18-OCT 2023 : LAB 44% / CON 28% / LDM 9% / REF 7%

[steve]

Let's try another one
Attachment Deleted

[Danny]

Dec 14, 2023 16:20:22 GMT leftieliberal said:

Dec 14, 2023 16:12:45 GMT mercian said:

you could have STV for the Commons and a regionalised Party List for the Lords.

So 50 members for england, 50 for ireland, 50 for wales, 50 for Scotland? Styled on the US senate?

[somerjohn]

Steve: "Let's try another one"

Given that Greece and Spain loom large in your life, and that the street looks likes like a paseo, I'd guess this is somewhere in your old haunts in Andalucia. Marbella? Estepona? Fuengirola?

[neilj]

Dec 14, 2023 17:22:18 GMT steve said:

Let's try another one
View Attachment

Santa Cruz in Teneriffe

[alec]

For those interested, have just posted on the covid thread of a couple of developments on nasal spray vaccines (one good, one not so good) plus news of how German businesses are starting to shift on covid adaptations and protections. They're well ahead of UK businesses on this in recognising the economic damage it is causing.

[steve]

Estupendo Neil

[alec]

Hard to imagine a more concentrated kick in the face - www.theguardian.com/society/2023/dec/14/sunak-scraps-dedicated-minister-disabled-people-government

[shevii]

Dec 14, 2023 16:00:05 GMT lululemonmustdobetter said:

Dec 14, 2023 15:13:08 GMT shevii said:

Given the economic forecast, and the position this country finds itself in after 14 years of Tory misrule, graft and incompetence, I do think a Starmer govt will take a drastic hit to its popularity. Lacking charisma and appeal as leader, without some noticeable 'gains' to offer voters who do want to see change, he will struggle to rally support at the following election. Its not like 97-01, when Labour inherited a favourable economic position. I cant see one landslide followed by another one. We are more likely to see something more akin to 45-51. I also think the failure of 'middle politics' will further fuel the the populist right, and as we have seen in US, it wont be one GE that acts as a silver bullet.   

I was mulling over the position at the 2027-29 election but can't come to any firm conclusions although I tend to agree with you in general terms re populist right and lukewarm interest in bothering to vote Labour and seeking alternatives.  I suppose though it's a bit like chatting about who you want in the semi final when you're 2-0 up after 70 minutes and a bit ridiculous speculating at this stage.

Unlike others on the left who predict meltdown for Labour if they pursue Tory lite, I think Labour are probably in a good position for a 2nd term mainly for the reason that the Tories will not be fixed by then or that they have someone like, but not, Farage in charge to scare the loc into voting for them again.  Blair 2005 was a similar situation where a very poor Lab vote saw him winning comfortably. I'm sure right wing Tories are planning to get to a position of dominating the party rather than the "sensibles" getting back to "one nation".  Wasn't like Truss and Co seemed to have learnt any lessons from her disaster.  Their chances of winning on that ticket are slim but if the country is (still) in a mess then I wouldn't completely rule out the chances of a populist campaign succeeding but it would be from Tories rather than REFUK.

This will now likely be the 3rd unprecedented election- Corbyn doing in two years what nearly every other party has failed to do in five in terms of gain in vote share, then Johnson totally reversing the Corbyn gains and swinging many more the other way, and now a large Tory majority likely being wiped out and possibly an even bigger Labour majority voted in. 

So I do think we now have a very volatile electorate not least because political awareness (as well as party loyalty) in the country isn't particularly high these days and increasingly an X-Factor, personality based attitude to voting. How that plays out is difficult to say and depends on the economy (mainly world economy) and when are we expecting this 15 year stagnation to end? Without being unduly pessimistic I feel like the whole world economy has gone down a blind alley and cannot handle global warming consequences and the ramping up of global tensions. Wealth inequality, multinational dominance of key resources and pitiful trickle down has sucked the life out of the model now. Populism succeeds when the technocratic/moderate approach fails.

