|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 18, 2023 22:55:40 GMT
A good article by Martin Fletcher in New Statesman: www.newstatesman.com/comment/2023/07/labour-radical-keir-starmer-reform – much of this by unelected prime ministers or prime ministers elected with a minority of the popular vote.
He is quite right that there are many things that a Labour majority government could do - I would add a closer relationship with the EU to the list - that will not cost a significant amount of money. A couple of years of this would do much to recover the voters' faith in politicians and lay the groundwork for the more progressive tax system needed to support the spending on social and health services that (almost) everyone wants. I particularly like the idea that a new Prime Minister should be required to face the electorate at a General Election, effectively removing the power of party members to select the Prime Minister. I'd quibble with one thing - no PM since the war has enjoyed the majority of the popular vote though some have come close. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jul 18, 2023 22:58:54 GMT
Polly Toynbee joins the debate about Starmer's current strategy as Labour leader. It's a different perspective to her Guardian colleague John Harris's of a few days ago, but it underlines how divided opinion is on this caution v radicalism tension within Labour ranks. Toynbee rehearses the pro-Starmer argument quite well, I think. In fairness, Harris was persuasive too, but his line of argument seems to be a prevailing one on the Left at the moment and it's sometimes good to read and hear some different perspectives from time to time. Toynbee sceptics will probably file this under, "Well she would say that, wouldn't she!" www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/17/labour-critics-record-keir-starmer-election-britain |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 18, 2023 23:02:24 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w Actually no it doesn't The 0.08% possible improvement in GDP from CPTPP membership over a decade is just the fifty times less than leaving the European union has already cost. The CPTPP isn't remotely as complex an arrangement as the 40 years+ of European union/EEC membership in order to leave the UK simply has to give six months written notice, our reciprocal trade arrangements with 9 out of 11 members aren't impacted , those arranged by the European union are more beneficial in most cases any way. There would be no requirement to leave the CPTPP until the point at which we rejoined the European unionEven if there was a will from either of our largest political parties the most optimistic time threshold for Rejoining would be around 3-5 years from commencement of negotiations. You see that's why the EU is so bad. Why should it be a requirement for a sovereign nation to give up it's own trading arrangements because the EU says so? It's a very inward-looking authoritarian protectionist organisation, whereas the UK has had a global outlook for hundreds of years. Some of the other EU nations used to have that too until the EU drained it from them. |
|
|
|
Post by ptarmigan on Jul 18, 2023 23:09:07 GMT
Hi shevii , I am now very much in the begrudgingly voting Labour camp. I'm sure when I do one of those 'which party's polices reflect your views/which party you should vote for tests' at the time of the next GE, mine will come up with Green/SNP. Starmer is being very short-sighted if you ask me - discarding core voters for soft Tory ones. Not that I'm canvassing for the Green Party or anything because that would be pointless on a forum of political aware people who know their own minds, but unless you're in one of the 20% of seats that would decide a General election, and probably 10% when it comes down to reading the opinion polls even half way correctly on UNS, then it doesn't much matter who you vote for. If you are in the 80% then you can send some sort of message with a free conscience. Mind you I might be being inconsistent here because I voted Labour in 2010 and 2015 even though Greens were probably nearer my politics and I was in a seat that has been Labour since 1918 and isn't going to change any time soon. This is very much how I'm thinking at the moment. My seat is a Tory/Labour battleground but it's been Tory since the dawn of time and, although Labour could very well win it on current polling, if they do prevail it's inconceivable that they won't have secured a very healthy majority. Yes, I'd prefer a Labour MP, and it's always nice to oust a sitting Tory, but in terms of the bigger picture it's difficult to see what the incentive is in voting for a party whose policy platform doesn't appeal when who governs the country ultimately isn't going to hinge on how my constituency votes. I think this is something that's often overlooked in the frequent discussions around how LOC folk might vote. To cast people as either sensible pragmatists or foolish and selfish idealists is, I think, to overlook the fact that people might have many different motivations for voting as they do and that they might make different calculations based on where they live, the marginality of their seat and all sorts of other factors. Also, if I'm honest, I've begun to resent being forced to vote in accordance with what FPTP demands. Doing so only really feels like a tacit endorsement of a voting system that I fundamentally don't agree with and which disenfranchises much of the country. I know that's the game, but if I'm always bemoaning the game then I wonder if it's perhaps time to stop playing. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 18, 2023 23:17:06 GMT
