Westminster Politics

Maticmaker said:
None whatsoever, Governments tell people what they want them to know, just like us. Just like the Nigerians, Just like the Mexicans, just like anyone who is still using Blast Furnaces, these methods pollute, surely the world has to learn something from history, or face oblivion.
China seems to have less problems with convincing its population, it has already lifted hundreds of millions of its populace out of abject poverty.
Click to expand...
Hardly surprising given what kind of regime it is
 
Red in STL said:
Hardly surprising given what kind of regime it is
Click to expand...

In part that was the point I was making. Of all governments China's seems to have less worries about telling its populace things they won't be happy about. The government's longevity in China seems to allow it to make long term (really long term) plans, 30, 50, maybe even 100-year plans, whether the people trust them or not seems irrelevant they just get on with it, and for 100 millions of Chinese they have been lifted out of abject poverty, so they are not probably that bothered about how it was brought about.
@Murder on Zidane's Floor was making the point that stopping the use of blast furnaces was something the Chinese government would have difficulty telling their populace as it would mean limiting the advance of their living standards.
 
Maticmaker said:
:lol: Yes, me too.... I once visited a Blast Furnace in Wales, or it might have been in Scunthorpe, its years ago (when United were winning PL title every season) ... but phew, thought I had arrived in hell.
Click to expand...

Yes I've been to one as well. He stayed with us in the summer of 2022 when I was melting in 40+ degrees and he wasn't hot, he was so used to the heat.

Regarding China, they're overproducing, domestic demand is down and they're losing money, so they're flooding the Asian market. But there are tools to prevent this which have been used for years to stop them dumping products, tariffs for example. Trump slapped a 25% tariff on Chinese steel.
 
decorativeed said:
That's currently. The other scopes will be phased in as part of the net zero plan schedule.
Click to expand...

What is the timeline on these new calculations, if they ever actually happen?

This is the time line for closures of the blast furnaces in Wales. I suspect the rest will close when the reinvestment cycle comes around.

"Here's some more detail on the timeline for how Tata plans to close both of its blast furnaces and supporting facilities in Port Talbot in a "phased manner":

  • The first blast furnace and coke ovens will close around mid-2024, and then the firm will progressively wind down its remaining heavy end assets during the second half of the calendar year
  • There will be a wider restructuring of other locations and functions across the company, including the intended closure of the steel-processing facility known as the Continuous Annealing Processing Line in March 2025
  • In order to deliver the proposed electric arc furnace in 2027, Tata says it has begun engineering design work and construction planning for a furnace which it says would be among the most modern in the world
The firm says it is in advanced planning discussions with the National Grid to enable infrastructure and has also begun engaging with the local authority and regulators."
 
Maticmaker said:
None whatsoever, Governments tell people what they want them to know, just like us. Just like the Nigerians, Just like the Mexicans, just like anyone who is still using Blast Furnaces, these methods pollute, surely the world has to learn something from history, or face oblivion.
China seems to have less problems with convincing its population, it has already lifted hundreds of millions of its populace out of abject poverty.
Click to expand...
Using coal...
 
Maticmaker said:
In part that was the point I was making. Of all governments China's seems to have less worries about telling its populace things they won't be happy about. The government's longevity in China seems to allow it to make long term (really long term) plans, 30, 50, maybe even 100-year plans, whether the people trust them or not seems irrelevant they just get on with it, and for 100 millions of Chinese they have been lifted out of abject poverty, so they are not probably that bothered about how it was brought about.
@Murder on Zidane's Floor was making the point that stopping the use of blast furnaces was something the Chinese government would have difficulty telling their populace as it would mean limiting the advance of their living standards.
Click to expand...
No, it's more they will also the question why their future prosperity has to be curtailed and they have to develop slower. Politicians can't sell this to a population.
 
TheGame said:
It’s from the Sun and Labour have subsequently said they are not dropping it.
Click to expand...

Next we will see an AI generated image of Starmer saying all sorts of things as part of the right wing media attempt to detail labour.
 
Frosty said:
And now after briefing that, Labour have told The Guardian that they will have meetings to determine whether or not to keep the policy

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...talks-on-future-of-28bn-green-investment-plan

Policy plans change hourly.
Click to expand...

Alternatively,

I went to the doctor and he said I was overweight and I needed to exercise more and eat less. I went back few years later and he said I was underweight and exhausted, so I had to eat more and rest more.

Doctors, changing their minds all the time, the idiots.

We should stick rigidly to everything Corbyn said before covid the war in Ukraine and Lizzie Dripping pissed all our money away. A good plan is a good plan no matter where you are starting from or what you are trying to correct and should only be revisited once a century.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Alternatively,

I went to the doctor and he said I was overweight and I needed to exercise more and eat less. I went back few years later and he said I was underweight and exhausted, so I had to eat more and rest more.