I do think, subject to what I see as a likely failure to improve public services, that there's more core Labour voters that go into the mix at the next election as happened with Red Wall and Scotland. Similar could happen with public servants like nurses and teachers who haven't seem improvements in their pay or conditions and ethnic minorities who are beginning to not see Labour as their natural home and sticking up for them- shadow cabinet looking pretty white these days.  Still think the betting would be on a lukewarm 2nd Labour term though because of the political dynamics. 

Don't get me started on the 2031-2033 election :-)

[steve]

Let's see if this is harder.
Attachment Deleted

[steve]

Definitely 100% safe.

"A Rwandan opposition politician who publicly criticised the UK’s deportation deal this week fears for her safety after a presidential adviser condemned her for “waging war on her compatriots”.

Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, who wrote a column in the Guardian on Tuesday questioning her country’s treatment of refugees, said she has become concerned about the fallout from the criticism after the aide, an ally of Paul Kagame, wrote she was “maligning Rwanda” in international media.

Umuhoza, who spent eight years in jail after what human rights groups called a flawed trial, also says she has received warnings of a threat against her life. Her views have been condemned by government supporters on social media.*


www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/14/rwanda-politician-criticised-sunak-bill-fears-for-her-safety

[athena]

Just for completeness here's a political argument for not voting tactically...

Our current economic strategy isn't sustainable and it requires heroic optimism to believe that Lab's growth strategy will deliver enough cash to plug the gaps. So public services, infrastructure and natural assets will continue to deteriorate under Labour and/or it'll have to raise a lot of extra money through taxation. It's just about conceivable that in govt Lab does raise taxes, maybe even starts to address the fundamental problems, and manages to pin the blame on the Tories a la Osborne in 2010, which would offer a route to a second electoral victory, but I don't think it is likely. More likely is that we get some tweaks to taxation and some action to tackle the most egregiously inadequate public services (hopefully not financed by some hideous financial engineering that just pushes the repayment problem down the line) - whether that would lead to sufficient disillusionment and dissatisfaction to prevent Lab winning a second term I've no idea.

The even worse case is that Labour governs as it is campaigning, continues to postpone dealing with the mismatch between tax receipts and the cost of public services, low levels of private investment, deteriorating infrastructure (a brake on productivity), degradation of natural assets etc. and the whole unsustainable edifice collapses catastrophically on Starmer's watch, with Lab getting the blame and being shut out of power for several electoral cycles. In effect this gives the counterpart to the ABT question 'Can you live with yourself if your radical vote lets in a Tory?' - 'If you vote tactically for a party that you don't think will address the UK's fundamental problems, can you live with the possibility that this leads to some combination of economic, environmental and social catastrophe on its watch, followed by at least ten years of rightwing, perhaps extreme right, government?'

I'm not saying that I think we'll get that kind of collapse in the next five years, but I wouldn't discount the possibility altogether (I wonder how well maintained the Thames barrier is?)

[hireton]

[athena]

If we're playing a short round of constitutional fantasy then I'm going for the UK as a federal republic, so the lower house will be geographically representative. I think I'd keep the upper house as a revising chamber (unable to initiate legislation), but perhaps give it right of veto (an overall party political majority would be unlikely, but an additional safeguard would be to require a supermajority to veto legislation) or strong delaying powers.

We hear quite a lot of lamenting that the HoC is too full of professional politicians, so I'd like the upper house to be partly a 'house of experts', i.e. to have representatives from a wide range of professions, trades, occupations and scientific, cultural and sporting interests. They could be elected by their peers (members of the relevant peak organisation) or occupy a seat by virtue of their position in a peak organisation. They'd serve one ten-year term. We'd have to sort out peak bodies for everything - they could be organisations like the Royal Society, TUs etc., but we might need to create a few new ones. For the rest of the seats I quite like leftieliberal's idea of regionalised party lists, provided they're open lists - the regions will be the states of the federation and (another difference from the lower house) they'll have equal representation regardless of size.

