|
Post by crossbat11 on Jan 2, 2024 15:45:07 GMT
Many Labour supporters would be very unhappy at the prospect of a Blair-type figure winning elections only to continue implementing Tory policies. Blair effectively cemented Thatcher's agenda for years - continued Privatisation etc - it was a great betrayal and a repeat of that would be very unwelcome. Very little difference to allowing the Tories carry on.You clearly weren't a user or employee of public sector services between 1997-2010. There was a massive difference in funding, capability, reach and morale compared to the grim 1990s and the grim 2010s. Lived experience can be a catch-all cliche but it can also be an expression of something important. The difference between living and breathing something as it happens as opposed to relying on third hand accounts or partial journalism to generate a sort of received wisdom. My wife worked in the health service from the early Thatcher days right up to Cameron's time. My two children started their time in state education during the Major years and completed it deep into Blair's third government. I was a husband of a nurse in the health service and a father of two children in state education with a ringside seat from Thatcher/Major to the end of the Blair/Brown years. I witnessed first hand these two vital public services being transformed by substantial increases in investment instigated by the Labour Governments of 1997-2010. I didn't need the ONS, or whatever it was called back then, or think tanks or journalists to tell me what was going on. I lived it through my family and witnessed the differences first hand.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 9,804
|
Post by Danny on Jan 2, 2024 15:46:51 GMT
I will be surprised if the LDs win as many as 30 seats. Unlike in 1997 and other elections of the pre-Coalition period,there are many left of centre voters who refuse to consider them as an alternative - and who are now much more likely to switch to the Greens as a protest vote. Again, if what is forecast is a clear labour win (as in 97), then voters will be free to vote as they might wish rather than to change the outcome. What I mean is, libs are very unlikely to be in a position to influence the next government so no risk you could vote lib and get con (or even lab). That being so, what IS the best protest vote? Voting green would be irrelevant to the outcome except in perhaps a couple of places. But in rather more places its possible voting lib would displace another con, and thats a big signal of protest against them. Even if you are a con supporter in general but dont like what they have been doing recently, you could vote in a lib without changing the real outcome whatever. But still make it very clear you do not accept how they have behaved.
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jan 2, 2024 15:49:59 GMT
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,384
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jan 2, 2024 15:57:04 GMT
You clearly weren't a user or employee of public sector services between 1997-2010. There was a massive difference in funding, capability, reach and morale compared to the grim 1990s and the grim 2010s. Throughout that period I worked in the public sector - education and the Civil Service. I experienced the ongoing erosion of working conditions of service coupled with a failure to increase pay levels. Salary increments disappeared and morale was at absolutely rock bottom - indeed far worse than under Thatcher back in the 1980s. Maybe it was different in the Health Service - but Local government workers were also very badly treated. I was in local government throughout the Blair/Brown years and this is frankly nonsense. I was also in local government 2010-14, during which time the council I worked for saw 40% of its income vanish thanks to Eric bloody Pickles and I (along with a lot of other people) was made redundant. There is simply no comparison.
|
|
|
Post by robbiealive on Jan 2, 2024 16:24:59 GMT
As he writes about a century that has produced only six Labour prime ministers – MacDonald, Clement Attlee, Harold Wilson, Jim Callaghan, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown – Cruddas offers his own reinterpretation of Labour history by assessing how its competing traditions and visions for advancing socialist justice – the belief in redistributing wealth, increasing liberty and freedom, and ideas on how to promote human virtue – have played out.
Notably, three of the six failed to win overall majorities in all the General Elections they fought (I'm not counting the 1931 election of the National Government). You have to question how good as role-models for any Prime Minister that MacDonald, Callaghan and Brown were and you could argue that Starmer is most in the image of Blair (both coming into politics through the legal profession); I don't think any Labour supporter could complain if he emulated Blair and won three General Elections in a row. Many Labour supporters would be very unhappy at the prospect of a Blair-type figure winning elections only to continue implementing Tory policies. Blair effectively cemented Thatcher's agenda for years - continued Privatisation etc - it was a great betrayal and a repeat of that would be very unwelcome. Very little difference to allowing the Tories carry on. Dear Graham, I am a great fan. I know I moan, never suggest an alternative, & endlessly repeat myself: in short, A paid-up UK poster. But I expect better from you. 1. We know you think Blair was well to the right of Genghis Khan & that his rule ( was no different from a continuation of the Torie. But it's untrue. 2. What exactly is yr alternative to voting Starmer. This ? Is endlessly put to the LOC refuseniks. Never answered.