Dan Wootton trending on twitter for a 5th day
The stench of hypocrisy is positively nauseating
Could it be because he's far less well-known? Massive media coverage would have most of the audience wondering 'who?'. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 18, 2023 23:19:10 GMT
graham “ There were suggestions in the 1930s that Macmillan might defect to Labour. “ Still might I s’pose. It's a possibility, I suppose. If he's disinterred and lives to walk again, he might well be impressed with Sir Keith Stalin's rightward drift and sign up to the "Keith/Rachel" project. During my much mourned short absence from this site, I see I've missed some fascinating historical leader beauty contests. Attlee vs Starmer; who do you prefer? Supermac v Corbyn was a cracker, and I must admit that I can't quite decide on that one. Nor Cameron vs Bonar Law Before the fascinating debate subsides, can I offer another comparison over the ages? Leon Trotsky vs Hugh Gaitskell. Who might have made the better PM? I suppose we'll never know, but it's a fascinating thought nonetheless is it not? Socialism in one country said Hugh. Leon less keen and more internationalist. Was Hugh keen on exporting revolution? I doubt it. A separate thread perhaps. How handy was old Hugh with an ice-pick? The public demands an answer. EDIT: I see I was beaten to it by a couple of posters. The perils of only looking in once or twice a day! |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 18, 2023 23:31:30 GMT
Has anyone spotted oldnat posting recently? I miss the old curmudgeon when they are absent, hope all is well with them. I had noticed too. I'm intrigued by your choice of pronouns. Is he a tranny then? I know it's hard to tell with Scots because of all the kilts. He's probably on holiday. |
|
|
|
Post by ptarmigan on Jul 18, 2023 23:52:53 GMT
Bewildered that some seem to have swallowed the fiscal responsibility stuff on the 2 child benefits cap. Reversing it would reportedly cost £1.3bn - that's an absolute drop in the ocean. If Labour can't commit to something like that they'll not commit to anything meaningful at all. Just feels like the sort of policy that played well with their beloved focus groups.
|
|
|
|
Post by eor on Jul 18, 2023 23:57:41 GMT
Has anyone spotted oldnat posting recently? I miss the old curmudgeon when they are absent, hope all is well with them. I had noticed too. I'm intrigued by your choice of pronouns. Is he a tranny then? I know it's hard to tell with Scots because of all the kilts. He's probably on holiday. Oh please. www.scotlandshop.com/us/tartanblog/the-great-kiltAs has often been pointed out, kilts weren't evolved by the Scots until long after oldnat's formative years! |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 19, 2023 0:06:09 GMT
shevii Totally agree. Both our two major political parties are forced by our electoral system to try and cobble together essentially untenable coalitions of voters. In so doing, they also unwittingly create intrinsically implausible political entities, containing as they almost have to do, political views so divergent that they rarely sit comfortably together under one umbrella. Rather sadly for the diversity and interest value of this forum, we don't get these internal tensions and contradictions crawled over as forensically as we do for Labour, but they exist every bit as much in the Tory Party. Not as much was/is made of it as it should be, predictably maybe, but the expulsion of the more moderate and pro-European Tory MPs by Johnson in 2019, and the party's gradual absorption of UKIP post 2016, may well prove to be one of the most significant developments in British politics in the last 40 years. A sort of below the radar party split, hidden for now by FPTP, but that may resonate for decades to come. Electoral reform would seal the deal of course. I'm in favour of some form of PR too, though I don't want to get involved in what form is best. It's interesting that various forms have been tried in the UK over the years (e.g. Holyrood, EU elections), almost as though someone was conducting an experiment to see which form would give them the result they wanted. Anyway, let's suppose we had a form of PR and the HoC number of seats was roughly proportional to the parties' popular vote. At first one would assume that Labour and Tories would still be the biggest parties, and LibDems presumably in the role of kingmakers as they would have a significant number of seats. Greens would have a few, SNP would suffer and there would be a few representatives of very minor parties. I can see two possible scenarios evolving: 1) Lab and Con continue to dominate, and one or the other cobbling together coalitions which would be a bit different each time. 2) As politicians are used to having a single party in power with very occasional coalitions or confidence and supply arrangements is it possible that the left of the Tories and right of Labour would join to make a new dominant central party or even join the LibDems? Tory and Labour would continue but no longer be dominant. The new party would be a sort of descendant of Chuka Umunna's multi-titled breakaway group during the post-referendum chaos. I'd be interested in people's views. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jul 19, 2023 0:13:22 GMT