[graham]

If Labour fails to raise taxes significantly, the PSBR will have to take the strain to finance higher public spending. Johnson post 2019 has provided a very useful precedent to fall back on by showing that when the threat of economic collapse becomes very real - as at the time of the pandemic - we can and must increase Public Borrowing. We have seen that it can be done - as indeed it was for both World Wars. It is the path that should have been taken post 2010 in the aftermath of the GFC- rather than Osborne's self defeating Austerity policies.

[alec]

The election after next: Nothing is certain, obviously, but UK electorates have traditionally been loathe to change horses. It's very rare for a party to regain power after a single electoral term in opposition, especially if the defeat was heavy. I suspect the period post 2024 is likely to be more like '79 - '83 as opposed to '97-'01, but lululemonmustdobetter's points remain valid. Labour hasn't 'won' anything - the Conservatives have lost everything. Labour still needs to build up their deposits of political capital, so will have a rough ride if things don't improve. But I don't think they're stupid. They will (and they should) blame the Tories for everything, and I suspect that message will stick, just like it stuck in 2010.

Starmer will have time. That's not my worry so much. I'm more concerned about what he does with that time. I'd trade seven extra years of power for the achievements post 1945 any day of the week. Sometimes, you need to think about what you are doing first and foremost, rather than how long you want to keep doing it.

[athena]

graham
The pandemic counts as exceptional circumstances. I don't think it's sustainable to keep borrowing to finance day-to-day public spending or maintenance of assets and infrastructure. If we want high quality public services and infrastructure then at some point we'll have to start paying enough tax to fund them. Pretending otherwise is just cakeism. The Tories have a much lower acceptable minimum for public services, so they don't face the same imperative to make the case for higher taxes. If Lab really thinks that argument is unwinnable then democracy is well and truly broken.

[mercian]

As steve has started Christmas games, here's one: Guess which regular poster I'm imitating with these one-liners. Some are very easy, some not so, probably because of my poor imitation. One or two might be people who don't often post now or are dead. Apologies to anyone who thinks I have twisted their words. Anyone missing should take it as a compliment that they aren't so obsessive predictable and so are harder to imitate.

1. "The other day I was walking down the canal bank on my way to a football match..."
2. "I don't come here to debate but just to express my opinion, which is that we won't see the benefits of Brexit until 2030 but I probably won't see it"
3. "Covid is really deadly and we should all wear masks all the time"
4. "No we shouldn't have done anything about Covid because I caught it in a seaside town in 2019"
5. "Stats For Lefties has a graph showing that Labour is doing worse in these kind of seats because of XYZ in the ABC."
6. " "

That'll do for starters

[graham]

Dec 14, 2023 20:44:23 GMT athena said:

graham
The pandemic counts as exceptional circumstances. I don't think it's sustainable to keep borrowing to finance day-to-day public spending or maintenance of assets and infrastructure. If we want high quality public services and infrastructure then at some point we'll have to start paying enough tax to fund them. Pretending otherwise is just cakeism. The Tories have a much lower acceptable minimum for public services, so they don't face the same imperative to make the case for higher taxes. If Lab really thinks that argument is unwinnable then democracy is well and truly broken.

'Exceptional circumstances' is a very elastic concept ,and for many people the state of our public services coupled with Local Authorities going bankrupt on an increasingly regular basis would merit that label.Moreover, the real burden of Public Debt today as a % of GDP is no higher than was the the case throughout the 1950s and much of the 1960s. Macmillan had still been able to tell us in 1957 that 'we have never had it so good.'In essence, we dealt with that burden via growth - not Austerity beyond the rationing and direct controls inherited from World War 2.

[crossbat11]

Dec 14, 2023 20:53:32 GMT mercian said:

As steve has started Christmas games, here's one: Guess which regular poster I'm imitating with these one-liners. Some are very easy, some not so, probably because of my poor imitation. One or two might be people who don't often post now or are dead. Apologies to anyone who thinks I have twisted their words. Anyone missing should take it as a compliment that they aren't so obsessive predictable and so are harder to imitate.