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jan 2, 2024 16:25:25 GMT
Throughout that period I worked in the public sector - education and the Civil Service. I experienced the ongoing erosion of working conditions of service coupled with a failure to increase pay levels. Salary increments disappeared and morale was at absolutely rock bottom - indeed far worse than under Thatcher back in the 1980s. Maybe it was different in the Health Service - but Local government workers were also very badly treated. I was in local government throughout the Blair/Brown years and this is frankly nonsense. I was also in local government 2010-14, during which time the council I worked for saw 40% of its income vanish thanks to Eric bloody Pickles and I (along with a lot of other people) was made redundant. There is simply no comparison. I think the key point here is that while none of us are claiming that these public services were suddenly transformed into faultless Shangri-las during the New Labour years, nor that every funding decision they made was beyond criticism, but it seems beyond dispute on any objective criterion you may care to use, that public services were greatly improved during their time in office. And that these same services have all gone backwards since 2010.
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Jan 2, 2024 16:28:37 GMT
I don't think he was; unless Michael Bentine was a pseudonym!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2024 16:33:22 GMT
Bit rude. (Or do you mean he was an Arsenal supporter?)
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,257
|
Post by steve on Jan 2, 2024 16:35:33 GMT
Liar liar short trousers on fire. Stephen Kinnock, the shadow immigration minister, has described Rishi Sunak’s post on X saying he has cleared the backlog of asylum applications as a “barefaced lie”. The PM’s barefaced lie that he has cleared the asylum backlog would be laughable if it wasn’t such an insult to the public’s intelligence. Statistics published this morning by his own Govt show there are still around 100,000 cases languishing in the Tories’ never-ending backlog.
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jan 2, 2024 16:38:04 GMT
Bit rude. (Or do you mean he was an Arsenal supporter?) Tie po I'm afraid 🥴
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2024 16:39:35 GMT
My take from O'Brien's accusations and associated data is that the Post Study visa scheme which was supposed to encourage "the brightest and the best" has done the very opposite. Was it really intended to do that? Surely, the main aim was to get in students to pay fees to subsidise UK education, and to wait at tables in their spare time? Yes-in terms. .......but by Boris !
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,257
|
Post by steve on Jan 2, 2024 16:46:08 GMT
"Farage to be readmitted and it is not impossible to imagine him back in, and even party leader, before the election after the one due this year"
Given that the frog faced hate gimp has lost seven attempts to be elected as an mp, in one case behind a man dressed as a dolphin, delighted to have him as Tory leader where he can lose seven general elections as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2024 16:58:18 GMT
Leaving aside your Richard Littlejohn originated jibe, I found it an interesting read. Cruddas is a thoughtful soft Left Labour figure who is always worth listening to, particularly on Labour Party history. Less so on the substance of politics, alas I think it's always worth knowing where people may be coming from when they make personal criticisms of other politicians, especially those within their own party. Cruddas, a leading but ultimately disappointingly dull light in the Milliband leadership years, has been largely sidelined by Starmer. I wonder if this is colouring his judgement a little? Personal antagonisms in politics can often be generated by a feeling that one's valuable contributions and qualities are being overlooked. Cruddas who, as I say, I quite like personally, disappointed me greatly when he was overseeing a number of policy review groups during the time Ed Milliband was Labour leader. I had high hopes for what they might produce but, as I recall, they were largely vacuous word salad blancmanges that came to naught in terms of translation into Labour policy. I have to say that they rather reminded me of Cruddas interviews whenever I've listened to him talking politics! My assessment of Cruddas would be likeable, interesting when talking Labour history but ultimately politically ineffectual. An interesting chap according to his Wikipedia. Complex-changed his mind on key issues ( including JC) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_CruddasLives in Notting Hill-what a cliche that is ! Born in the town where I went to Grammar School !-which isn't a cliche at all.
|
|
|
Post by jib on Jan 2, 2024 17:04:10 GMT
Austerity, and the hangover of austerity we still endure, pulverised public services in the UK.