Bewildered that some seem to have swallowed the fiscal responsibility stuff on the 2 child benefits cap. Reversing it would reportedly cost £1.3bn - that's an absolute drop in the ocean. If Labour can't commit to something like that they'll not commit to anything meaningful at all. Just feels like the sort of policy that played well with their beloved focus groups. To be fair, the only people objecting will be those with more than two kids, such as Boris and Rees-Mogg and also virtue-signallers. Most voters will not have more than two kids so it's a winner. |
|
|
|
Post by eor on Jul 19, 2023 0:19:34 GMT
Re-Sunak & university courses. Populist and wrong. While it is true that many see university as a direct path to a well paying job - and for many, it is, that is not the whole rationale. There is such a thing as love of learning...and certainly love of learning a subject you are passionate about. Then, there is the learning of critical and anylitical skills that can surely be applied to life in general. Added to this, for many, life skills are learned, away from home, fending for yourself for the first time, as well as a journey of self discovery - finding out who you are. The government could end tuition fees tomorrow if it wanted so that students wouldn't be saddled with (as much) debt. In my own case, I did computer studies, something that Sunak would likely consider worthwhile. I have, in more recent years, said that if I had my time over, I'd do something else. Somthing I've changed my mind about. Now I would certainly do it again. The reason that, for many years, I said I wouldn't is that much of what I learned is eithor out of date, depreciated or stuff that nobody uses anymore. Had I got a job relevant to my course, I would have eithor been made reduundant or faced with a long, continuous learning curve long after my course had ended....far more than in most jobs. Nowadays, I would have still done the same course, but, not wanted or applied for a relevant job afterwards. My income would be made from something far, fr away from computers as possible. The skills I learned (and yes, there would be the same learning curve over time) be put to use writing Userstyles, or writing software (I would love to be able to write something like "Get_Iplayer", for example) - the sort of thing where the renumeration is pure satisfaction (yes, there are links on these sort of things to donate, often labelled 'buy me a coffee/pint', but, hardly anybody ever does). - politicians trying to say which courses "count" and which don't is almost always a recipe for pandering nonsense. At the same time, Sunak is probably trying to tap into something significant, according to his polling wonks anyway, that whilst university education is widely regarded as valuable, the massive expansion that took place during/after the time you and I were there is perceived more negatively. Crudely put, that Blair's drive for 50% mostly resulted in a lot of middle-class kids who weren't bright enough to get in before now getting a few years respite from having to join the real world after school. And I think that's where the inevitable snide course references by journalists come in - it's not that any course can't be valuable for the right students, or indeed for all students that take it - Film Studies at my university was a damn sight more rigorous and demanding than English Literature or History. But the appeal of this coverage is that a lot of people reading it will be able to think of a child of friends or relatives who spent three years at university with no obvious bearing or impact on what they're doing now. |
|
|
|
Post by eor on Jul 19, 2023 1:03:22 GMT
Dan Wootton trending on twitter for a 5th day
The stench of hypocrisy is positively nauseating
As someone who had to google to find out who Wootton even is, mercian 's point about comparing the attention given to him versus two of the most famous men on TV seems pretty valid. Likewise as I understand it, the other two stories started because Schofield was accused of abuse of power (getting a vulnerable and patronage-dependent job for the person he was shagging) and potential child sex offences, whilst Edwards was accused of child sex offences by people who weren't the alleged victim. These are inevitably going to be massive, subsuming stories, whilst Wootton hasn't (as far as I've seen at time of writing) been accused of an offence. and works for a channel most people probably don't know exists. |
|
|
|
Post by expatr on Jul 19, 2023 2:15:52 GMT
Dan Wootton trending on twitter for a 5th day
The stench of hypocrisy is positively nauseating
As someone who had to google to find out who Wootton even is, mercian 's point about comparing the attention given to him versus two of the most famous men on TV seems pretty valid. Likewise as I understand it, the other two stories started because Schofield was accused of abuse of power (getting a vulnerable and patronage-dependent job for the person he was shagging) and potential child sex offences, whilst Edwards was accused of child sex offences by people who weren't the alleged victim. These are inevitably going to be massive, subsuming stories, whilst Wootton hasn't (as far as I've seen at time of writing) been accused of an offence. and works for a channel most people probably don't know exists. TBF the claims here
and here
are rather worse than what actually transpired to be the case for Edwards - although it may turn out that the Gruan are as guilty as false insinuation as the Sun.