Doctors, changing their minds all the time, the idiots.

We should stick rigidly to everything Corbyn said before covid the war in Ukraine and Lizzie Dripping pissed all our money away. A good plan is a good plan no matter where you are starting from or what you are trying to correct and should only be revisited once a century.
Click to expand...
20150226_inhofe_snowball.jpg
 
We’ve gone from thinking the national economy is the same as house hold income. To thinking global climate change is like a visit to the local GP.

We are soooo fecked.
 
Sweet Square said:
We’ve gone from thinking the national economy is the same as house hold income. To thinking global climate change is like a visit to the local GP.

We are soooo fecked.
Click to expand...
It's the CE forum equivalent of 'Listen if someone offered you 700k a week to do your job in SA, you'd take it!'.
 
I agree with earlier comments that the Conservatives will try to frame the next general election, at least in part as a referendum on immigration. But I don't think it will be successful, due to them repeatedly failing to meet their own targets, including since 2019 when they've had large working majorities.

Even if you ignore ethics and only focus on practicality, the Tories have basically snookered themselves by setting completely unrealistic and undeliverable targets re cutting net migration. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with a policy, clearly if there's no chance of it being delivered it shouldn't be pledged in the first place. They've done it, to appease right wing back-benchers, the right-wing media in the short-term, without thinking of what happens next. They anger many people on the left and centre of the political spectrum by making those promises and using that rhetoric, and then anger many people on the right of the political spectrum by failing to meet their pledged targets (and of those people on the left and centre that they previously angered are not going to forgive them).

Also Reform, including Farage, attacking the Tories on immigration from the right, will also be very damaging for them. It is of course clear that Reform want the Tories to suffer a heavy defeat, so that they can influence their next leadership election and 'rebuild' afterwards. Their previous Brexit Party incarnation clearly influenced the Tories ditching May and replacing him with Johnson in 2019.
 
Last edited:
Conor said:
It's the CE forum equivalent of 'Listen if someone offered you 700k a week to do your job in SA, you'd take it!'.
Click to expand...
Pretty much. Its only going to be when the sea water is chest height and raising will a lot of people start taking the issue a bit more seriously.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Alternatively,

I went to the doctor and he said I was overweight and I needed to exercise more and eat less. I went back few years later and he said I was underweight and exhausted, so I had to eat more and rest more.

Doctors, changing their minds all the time, the idiots.

We should stick rigidly to everything Corbyn said before covid the war in Ukraine and Lizzie Dripping pissed all our money away. A good plan is a good plan no matter where you are starting from or what you are trying to correct and should only be revisited once a century.
Click to expand...

Delaying dealing with global heating negatively impacts the economy. That isn't a left wing idea. It is mainstream economics.

Here is the IMF making this point: https://www.imf.org/en/Blogs/Articl...ng-climate-policies-will-hurt-economic-growth

This isn't a plan to roll out more rural bus services, or to invest more in higher education. This is about the future of the planet, what world our grandchildren inherent and, yes, helping the economy grow.

And we have money. We have a national bank that creates money if the government asks it to.
 
GuybrushThreepwood said:
I agree with earlier comments that the Conservatives will try to frame the next general election, at least in part as a referendum on immigration. But I don't think it will be successful, due to them repeatedly failing to meet their own targets, including since 2019 when they've had large working majorities.

Even if you ignore ethnics and only focus on practicality, the Tories have basically snookered themselves by setting completely unrealistic and undeliverable targets re cutting net migration. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with a policy, clearly if there's no chance of it being delivered it shouldn't be pledged in the first place. They've done it, to appease right wing back-benchers, the right-wing media in the short-term, without thinking of what happens next. They anger many people on the left and centre of the political spectrum by making those promises and using that rhetoric, and then anger many people on the right of the political spectrum by failing to meet their pledged targets (and of those people on the left and centre that they previously angered are not going to forgive them).

Also Reform, including Farage, attacking the Tories on immigration from the right, will also be very damaging for them. It is of course clear that Reform want the Tories to suffer a heavy defeat, so that they can influence their next leadership election and 'rebuild' afterwards. Their previous Brexit Party incarnation clearly influenced the Tories ditching May and replacing him with Johnson in 2019.
Click to expand...
Totally unrelated but you have the best username in the caf. Just pipped beepbeepiamajeep
 
Frosty said:
Delaying dealing with global heating negatively impacts the economy. That isn't a left wing idea. It is mainstream economics.