Yes, there was waste in the 2000s and the state maybe over-reached, but the glee and spite of Cameron - Clegg will not be forgotten!
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jan 2, 2024 17:23:44 GMT
I was in local government throughout the Blair/Brown years and this is frankly nonsense. I was also in local government 2010-14, during which time the council I worked for saw 40% of its income vanish thanks to Eric bloody Pickles and I (along with a lot of other people) was made redundant. There is simply no comparison. I think the key point here is that while none of us are claiming that these public services were suddenly transformed into faultless Shangri-las during the New Labour years, nor that every funding decision they made was beyond criticism, but it seems beyond dispute on any objective criterion you may care to use, that public services were greatly improved during their time in office. And that these same services have all gone backwards since 2010. I would not deny the extent of further deterioration since 2010 - but I do firmly assert that working in education, the civil service - and from extended discussions with others - Local Government was much more miserable in 2010 than had been the case in 1990 or 1985! Throughout the period from the mid-1990s there were no real pay increases and working conditions worsened significantly.
In the 1990s I worked in Higher Education as a lecturer and was faced with Senior Lecturer grades being abolished with those affected being effectively demoted and expected to undertake additional responsibilities and work loads with no remuneration given in compensation. Holiday entitlement was also reduced.
I joined the Civil Sevice at the end of 2002. Salary increments had already been removed - and we were no longer eligible to receive the full benefits of the Civil Service Pension Scheme still available to longer term employees. Those who joined later in 2008/2009 faced further restrictions on their entitlements . To say that conditions became even worse post 2010 is a bit like saying to inmates at Dachau that they ought not to complain because conditions were even worse at Auschwitz.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,257
|
Post by steve on Jan 2, 2024 17:44:54 GMT
, " but the glee and spite of Cameron - Clegg will not be forgotten! "
Not in your head anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2024 17:48:04 GMT
graham“ To say that conditions became even worse post 2010 is a bit like saying to inmates at Dachau that they ought not to complain because conditions were even worse at Auschwitz.” Blimey, you’ve finally tipped over to stark bonkers obsessive.
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jan 2, 2024 17:50:22 GMT
Austerity, and the hangover of austerity we still endure, pulverised public services in the UK. Yes, there was waste in the 2000s and the state maybe over-reached, but the glee and spite of Cameron - Clegg will not be forgotten! Tony Crosland told the country back in 1975 re -Local Government that 'the party is over.' Ever since that time the sector has been faced with serious fiscal retrenchment. It certainly did not begin in 2010 - though it has continued.
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Jan 2, 2024 17:53:29 GMT
You clearly weren't a user or employee of public sector services between 1997-2010. There was a massive difference in funding, capability, reach and morale compared to the grim 1990s and the grim 2010s. Throughout that period I worked in the public sector - education and the Civil Service. I experienced the ongoing erosion of working conditions of service coupled with a failure to increase pay levels. Salary increments disappeared and morale was at absolutely rock bottom - indeed far worse than under Thatcher back in the 1980s. Maybe it was different in the Health Service - but Local government workers were also very badly treated. I worked local government between 1987 and 2011 and my recollections are the exact opposite of yours.