1. "The other day I was walking down the canal bank on my way to a football match..."
2. "I don't come here to debate but just to express my opinion, which is that we won't see the benefits of Brexit until 2030 but I probably won't see it"
3. "Covid is really deadly and we should all wear masks all the time"
4. "No we shouldn't have done anything about Covid because I caught it in a seaside town in 2019"
5. "Stats For Lefties has a graph showing that Labour is doing worse in these kind of seats because of XYZ in the ABC."
6. " "

That'll do for starters

I see you've self-identified in Question 2!
I was going to add one though.

7) 'Say what you like about old Enoch,and I might not have used some of the more inflammatory language that he did, but he had a point.....'

🤔🤣

[jib]

Dec 14, 2023 20:59:26 GMT graham said:

Dec 14, 2023 20:44:23 GMT athena said:

graham
The pandemic counts as exceptional circumstances. I don't think it's sustainable to keep borrowing to finance day-to-day public spending or maintenance of assets and infrastructure. If we want high quality public services and infrastructure then at some point we'll have to start paying enough tax to fund them. Pretending otherwise is just cakeism. The Tories have a much lower acceptable minimum for public services, so they don't face the same imperative to make the case for higher taxes. If Lab really thinks that argument is unwinnable then democracy is well and truly broken.

'Exceptional circumstances' is a very elastic concept ,and for many people the state of our public services coupled with Local Authorities going bankrupt on an increasingly regular basis would merit that label.Moreover, the real burden of Public Debt today as a % of GDP is no higher than was the the case throughout the 1950s and much of the 1960s. Macmillan had still been able to tell us in 1957 that 'we have never had it so good.'In essence, we dealt with that burden via growth - not Austerity beyond the rationing and direct controls inherited from World War 2.

Athena; Amend to "The Tories and Lib Dems have a much lower acceptable minimum for public services," 

Graham; the % of GDP  being invested in public infrastructure (note invest) is at a record low. What is being invested is being leeched away by quasi private consultancies. 

[neilj]

Not a Royalist but Charley boy makes me smile...although I doubt Sunak is

[mercian]

Dec 14, 2023 21:20:23 GMT crossbat11 said:

Dec 14, 2023 20:53:32 GMT mercian said:

As steve has started Christmas games, here's one: Guess which regular poster I'm imitating with these one-liners. Some are very easy, some not so, probably because of my poor imitation. One or two might be people who don't often post now or are dead. Apologies to anyone who thinks I have twisted their words. Anyone missing should take it as a compliment that they aren't so obsessive predictable and so are harder to imitate.

1. "The other day I was walking down the canal bank on my way to a football match..."
2. "I don't come here to debate but just to express my opinion, which is that we won't see the benefits of Brexit until 2030 but I probably won't see it"
3. "Covid is really deadly and we should all wear masks all the time"
4. "No we shouldn't have done anything about Covid because I caught it in a seaside town in 2019"
5. "Stats For Lefties has a graph showing that Labour is doing worse in these kind of seats because of XYZ in the ABC."
6. " "

That'll do for starters

I see you've self-identified in Question 2!
I was going to add one though.

7) 'Say what you like about old Enoch,and I might not have used some of the more inflammatory language that he did, but he had a point.....'

🤔🤣

Is 7 a direct quote or just what you think I'd say? It could be a direct quote. 🤩

[crossbat11]

Now another step to a rendezvous in Athens in early June has been successfully negotiated in the Balkans this evening, I can relax a little and indulge, as is my wont, in a little casual sexism on UKPR.

(Mark - no you bloody well can't mate. I've warned you 35 times now for such transgressions in the past and I think you may well be approaching the steps of the last chance saloon now. I implore you to heed the warnings given.)

[mercian]

Dec 14, 2023 21:33:05 GMT neilj said:

Not a Royalist but Charley boy makes me smile...although I doubt Sunak is

What with that and his 'Greek flag'-like tie I wonder if he's deliberately sending subtle messages, knowing that he's no longer allowed to directly interfere? I understand that he used to write directly to ministers when he was Prince of Wales.
 I've got quite a lot of time for him despite his romantic disasters. He was way ahead of his time on the green agenda, set up the Prince's Trust and built what he hoped would be a model village to be an example to town planners and so on.