The point though is one of hypocrisy The Murdoch press saw an opportunity to damage the BBC when they had very similar, and potentially worse, allegations in their own organisation, the alleged having been vociferous in attacking Schofield (and is now claiming he's the victim of cancellation)
Hypocrisy in sexual matters always plays a lot worse than the sexual matters themselves.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,638
|
Post by steve on Jul 19, 2023 5:16:13 GMT
At what point will Starmer's efforts not to upset the readers of the daily mail by being a principle vacuum prove counter productive.
His support for the Tories efforts to impoverish poor families through the child benefit cap appears to me to be a likely vote loser, opposed by the majority of Labour supporters.
The triangulation on the mythical traditional Labour voter has reached a tipping point.
Labourites in seats where the lib dems can win might like to ask themselves the question do they really want a light blue government with a vast majority that isn't held to account by more progressive parties?
The Lib Dems have consistently opposed the child benefit cap and we still do.
|
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Jul 19, 2023 5:23:37 GMT
However, it clearly is UK Labour policy and she fails to recognise that her support for the continuation of the British state and Westminster supremacy means that Scotland will get what voters in England will support. Anyway, we leave the UK tomorrow to take up residency in the EU and at the moment I hope never to have to return. Good luck with your new life- hope you still pop in here from time to time. Tx, certainly will! |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,390
|
Post by neilj on Jul 19, 2023 5:41:43 GMT
They won't because they would all be expelled from the Labour Party for endorsing someone standing against an official Labour candidate (something you approved of yesterday in respect of Alistair Campbell). Your suggestion would lead to the extinction of the far left in the PLP. Starmer would be delighted but John McDonnell is not that stupid. But if their endorsement was delayed until close of nominations - a month before Polling Day - Starmer would be trapped. It would be too late to deselect those candidates or to choose new replacements. What could Starmer do about it under such circomstances? It would also create an almighty row - and potential split right at the outset of the official election campaign. Effectively the Campaign group could have him over a barrel. In those circumstances Starmer/Labour would have no choice but to expel them. They would, probably quite rightly, see much bigger damage being done to Labour through out the country in electoral terms if they didn't. Rightly or wrongly Corbyn is seen as toxic by many of the people Labour want to vote for them On the other hand Starmer showing himself a 'tough' leader in dealing with it would probably play quite well. If he doesn't he would be seen as weak as Sunak, who he definitely wouldn't want to be compared with Personally can't see the Campaign group going for it precisely because of that |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,390
|
Post by neilj on Jul 19, 2023 5:49:01 GMT
How much has this stunt cost us,seems to me basic planning is to find out where you would put the boat first
Incompetence thy name is tory
'Two giant cruise ships set to house 1,000 asylum seekers were unable to find anywhere to dock and have been returned to their owners, a senior source has told Sky News.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,638
|
Post by steve on Jul 19, 2023 5:52:38 GMT
mercianWe have to " give up" our own trading arrangements in the area to participate in the CPTPP that's how partnerships work. Given that the brexitanians spouted a lot of bollocks about sovereignty interesting that their governing regime has no problem with losing sovereignty to ensure a deal worth fifty times less than the one they walked away from because of " sovereignty ". youtu.be/XSy_lwQUR9Y
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,638
|
Post by steve on Jul 19, 2023 6:01:14 GMT
Labour's approach to future government is bizarre. In 1996 under Blair the Labour party didn't set out on a campaign to flag up the similarities between the Labour party and a failing Tory regime. Because apart from having a coherent plan it made no political sense whatsoever. Starmer needs to get rid of whatever focus group came up with light blue Labour as a vote winner unless of course it's his own idea in which case heaven help us all. Oh and by the way Attachment Deleted |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Jul 19, 2023 6:19:01 GMT
Get with the times Batty. It's Sir Kid Starver since yesterday! Missed that but the 'usual suspects' in the twitterverse are onto it... PS Given the discussion on population growth then I fully approve of Starmer backing CON's policy and no need to mention how many siblings Starmer has as his family were doing well for themselves back when Starmer was a wee laddie.  However, on the last thread I stated Starmer had "won" a bursary to continue in a private school (inferring it was on 'merit') but it appears Starmer "doesn't recall who exactly footed the bill" - no doubt we'll find out more about that into GE'24
'Hypocrite' Keir Starmer benefited from private school charitywww.pressreader.com/uk/the-sunday-telegraph/20230129/281479280551938A little example on UKPR2 of how the right and the left will working hand in glove should Labour win. Nothing new in this world is there. My enemies enemy is my friend as they say. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,638
|
Post by steve on Jul 19, 2023 6:20:08 GMT
If anyone wants to find ou more about the allegations over Dan Wootton the following link to novara is informative. youtu.be/xxJ0NCaDaeQ |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,638
|
Post by steve on Jul 19, 2023 6:30:36 GMT
I see Trevor is repeating his bollocks about Starmer's parents sending him to a private school oddly enough the link he provides proves it's bollocks.
