Westminster Politics

TheGame said:
Imagine blaming the Labour Party before they’ve even got into power for the Tory failure of the last 14 years. That’s quite something. Tell you what, let’s just protest from the sidelines and not get into power. That’ll solve it.
Click to expand...
How am I blaming Labour for last 14 years? I'm blaming Tory policy. I think this country is in the state it's in due to austerity and the way the Tories have run the economy.

That's why I'm perplexed that people on here seem to think that even more of that Tory policy and economic thinking is somehow going to improve things for people.
 
Mogget said:
How am I blaming Labour for last 14 years? I'm blaming Tory policy. I think this country is in the state it's in due to austerity and the way the Tories have run the economy.

That's why I'm perplexed that people on here seem to think that even more of that Tory policy and economic thinking is somehow going to improve things for people.
Click to expand...

Labour have not shown they are just repeating Tory austerity. They obviously have to be careful with the finances but the main thing is to get elected and enact change once elected. There will obviously be challenges ahead to reverse the damage caused by the Tories.
 
NotThatSoph said:
It wasn't difficult at all. What @Herman Toothrot is saying is that it's worrying if Labour is becoming the sort of party attractive to that part of society. You don't have to agree, but the point couldn't be more obvious.

If you want to be sarcastic, then the absolute minimum requirement is to be able to understand basic sentences. Otherwise you usually end up looking a bit silly.
Click to expand...

Thanks for chipping in! Always appreciated from yourself.
 
TheGame said:
Labour have not shown they are just repeating Tory austerity. They obviously have to be careful with the finances but the main thing is to get elected and enact change once elected. There will obviously be challenges ahead to reverse the damage caused by the Tories.
Click to expand...

Exactly, why is this concept so difficult for (some) Labour people to understand?
 
Maticmaker said:
Exactly, why is this concept so difficult for (some) Labour people to understand?
Click to expand...

@TheGame I personally think Labour should be less fearful of the word 'borrowing' but some seam to think we should magic up about £1tn to dish out on everything that's wrong with the country.
 
Jericholyte2 said:
@TheGame I personally think Labour should be less fearful of the word 'borrowing' but some seam to think we should magic up about £1tn to dish out on everything that's wrong with the country.
Click to expand...

This Government has spent over £1.6 trillion in 14 years making everyone poorer and dismantling the country whilst preaching constantly about austerity.

It is not unreasonable to think about borrowing a lower figure for better purposes.
 
Dobba said:
Sad story but who the feck thinks like this?

"If my cancer had been caught early, I would be looking at another 30 years of economic productivity"

Not 30 more years with my friends and family, but 30 years of economic productivity. What an existence.
Click to expand...
He’s just trying to make a political point that he could potentially have still been paying taxes for another 30 years, giving back to the pot
 
Frosty said:
This Government has spent over £1.6 trillion in 14 years making everyone poorer and dismantling the country whilst preaching constantly about austerity.

It is not unreasonable to think about borrowing a lower figure for better purposes.
Click to expand...

That was my first point.
 
Jericholyte2 said:
@TheGame I personally think Labour should be less fearful of the word 'borrowing' but some seam to think we should magic up about £1tn to dish out on everything that's wrong with the country.
Click to expand...

Labour are always in a difficult spot with public spending. Tax rises are a vote loser (I'm not sure when there was last a successful election campaign where there was an acknowledgment taxes would need to rise, even if that would be spent wisely on public services). Borrowing for investment being dangerous electorally is a more recent phenomenon for Labour. Probably 2010 and 2019 caused a bit of an issue and the current pitch is fiscal stability and responsibility, to neutralise the conservative attack line. Public services do need a huge cash injection though.
 
FireballXL5 said:
Mmmmmm, austerity :drool:

Sunaks' wealth rises to £651m in latest Sunday Times Rich List

The personal wealth of Rishi Sunak and his wife Akshata Murty rose by £122m last year, according to the Sunday Times Rich List.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69027955
Click to expand...
"But the PM's official spokesman added: "When he's been asked this question before he's responded and asked that people judge him by his actions, including to support livelihoods during the pandemic though the furlough scheme as an example."
Click to expand...

The furlough scheme ended almost three years ago and it's the only thing they can think of.

Goes without saying that Infosys and his wife's fitness company also did quite well thanks to the furlough scheme.
 
Mr Pigeon said:
The furlough scheme ended almost three years ago and it's the only thing they can think of.

Goes without saying that Infosys and his wife's fitness company also did quite well thanks to the furlough scheme.
Click to expand...

Did you not eat out to help out? You're underestimating him.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
Basically, the people who've rigged the economy to ensure the rich stay rich while schools, hospitals and public services crumble are now confident that Labour will not challenge the status quo. Once again, anything approaching a fair taxation system is now considered fantasy politics and everyone can get back to bootlicking and blaming their problems on immigrants.
Click to expand...