Here is the IMF making this point: https://www.imf.org/en/Blogs/Articl...ng-climate-policies-will-hurt-economic-growth

This isn't a plan to roll out more rural bus services, or to invest more in higher education. This is about the future of the planet, what world our grandchildren inherent and, yes, helping the economy grow.

And we have money. We have a national bank that creates money if the government asks it to.
Click to expand...

Kwasi Kwarteng pretty much proved that unless you carry the market with you in terms of credible ability to pay them back they will ruin your plans and you get to watch your economy and govt collapse.

I think we should do what we can afford to do and look at the 28 billion commitment on those terms.

If its a good idea and affordable, do it, if not, scale it back and make a slower start.

There will always be more good ideas for spending money than there are for raising or saving money.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Kwasi Kwarteng pretty much proved that unless you carry the market with you in terms of credible ability to pay them back they will ruin your plans and you get to watch your economy and govt collapse.

I think we should do what we can afford to do and look at the 28 billion commitment on those terms.

If its a good idea and affordable, do it, if not, scale it back and make a slower start.

There will always be more good ideas for spending money than there are for raising or saving money.
Click to expand...

I can't say I run out of fingers and toes when I calculate the successes austerity has brought us. The thing is that the cost of stuff like borrowing and debt repayments is easy to calculate on a yearly basis, but the cost of failing infrastructure, declining standards of education and healthcare, that's harder to enumerate and its true cost appears over decades.

There is a tremendous difference between Truss's adlibs and Kwasi's impromptu tax cuts and a government presenting a plan to invest in infrastructure and retool an economy. For sure there's a risk in making those investments, but there may well be equal or greater risk in not making them.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
I can't say I run out of fingers and toes when I calculate the successes austerity has brought us. The thing is that the cost of stuff like borrowing and debt repayments is easy to calculate on a yearly basis, but the cost of failing infrastructure, declining standards of education and healthcare, that's harder to enumerate and its true cost appears over decades.

There is a tremendous difference between Truss's adlibs and Kwasi's impromptu tax cuts and a government presenting a plan to invest in infrastructure and retool an economy. For sure there's a risk in making those investments, but there may well be equal or greater risk in not making them.
Click to expand...


If that is true then go ahead with it the markets will support it and we are all good.

On the other hand, what was the proposed cost of Cross rail, HS2 at the start? If the markets decide its the same pie in the sky wishful thinking we lose not only the 28 billion but probably double that in interest debt each year. If we don't get this right we will all suffer and still get no green deal or whatever they are calling it today.
 
GuybrushThreepwood said:
I agree with earlier comments that the Conservatives will try to frame the next general election, at least in part as a referendum on immigration. But I don't think it will be successful, due to them repeatedly failing to meet their own targets, including since 2019 when they've had large working majorities.

Even if you ignore ethics and only focus on practicality, the Tories have basically snookered themselves by setting completely unrealistic and undeliverable targets re cutting net migration. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with a policy, clearly if there's no chance of it being delivered it shouldn't be pledged in the first place. They've done it, to appease right wing back-benchers, the right-wing media in the short-term, without thinking of what happens next. They anger many people on the left and centre of the political spectrum by making those promises and using that rhetoric, and then anger many people on the right of the political spectrum by failing to meet their pledged targets (and of those people on the left and centre that they previously angered are not going to forgive them).

Also Reform, including Farage, attacking the Tories on immigration from the right, will also be very damaging for them. It is of course clear that Reform want the Tories to suffer a heavy defeat, so that they can influence their next leadership election and 'rebuild' afterwards. Their previous Brexit Party incarnation clearly influenced the Tories ditching May and replacing him with Johnson in 2019.
Click to expand...
I thought one of the points of Brexit was that they could control this, any target they set was realistic and deliverable because they had the power to determine who they let in,that they didn't meet it is nothing more than incompetence
 
Red in STL said:
I thought one of the points of Brexit was that they could control this, any target they set was realistic and deliverable because they had the power to determine who they let in,that they didn't meet it is nothing more than incompetence
Click to expand...

1,200,000 immigrants arrived legally, allowed in by the government, into the UK last year. So they focus on the 30,000 or 40,000 refugees/asylum seekers who arrived by boats and then call them illegal. Less than 3%. Might distract the electorate and it succeeds.

Furthermore they make no mention of real illegal immigrants or the numbers because in reality they have no idea of the numbers.

If there was an opposition party this would be pointed out but instead the leader of the opposition parrots "We've lost control of our borders".
 
Sweet Square said:
Yep they are so free floating. I understand people can change their politics over time. But I would have thought standing to be a MP means there’s some ideological commitment or else whats the point ?

