steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 3, 2024 23:07:34 GMT
"Labour is planning only limited first-term reforms of social care and the House of Lords and a smaller green investment plan as part of a stripped-down general election manifesto, as it seeks to make its policies “bombproof” to Tory attacks."
By becoming Tory lite.
It must be very disappointing for Labour party activists.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,601
|
Post by pjw1961 on Feb 3, 2024 23:31:24 GMT
I'm going to mention this although it is far from my 'polity' simply because it should not pass unremarked on. Michelle O’Neill's election as First Minister of Northern Ireland is one of those events that genuinely merits the description 'historic'. When you consider that Northern Ireland is nothing more than a gerrymandered entity with no basis in history (it doesn't even cover all of the province of Ulster) that was created solely to have an artificial Protestant majority in a sub-section of the historic nation of Ireland, it is safe to assume that the people who carved it out never dreamed that such a thing would one day come to pass. Another step on the road to the inevitable reunification of Ireland. I might add that it is equally good news that the Republic is no longer dominated by the Catholic church, but is a modern, essentially secular, state. Yes, you do keep making that error. You need to broaden your mind away from your attachment to temporary political entities and and embrace the oneness of humanity. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Feb 4, 2024 0:47:16 GMT
I thought that your polity was the UK of GB and NI. In which case, it is an integral part of your polity - not "far from it". Yes, you do keep making that error. You need to broaden your mind away from your attachment to temporary political entities and and embrace the oneness of humanity.
I don't think you are an idiot, so it would seem unlikely that you believe that it would be appropriate for a world government deciding on alcohol limits for drivers across the globe, or ruling on a planning application for a kitchen extension in Braintree, so you must accept that decision making, below the level of "humanity" is necessary. People across the world can accept the "oneness of humanity" without requiring all decisions to be made by a government that represents that "oneness". Those who have aspirations for the powers of the parliament that they choose - whether that is all or some of EU, UK, GB, Scotland etc - can all share that view. (Though perhaps we should exclude the government of Israel, and those that support it, from that inclusivity).
As a matter of interest, what do you see as "your polity" (many of us would have multiple polities, that we are part of). You seem to exclude part of humanity from yours. |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Feb 4, 2024 6:01:45 GMT
Good to see Ian Botham's grandson get a try for Wales in their barnstorming second half comeback against the Scots. Looking at that team sheet I was dreading it and switched channels at the end of the first half. The boys came good though, just didn't have a enough stamina to get us over the line. That second half will help Gatlands rebuild though. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 4, 2024 6:23:35 GMT
More Brexit self delusion from the regime Kemi Badenoch positioning for leadership after election defeat soothing the brexitanian head bangers with tales of imaginary Brexit trade success. She identifies in particular sales of honey to the middle east “My department is leveraging our post-Brexit freedoms to make the UK the best place in the world to start and grow a business,” added Badenoch, seen by many Tory MPs as one of several flexing their muscles for a tilt at the leadership quite soon. But her triumphalist tone, and many of the assertions in the Department for Business and Trade’s (DBT) Brexit 4th Anniversary document, did not quite ring true with the industries cited. “I don’t know any of our members who export any great amounts [to Saudi Arabia],” said Paul Barton of the Bee Farmers Association, which represents professional beekeepers in the UK. “Speaking from the industry, we’ve not had any assistance from the government in exploiting [the Saudi Arabian] market, getting access into that market. So I don’t know where their increases come from.” He added: “I do remember years ago a chap, I think he was Kuwaiti or Saudi, just knocked on the door and bought a couple of buckets full of honey. I imagine he put it in his hand luggage.” 90% of all honey consumed in the UK is imported. www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/04/brexit-trade-perks-firms-business-department-leaving-eu-companies. Attachment Deleted |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Feb 4, 2024 6:23:45 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 4, 2024 7:33:24 GMT
"It's my polity and I'll cry if I want to
Cry if I want to
Cry if I want to
You would cry too if it happened to you."
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Feb 4, 2024 7:53:22 GMT
steve - "It must be very disappointing for Labour party activists." Indeed, but probably significantly less disappointing than the election of the party that propped up Tory austerity would be. 