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jan 2, 2024 18:03:09 GMT
Throughout that period I worked in the public sector - education and the Civil Service. I experienced the ongoing erosion of working conditions of service coupled with a failure to increase pay levels. Salary increments disappeared and morale was at absolutely rock bottom - indeed far worse than under Thatcher back in the 1980s. Maybe it was different in the Health Service - but Local government workers were also very badly treated. I worked local government between 1987 and 2011 and my recollections are the exact opposite of yours. I did not work in Local Government - other than in the indirect sense that until 1995 Colleges of Further and Higher Education were run by County Councils . However, I have spoken at length with those who worked at various Local Authority tiers - a range of staff encompassing Departmental Heads and junior clerical personnel - and to Trade Union representatives. Without exception they confirmed that the ongoing pressures and disputes I went through in the Civil Service was part of their experience too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2024 18:05:26 GMT
I worked local government between 1987 and 2011 and my recollections are the exact opposite of yours. I did not work in Local Government - other than in the indirect sense that until 1995 Colleges of Further and Higher Education were run by County Councils . However, I have spoken at length with those who worked at various Local Authority tiers - a range of staff encompassing Departmental Heads and junior clerical personnel - and to Trade Union representatives. Without exception they confirmed that the ongoing pressures and disputes I went through in the Civil Service was part of their experience too. Did they mention concentration camps as well?
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Jan 2, 2024 18:06:06 GMT
My assessment of Cruddas would be likeable, interesting when talking Labour history but ultimately politically ineffectual. Whilst your assessment of Cruddas is one I would find difficult to dispute nonetheless he makes a significant point about KS and the apparent absence of what might be described as a philosophical foundation to his politics (that is something, generally, more reminiscent of Conservative leaders than Labour leaders). It is an open question as to whether this is an electoral asset or weakness, but the analysis is sound as to the lack of a "foundation" it appears to me. The other element of the analysis that I agree with fundamentally is that KS has favoured one wing of the party. I have always thought that the Labour Party was at its most successful when both wings worked together. Even Tony Blair, in his early cabinets needed to balance both wings. Harold Wilson was most successful in that regard and he said one of the things he was most proud of as leader was keeping his party together. I fear that relying on the weakness of the Conservatives will work for a while but it will not inspire or redeem public trust in politics or politicians. I disagree. Everything I've seen and heard from Starmer tells me he has a strong moral purpose and sense of fairness and equality. He has championed the underdog on many occasions during his legal career often taking these case for free and using his barrister fees to subsidise the other cases. I think he knows what should happen and believes strongly that Britain can be a better place for everyone but particularly for those who need an effective and supportive state most He is though, and that's very like me, a realist and a pragmatist. He understands that for Labour to make a difference it has to WIN. And in attempting to get into power he is making compromises and deferring a lot of policies I'm sure he wants to enact in order to build a a winning coalition across all groups. And he knows that the economy and public services are in such dire straits that it's going to take a long time to find the money to fix them. So it's steady as he goes. Of course I want more radical reshaping policies but I'd rather have modest, compromised ones that are delivered than a dream manifesto that has no chance of delivering power (2019). If he gets a big enough majority then I expect the his 2nd term manifesto will be more radical.
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jan 2, 2024 18:10:31 GMT
I did not work in Local Government - other than in the indirect sense that until 1995 Colleges of Further and Higher Education were run by County Councils . However, I have spoken at length with those who worked at various Local Authority tiers - a range of staff encompassing Departmental Heads and junior clerical personnel - and to Trade Union representatives. Without exception they confirmed that the ongoing pressures and disputes I went through in the Civil Service was part of their experience too. Did they mention concentration camps as well? No - but I may have done so. I certainly referred in addresses given at Union meetings to the 'Arbeit Macht Frei ' wing of the Tory Party.. It was pretty well received!
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Jan 2, 2024 18:13:44 GMT
Election Maps UK @electionmapsuk · 26m Westminster Voting Intention:
LAB: 42% (+2) CON: 28% (-1) LDM: 12% (+1) RFM: 9% (+2) GRN: 6% (-1) SNP: 2% (-1)
Via @deltapolluk , 22-29 Dec.
|
|
|
Post by isa on Jan 2, 2024 18:30:02 GMT
Do you know what the comparator period for that poll was shevii?