Maybe he should read what he links to.
Timeline
Starmer passed the 11 plus
Starmer went to local state Grammar
Two years later the school became independent
Local authority and the school treat it as a state school for existing students until age 16 .
At age sixteen school agrees to fund all existing students who attended while the school was a state school who wish to remain in sixth form.
This included but wasn't specific to Starmer.
Trevor's take
"However, on the last thread I stated Starmer had "won" a bursary to continue in a private school (inferring it was on 'merit') but it appears Starmer "doesn't recall who exactly footed the bill" -
It was the local authority and the school Trevor
Not so clever Trevor!
|
|
|
|
Post by moby on Jul 19, 2023 6:45:59 GMT
They won't because they would all be expelled from the Labour Party for endorsing someone standing against an official Labour candidate (something you approved of yesterday in respect of Alistair Campbell). Your suggestion would lead to the extinction of the far left in the PLP. Starmer would be delighted but John McDonnell is not that stupid. But if their endorsement was delayed until close of nominations - a month before Polling Day - Starmer would be trapped. It would be too late to deselect those candidates or to choose new replacements. What could Starmer do about it under such circomstances? It would also create an almighty row - and potential split right at the outset of the official election campaign. Effectively the Campaign group could have him over a barrel. That would be seen as typical socialist campaign group factionalism, they can't see the wood because of the trees. Really isn't it about time we rose above this internal tribal stuff. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 19, 2023 7:34:53 GMT
Bewildered that some seem to have swallowed the fiscal responsibility stuff on the 2 child benefits cap. Reversing it would reportedly cost £1.3bn - that's an absolute drop in the ocean. If Labour can't commit to something like that they'll not commit to anything meaningful at all. Just feels like the sort of policy that played well with their beloved focus groups. To be fair, the only people objecting will be those with more than two kids, such as Boris and Rees-Mogg and also virtue-signallers. Most voters will not have more than two kids so it's a winner. Minor edit. Those who have/plan to have more than two kids and who live on welfare - I posted a link on the families that covered on the last thread. I assume the case for reducing population growth is quite obvious but a few communities, probably more likely to lean LAB, continue to have very large families - many of whom live on welfare. If you can't afford to support children then simples - don't have so many children (and certainly HMG should not encourage people to have lots of children via taxpayer funded welfare system). |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,638
|
Post by steve on Jul 19, 2023 7:36:02 GMT
I don't have much in common with Tories particularly this iteration of brexitanian luddites but hats off to deputy speaker and one of the longest serving MPs Roger Gale for speaking truth to racist stupidity. I suspect Gale was appointed as temporary deputy speaker as his old style pro European union anti Spaffer conservatism might have clashed with voting. youtu.be/zsBAotJGYjk |
|
|
|
Post by eor on Jul 19, 2023 7:37:25 GMT
Thanks expatr - I'd noticed the Guardian being pricked into action last night but hasn't seen the other piece. I do still think the shouts of bias and hypocrisy are missing a pretty large elephant here. I mean outside of this site, how many people could you have a conversation with about Dan Wootton without having to first tell them who he is? And likewise how many people do you know or work with who wouldn't immediately know who Philip Schofield and Huw Edwards are? Ignoring that factor whilst interpreting the respective volume of media coverage seems bizarre to me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2023 7:41:55 GMT
Bewildered that some seem to have swallowed the fiscal responsibility stuff on the 2 child benefits cap. Reversing it would reportedly cost £1.3bn - that's an absolute drop in the ocean. If Labour can't commit to something like that they'll not commit to anything meaningful at all. Just feels like the sort of policy that played well with their beloved focus groups. To be fair, the only people objecting will be those with more than two kids, such as Boris and Rees-Mogg and also virtue-signallers. Most voters will not have more than two kids so it's a winner. 60 % public approval I think. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jul 19, 2023 7:45:29 GMT
Great meme Steve, if you just ignore the problem that it gets turned on its head rather if the US and EU join in with CPTPP, which was a key point in the discussion yesterday but which strangely you kept ignoring! |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 19, 2023 7:46:28 GMT
|
|