[Danny]

Dec 14, 2023 20:27:25 GMT graham said:

Johnson post 2019 has provided a very useful precedent to fall back on by showing that when the threat of economic collapse becomes very real - as at the time of the pandemic - we can and must increase Public Borrowing. We have seen that it can be done - as indeed it was for both World Wars.

Except that the threat of economic collapse during the pandemic was not caused by the illness but by the chosen interventions.

Dec 14, 2023 20:34:32 GMT alec said:

I suspect the period post 2024 is likely to be more like '79 - '83 as opposed to '97-'01, but lululemonmustdobetter's points remain valid.

You mean, labour will have to win a war to win a second term?

Labour hasn't 'won' anything - the Conservatives have lost everything.

Well, yes. But they are losing now because they have the same policies which were winners in 2010. And from 1980. Austerity is great IF there is anything to cut. What con need is for labour to build services back up, and then the con USP will have resonance again. Thw siamese twins need each other.

[Danny]

Dec 14, 2023 20:53:32 GMT mercian said:

As steve has started Christmas games, here's one: Guess which regular poster I'm imitating with these one-liners. Some are very easy, some not so, probably because of my poor imitation. One or two might be people who don't often post now or are dead. Apologies to anyone who thinks I have twisted their words. Anyone missing should take it as a compliment that they aren't so obsessive predictable and so are harder to imitate.

1. "The other day I was walking down the canal bank on my way to a football match..."
2. "I don't come here to debate but just to express my opinion, which is that we won't see the benefits of Brexit until 2030 but I probably won't see it"
3. "Covid is really deadly and we should all wear masks all the time"
4. "No we shouldn't have done anything about Covid because I caught it in a seaside town in 2019"
5. "Stats For Lefties has a graph showing that Labour is doing worse in these kind of seats because of XYZ in the ABC."
6. " "

That'll do for starters

I'm very pleased the point has got across.

[wb61]

Re the discussion on growth/PSBR. I accept the economic theory which states that the size of a nation's GDP is more dependent on the speed of circulation of money than on actual production. This can be seen by how much GDP is connected to inflation and particularly property inflation in the UK. Therefore I fall between graham and athena as it is the case that some borrowing is necessary but needs to be accompanied by measures which cause private money to be spent.
The problem has always been that more inequality inevitably leads to less overall private expenditure. The greater number of people there are with disposable money, over and above necessities, the more and the faster money circulates, leading to growth. Any policy for expansion of growth ought, therefore, to involve significant redistribution of wealth.

[Danny]

Dec 14, 2023 20:59:26 GMT graham said:

'In essence, we dealt with that burden via growth - not Austerity beyond the rationing and direct controls inherited from World War 2.

MMm. But we had just had a program of reconstructing the country, and a recovery of world trade because the war ended. Whereas today we just had brexit, which is the exact opposite of a recovery of trade. While after ww2 we largely went back to exploiting developing countries, whereas today they are exploiting us.

As to paying tin pot dictators massive amounts of money to take away workers we actually need.....

[mercian]

Dec 14, 2023 21:52:58 GMT Danny said:

Dec 14, 2023 20:27:25 GMT graham said:

Dec 14, 2023 20:34:32 GMT alec said:

I suspect the period post 2024 is likely to be more like '79 - '83 as opposed to '97-'01, but lululemonmustdobetter 's points remain valid.

You mean, labour will have to win a war to win a second term?

It was also because the SDP/Liberal Alliance got 8 million votes. A similar thing could happen to the Tories if Farage takes a more active part in Reform and splits the Roc vote in half. 

[Deleted]

Dec 14, 2023 21:39:17 GMT crossbat11 said:

Now another step to a rendezvous in Athens in early June has been successfully negotiated in the Balkans this evening, I can relax a little and indulge, as is my wont, in a little casual sexism on UKPR.

(Mark - no you bloody well can't mate. I've warned you 35 times now for such transgressions in the past and I think you may well be approaching the steps of the last chance saloon now. I implore you to heed the warnings given.)

I’m mildly worried about your truly dreadful impersonations Batty.