In my case the guy who was a former 2015 local Lib Dem candidate was pretty much acting as a guide/helper to the 2017 labour candidate. He taking her through the basics of running a political campaign. Tbh we didn’t stand a chance against the tories(I think we were the most unfunded branch in England) so maybe it was just friends helping each other out.

A strange experience.
Click to expand...
I forgot to ask- how did the Lib Dem guy square helping the Labour candidate in his head? Was just cos it didn't matter if the Tories were going to win anyway or more he was passing on the anti-Tory baton or something?
 
Jippy said:
I forgot to ask- how did the Lib Dem guy square helping the Labour candidate in his head? Was just cos it didn't matter if the Tories were going to win anyway or more he was passing on the anti-Tory baton or something?
Click to expand...
I think it was a mix of both. Overall the Tory was always going to win but also that year Labour looked the better bet for the anti-Tory baton.

Labour did finish in 2nd but the Tory MP regained her seat after getting her best result since 1992. We could have combined all the anti Tory votes together and it still wouldn’t have been enough.

Although tbh I never asked him. The overall vibe I got of that Labour brach was a bunch of very nice people wanting to make their local area better for people. But having with no resources or power to do so. :(
 


Thoughts on this? Barring the obvious Edwardian era education we’re giving kids that gives a negligible preparation for 21st century life, this push on ‘attend at all costs’ seems a particularly harsh roll-back given studies about more holistic approaches.
 
Jericholyte2 said:


Thoughts on this? Barring the obvious Edwardian era education we’re giving kids that gives a negligible preparation for 21st century life, this push on ‘attend at all costs’ seems a particularly harsh roll-back given studies about more holistic approaches.
Click to expand...

If you or family members are not immunocompromised, being exposed to mild illnesses helps build immunity doesn’t it? @Pogue Mahone will have an opinion on this.
 
Jericholyte2 said:


Thoughts on this? Barring the obvious Edwardian era education we’re giving kids that gives a negligible preparation for 21st century life, this push on ‘attend at all costs’ seems a particularly harsh roll-back given studies about more holistic approaches.
Click to expand...


I don't understand why they are mixing up viral illnesses with what they are actually trying to say, which is "don't let anxiety of school (or post-covid bad attendance) lead to your kid missing class frequently". I seriously doubt "tummy aches" and "runny nose" is leading to cratering attendance issues. I could be wrong, but I'd put good money on the mental health/specific kids getting too comfortable in school from home environments as the major factor here.
 
Pexbo said:
If you or family members are not immunocompromised, being exposed to mild illnesses helps build immunity doesn’t it? @Pogue Mahone will have an opinion on this.
Click to expand...

But, similar to the Covid ‘issue’, if one of the 35 kids in a class is immunocompromised then it’s irresponsible.

I believe it’s simply a continuation of the Victorian view of ‘the serf works no matter what’ and punitive attendance procedures at workplaces.

For example I remember working in the NHS where, if you have a sickness bug, you have to be clear for 48hrs before returning. I had issues one year as I had a lot of such bugs. I triggered the attendance review where I was told my attendance wasn’t good enough - I didn’t get the best response when I suggested it would have been at least halved if they didn’t want me to adhere to their policies.
 
Being exposed to viruses and infections is a basic fact of life we need to except. If individual circumstances apply such as being immunocompromised, then that needs to be dealt with specifically rather than holistically. Especially when it comes to children and their development.

For adluts in the workplace, it should be treated differently. Especially if you have the option of working from home.
 
Bert_ said:
Being exposed to viruses and infections is a basic fact of life we need to except. If individual circumstances apply such as being immunocompromised, then that needs to be dealt with specifically rather than holistically. Especially when it comes to children and their development.

For adluts in the workplace, it should be treated differently. Especially if you have the option of working from home.
Click to expand...

Then shouldn’t that be similar in schools, if we’re to prep kids for 2020’s workplace practices?
 
Pexbo said:
If you or family members are not immunocompromised, being exposed to mild illnesses helps build immunity doesn’t it? @Pogue Mahone will have an opinion on this.
Click to expand...

Yeah, to an extent. Although the main reason I think a campaign like this might be necessary is because there are a lot of people out there who have an over the top fear of viral illnesses, after covid. We do have to get on with living our lives, in amongst all these viruses
 
Last edited:
Pogue Mahone said:
Yeah, to an extent. Although the main reason I think a campaign like this might be necessary is because there are a lot of people out there who have an over the top fear of viral illnesses, after covid. We do have to get on with living our lives, in amongst all these viruses
Click to expand...

And you don't think people who have these mental health issues should get support? Just a kick up the proverbial along with a 'cheer up, it might never happen' and a threat to the parents?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.