God forbid Labour makes friends with companies that know how to build houses eh? I mean what sort of bastards would do that in the middle of a house supply crisis? This type of criticism is just posing.
 
Jericholyte2 said:
@TheGame I personally think Labour should be less fearful of the word 'borrowing' but some seam to think we should magic up about £1tn to dish out on everything that's wrong with the country.
Click to expand...
Liz Truss showed the danger for Labour in taking the financial markets for granted. They have to be cautious. They can’t make promises to spend money that isn’t there as you say. We have to spend the money we do have, better, and some taxes will have to go up. An awful of of spend is already priced in (eg growing costs of the retired) yet the economy is not growing fast enough. Labour is going to be in a tough place, I hope Reeves is up to it.
 
Last edited:
nickm said:
God forbid Labour makes friends with companies that know how to build houses eh? I mean what sort of bastards would do that in the middle of a house supply crisis? This type of criticism is just posing.
Click to expand...

Would they stop building houses if they weren't 'friends'? Pretty fecking vindictive to abandon your business because you don't like the government of the day.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
Would they stop building houses if they weren't 'friends'? Pretty fecking vindictive to abandon your business because you don't like the government of the day.
Click to expand...
I think that serious governments (rather than protest movements) try to solve problems by working with the people and organisations that know about it and who are placed to help. We built less than 30k houses in the last quarter, which is 1/3 of the target amount, which is itself about 1/3 of what it needs to be IMO). This is one of the most serious issues facing the country and government need to stop fecking about. If inviting a house builder to a conference is a small sign of labour seriousness in this matter, I am for it.

This idea that government is about sending ideological smoke signals is an idea whose time is well and truly up.
 
Last edited:
nickm said:
I think that serious governments (rather than protest movements) try to solve problems by working with the people and organisations that know about it and who are placed to help.
Click to expand...

I think you can do this without being a continuity government and have some serious policies that address the ridiculous disparity of wealth in this country. The only thing more shameful that maintaining the status quo is excusing it.
 
It must be great to have a worldview where the tories have destroyed Britain but not property developers, waters companies or landlords.

Such bliss.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
Would they stop building houses if they weren't 'friends'? Pretty fecking vindictive to abandon your business because you don't like the government of the day.
Click to expand...

You might campaign against them and donate to their political opponents though.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
I think you can do this without being a continuity government and have some serious policies that address the ridiculous disparity of wealth in this country. The only thing more shameful that maintaining the status quo is excusing it.
Click to expand...
And I think I’d rather see some practical grappling with specific problems rather than everything having to be measured against whether it was sufficiently restructuring captitalist society or not.
 
Sweet Square said:
It must be great to have a worldview where the tories have destroyed Britain but not property developers, waters companies or landlords.

Such bliss.
Click to expand...
Equally it must be great to have a worldview where the actual practical effects of your policy ideas are never tested because nobody ever wants to elect the people who propose them. This does at least have the benefit of keeping the worldview holders in blissful ignorance.
 
nickm said:
Equally it must be great to have a worldview where the actual practical effects of your policy ideas are never tested because nobody ever wants to elect the people who propose them. This does at least have the benefit of keeping the worldview holders in blissful ignorance.
Click to expand...

You're your own worst enemy. Unless you're a millionaire or a billionaire you're nothing but the equivalent of a 21st Century peasant being read selective passages of the bible so you can rejoice in the being at the thick end of inequality. You deserve better.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
Would they stop building houses if they weren't 'friends'? Pretty fecking vindictive to abandon your business because you don't like the government of the day.
Click to expand...


Land hoarding is actually a big issue, and it is perpetrated largely by these companies.
 
nickm said:
Equally it must be great to have a worldview where the actual practical effects of your policy ideas are never tested because nobody ever wants to elect the people who propose them. This does at least have the benefit of keeping the worldview holders in blissful ignorance.
Click to expand...
nickm said:
The economics of British coal destroyed the mining industry, not Thatcher.

You castigate Thatcher for how she went after the mining unions, but you forget this is a fight they wanted and chose to have.

I am 40, so I remember this stuff too.
Click to expand...
.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
I think you can do this without being a continuity government and have some serious policies that address the ridiculous disparity of wealth in this country. The only thing more shameful that maintaining the status quo is excusing it.
Click to expand...

Do you really believe a new Labour government (especially) with large majority is going to become a 'continuity' government? To me what Labour is doing is beginning to look and sound like a government in waiting.

They will talk to anyone they need to talk too, whether it's to rebuild the economy or to make real changes to the lives of ordinary working people, by making lasting interventions in e.g. housing, with policy that will benefit those who now are struggling to find homes and those who are fearful they might be struggling to hold on their home in the future, and will ensure insulation and other energy management elements are included.

Once they have seen the books, then some emergency plans will be launched, probably around NHS/Social care and maybe education, simply to stop further implosion. Such plans won't be the be all and end all of the expectations, but the first steps. It is abundantly clear that to make a real movement on the dial, will take at least two terms in government, maybe even three.

