more realistic concept of what actually needs to change and why, over a bunch of gormless, bought, compromised, Charlie addled ponces from the private clubs of West London.

 

[BobKowalski]

That's an interesting perspective and I can sort of see where you're coming from, they're certainly crap at the politics. I'm not wholly convinced they are competent technocrats though and the problem might be they're failing between the two stools? A quick example off the top of my head: I had a look to see whether they'd modelled the risk in the welfare bill of carers chucking in the towel and the knock on fiscal impact of more people coming into direct state care. The OBR and a number of charities pointed out this was one of a number of holes in the modelling. A properly technocratic government with a bit of an evilcorp bent would factor in the fact that the unpaid carer army are by far the cheapest unit cost in our welfare system and should be supported/exploited as much as possible if you want to keep costs down in the mid to long term.

In fairness I'll take a half arsed technocrat as PM over an utterly untrustworthy narcissistic arsehole or a deluded dingbat but that's not a high bar tbh and I think I'd like strong political vision and nous backed up by a decent quality beaurocracy if Santa can arrange it.

Axing carers allowance was beyond stupid. You didn’t even need to see the figures to work out that unsalaried carers removes a greater burden from the state than any allowance you bung them. Keeping them sweet makes fiscal sense.

The response to our Parliamentary system working as it should with the Executive proposing policies/legislation and then seeking the consent of the legislature to enact them is moronic. Parliament is there to act as a scrutiny and check on the Executive and not just be a nodding dog. If the Executive can’t sell it to Parliament then they amend it or withdraw it. That is how it works. Instead we get ‘U-turn! Disaster for Starmer’ ‘Govt in Chaos! See pages 2,3,4 and 6’. They seem to forget Labour MPs are part of the Government and in this case, rightly, exercising their elected duties.

Oh, and then tomorrow we will have half the posts in here banging on about MPs been all the same and only init for themselves and don’t care about those who elected them - riddle me that one! The other half will be playing gotcha with posters who they think blindly follow the Government line.

It’s like a toddler playgroup at times :)

 

[Corky]

Well given a U-turn is characterised by going back on policy they said they would adopt as part of a leadership campaign let’s go with Starmer’s.


1. Pledge to lift the 2 child cap
2. Scraping tuition fees
3. Abolish universal credit
4. Increasing income tax for top 5%
5. End outsourcing in NHS
6. Nationalise energy
7. Nationalise water
8. Nationalise mail
9. Free movement with EU

So certainly a lot more than 3 if we want to compare apples with apples. It’s not always about the quantity either, sometimes it’s the quality of the u turns that matter.

Anyroad glad to see you’ve got your account back from whoever hacked you yesterday.

That is 15 years' worth of policy not 10 months.

 

[BobKowalski]

Hello chaps. Haven't posted or even visited here for a LONG time. It was just too depressing to contemplate after this shower won the GE last year. I've been wearing a black armband ever since.

Just wondered how the die-hard Labour supporters on here thought it was going? Clearly Labour have a huge majority but since only 1 person in 5 able to vote, actually voted for them, they have no popular mandate and it shows in the polls.

Do you think the current ombi-shambles are just teething troubles, whilst they lay the foundations for long term success? Or as I do, the symptoms of a bunch of clueless socialist idiots who couldn't run a piss up in a brewery, let alone a country. For a party who put GROWTH as their main priority, I cannot imagine a set of policies better tuned to delivering the absolute oppposite.

I’m good so far with the Government. Liked the budget, worker rights bill (so far), EU reset. Happy with them on Ukraine - could do with less sucking on Trump dick.

Six out of ten.

 

[Dereck Jeffries 3 wd]

I’m good so far with the Government. Liked the budget, worker rights bill (so far), EU reset. Happy with them on Ukraine - could do with less sucking on Trump dick.

Six out of ten.

Their book on u turns excuses must be running out!! Wonder how many people who voted for them would score themselves 6/10?