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Jan 2, 2024 18:35:06 GMT
Do you know what the comparator period for that poll was shevii ? 8-11 Dec according to wiki.
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jan 2, 2024 18:57:35 GMT
Yes, Dachau and Auschwitz are exactly the right reference points to use for discussing the extent to which public services improved or not in the early part of the 21st century in Britain.
Well, they are I suppose if you have a tin ear and a cold heart and are quite happy to trivialise the suffering of the thousands of people who met their deaths in those mass extermination concentration camps.
Only a self satisfied pillock inhabiting a smug and complacent world of their own, inoculated from the suffering he so glibly cites, could regularly defile sensible discussion with such inappropriate and lurid allusions.
|
|
|
Post by robbiealive on Jan 2, 2024 19:10:57 GMT
Whilst your assessment of Cruddas is one I would find difficult to dispute nonetheless he makes a significant point about KS and the apparent absence of what might be described as a philosophical foundation to his politics (that is something, generally, more reminiscent of Conservative leaders than Labour leaders). It is an open question as to whether this is an electoral asset or weakness, but the analysis is sound as to the lack of a "foundation" it appears to me. The other element of the analysis that I agree with fundamentally is that KS has favoured one wing of the party. I have always thought that the Labour Party was at its most successful when both wings worked together. Even Tony Blair, in his early cabinets needed to balance both wings. Harold Wilson was most successful in that regard and he said one of the things he was most proud of as leader was keeping his party together. I fear that relying on the weakness of the Conservatives will work for a while but it will not inspire or redeem public trust in politics or politicians. I disagree. Everything I've seen and heard from Starmer tells me he has a strong moral purpose and sense of fairness and equality. He has championed the underdog on many occasions during his legal career often taking these case for free and using his barrister fees to subsidise the other cases. I think he knows what should happen and believes strongly that Britain can be a better place for everyone but particularly for those who need an effective and supportive state most He is though, and that's very like me, a realist and a pragmatist. He understands that for Labour to make a difference it has to WIN. And in attempting to get into power he is making compromises and deferring a lot of policies I'm sure he wants to enact in order to build a a winning coalition across all groups. And he knows that the economy and public services are in such dire straits that it's going to take a long time to find the money to fix them. So it's steady as he goes. Of course I want more radical reshaping policies but I'd rather have modest, compromised ones that are delivered than a dream manifesto that has no chance of delivering power (2019). If he gets a big enough majority then I expect the his 2nd term manifesto will be more radical. Right on Babs. I stirred up the grammar-policing pot to which you contributed a chiding about the lesser/fewer atrocity.(The uninterested reply "I couldn't care fewer"). But what gave yr fine post an extra impact was its style. It contained only two commas and its directness had a real punch. Cyril Connoly in his The Enemies of Promise of which the chief one was the "perambulator in the hall" referred to any ornate & complex construction as the Mandarin Style. Why? Because it assumed that the leisured & cultivated reader had all the time in the world to digest it. Phew I managed 15-20 lines without a comma. I'm stressed.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,384
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jan 2, 2024 19:25:20 GMT
Did they mention concentration camps as well? No - but I may have done so. I certainly referred in addresses given at Union meetings to the 'Arbeit Macht Frei ' wing of the Tory Party.. It was pretty well received! What a surprise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2024 19:54:23 GMT
Yes, Dachau and Auschwitz are exactly the right reference points to use for discussing the extent to which public services improved or not in the early part of the 21st century in Britain. Well, they are I suppose if you have a tin ear and a cold heart and are quite happy to trivialise the suffering of the thousands of people who met their deaths in those mass extermination concentration camps. Only a self satisfied pillock inhabiting a smug and complacent world of their own, inoculated from the suffering he so glibly cites, could regularly defile sensible discussion with such inappropriate and lurid allusions. Very well said Nick. Oddly, given how fucking predictable such references are, they almost always take me by surprise because they are contained in such totally irrelevant and inappropriate settings. Why Mark hasn’t acted I have no idea but I do wish he would - it’s one of many reasons I rarely post here at all now.
|
|