Trying to put a price on what will be necessary in money terms and indeed on changes in legislation at this stage is foolish. The intentions Labour has already given, show a clear indication they know what the task ahead of them is likely to require, but they are also aware "that the devil is in the detail" and that has to be given some clear analysis once the full landscape requiring change is known and validated.

Even if the Tories get back, there will be no continuity government... or else we are all going to hell in a handcart
 
Maticmaker said:
Do you really believe a new Labour government (especially) with large majority is going to become a 'continuity' government? To me what Labour is doing is beginning to look and sound like a government in waiting.

They will talk to anyone they need to talk too, whether it's to rebuild the economy or to make real changes to the lives of ordinary working people, by making lasting interventions in e.g. housing, with policy that will benefit those who now are struggling to find homes and those who are fearful they might be struggling to hold on their home in the future, and will ensure insulation and other energy management elements are included.

Once they have seen the books, then some emergency plans will be launched, probably around NHS/Social care and maybe education, simply to stop further implosion. Such plans won't be the be all and end all of the expectations, but the first steps. It is abundantly clear that to make a real movement on the dial, will take at least two terms in government, maybe even three.

Trying to put a price on what will be necessary in money terms and indeed on changes in legislation at this stage is foolish. The intentions Labour has already given, show a clear indication they know what the task ahead of them is likely to require, but they are also aware "that the devil is in the detail" and that has to be given some clear analysis once the full landscape requiring change is known and validated.

Even if the Tories get back, there will be no continuity government... or else we are all going to hell in a handcart
Click to expand...

I do. I hope I'm wrong.
 
nickm said:
God forbid Labour makes friends with companies that know how to build houses eh? I mean what sort of bastards would do that in the middle of a house supply crisis? This type of criticism is just posing.
Click to expand...
Apparently it's debatable that we are in a housing crisis in the way most people interpret that. We have as many houses per capita as we did decades ago. The problem caused by too many landlords and too many empty properties.

https://amp.theguardian.com/lifeand...risingly-simple-solution-to-uk-housing-crisis

We now find ourselves in a situation where one in every 21 adults in the UK is a landlord. We have four times as many landlords as teachers. As a consequence, virtually everyone struggles to afford a home that meets their needs despite a net gain in housing stock.
Click to expand...

We need a government to address that issue, and increase social housing, not just build more so that landlords can increase their portfolios and let others pay their mortgages for them.
 
I’m gonna throw out two ideas I’d love a Labour Party to use, but no idea how genuinely feasible it would be, so gonna run it up the flagpole here:

1. To renationalise water
  • Create UK Water Co
  • Arrange a meeting with the heads of each of the water companies
  • Offer them a deal
    • We empower OFWAT to fine then £10,000,000 per day until they resolve issues. This’ll cripple them and run down their stock value, at which point UK Water buys them out.
    • Companies agree to sell up at 50% market value
2. Temporary NHS waiting list resolution
  • Arrange a medial agreement with EU, to allow the free movement of medical professionals between UK and EU
  • As part of this, agree with nations to use EU members’ medical capacity to fast track outstanding appointments (essentially make Turkey Teeth a temporary government policy)
  • Subsidise travel and accommodation for those who agree to it
  • Start with younger, orthopaedic issues (usually day surgeries, in and out within 24hrs
Would both be even remotely workable?
 
Jericholyte2 said:
I’m gonna throw out two ideas I’d love a Labour Party to use, but no idea how genuinely feasible it would be, so gonna run it up the flagpole here:

1. To renationalise water
  • Create UK Water Co
  • Arrange a meeting with the heads of each of the water companies
  • Offer them a deal
    • We empower OFWAT to fine then £10,000,000 per day until they resolve issues. This’ll cripple them and run down their stock value, at which point UK Water buys them out.
    • Companies agree to sell up at 50% market value
2. Temporary NHS waiting list resolution
  • Arrange a medial agreement with EU, to allow the free movement of medical professionals between UK and EU
  • As part of this, agree with nations to use EU members’ medical capacity to fast track outstanding appointments (essentially make Turkey Teeth a temporary government policy)
  • Subsidise travel and accommodation for those who agree to it
  • Start with younger, orthopaedic issues (usually day surgeries, in and out within 24hrs
Would both be even remotely workable?
Click to expand...

On point 1, creating a UK water company is fine. The points of offering them a deal and fine them to resolve issues would fall down at the very first legal hurdle, and agreeing to sell them at 50% market value won't even begin at a conversation as most investors in these companies will have other investments in the country. Plus also any re-nationalisation of a water company needs 25 years notice if their license is being removed.

Point 2 doesn't look workable, the waiting list matter is complex and is as much about the lack of social care as much as under investment/lack of capacity in the NHS. To create all of that will take a long time, and you'd be quicker investing in the UK service rather than sending people around Europe for healthcare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.