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 4, 2024 7:55:37 GMT
I think the debate on the wisdom and likely success of Starmer's tactics is a valid one, and worth having, however niggly it sometimes gets. The two views, a little polarised at times, could be summarised as one side thinking that the strategy is woefully over cautious and lacking the plans for the sort of radical change that the country needs, thereby uninspiring and lacking appeal, while the other side prioritises electoral success, the removal of this Tory government and, to that end, the need for party discipline, a teflon coated and detail-light policy offer and a general belief that you let your opponents get on with losing the election. Keep your powder very dry. Whilst disingenuous attacks from political opponents are all the fun of the fair, and easily dismissed, criticisms from those who want a change of government and wish Labour well, shouldn't be dismissed. I feel I'm right in supporting Starmer's strategy, but I can't be sure that I am. At times, I do wish Labour had a more charismatic and bold leader who inspired more than the current one does. Maybe he doesn't fully grasp the radicalism required to set the country on a better path after the wreckage of the last 14 years. Maybe those saying his strategy is a disastrous one, both in opposition and in government, will be proved right. All I do know is that the party seems motivated, disciplined and wholly committed to win the next election. Starmer has brought about real change to it and whilst it's easy to belittle this achievement, and where it's put Labour in terms of opinion polls and by elections/councils won/councillors gained, as purely the result of government unpopularity, I think we may be missing how successful Starmer's approach is proving. I think it's too early to be writing off his putative government too, should of course it ever come about. I'm sticking with both Starmer and the strategy for now. There is an article of faith involved, I admit, but I've seen too many failed Labour bids for power over the years, and I can see all the mistakes that were made in my mind now. Burned painfully in my consciousness. And Starmer's avoiding most of them. |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,498
|
Post by neilj on Feb 4, 2024 8:09:56 GMT
I for one wish Starmer/Labour was a little more ambitious, but can appreciate their caution. The country's finances are and will be in a terrible state and for the first couple of years prudence will be required
It's very easy for parties unlikely to be in power to promise all sorts of things. But if they ever got into power, the realities of it would slap them in the face.
One of the worse things a political party can do is over promise and under deliver
|
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Feb 4, 2024 8:30:44 GMT
The move also means that the tragically short shelf-life of your bag of iceberg lettuce could get even shorter. An appropriate way to celebrate Brexit’s 4th Birthday. Congrats to all involved. Sticking with this theme, this week the House of Commons’ European Scrutiny Committee heard this week that holidaymakers hoping to cross the English Channel could face 14 hour queues from October as the EU introduces a new requirement for fingerprint scans and photographs to be taken from all non-EU citizens entering the bloc (but not Ireland or Cyprus). Still praying for chaos. Now it's been reduced to an aspiration of soggy lettuce at Lidl in Luton.  But we were promised not only no chaos or recession (!) but loads of benefits so where are they? (You're not allowed to mention European superstate or sovereignty as those are both myths that never existed except in the heads of fools and charlatans like Johnson.) |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 4, 2024 8:33:23 GMT
"Indeed, but probably significantly less disappointing than the election of the party that propped up Tory austerity would be."
jib is that you?
|
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Feb 4, 2024 8:37:02 GMT
"Labour is planning only limited first-term reforms of social care and the House of Lords and a smaller green investment plan as part of a stripped-down general election manifesto, as it seeks to make its policies “bombproof” to Tory attacks." By becoming Tory lite. It must be very disappointing for Labour party activists. On the contrary. Starmer is showing a realistic and pragmatic approach to government given the absolute shitshow he will inherit. He doesn't just want a smash and grab, he wants two full terms to complete and embed his plans and roll back the damage done by this lot of shysters. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 4, 2024 8:38:13 GMT
This is getting embarrassing.
The other team score 4 and we still don't manage to lose.
I was looking forward to a visit to Preston North end.
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 4, 2024 9:01:27 GMT
This is getting embarrassing. The other team score 4 and we still don't manage to lose. I was looking forward to a visit to Preston North end. Careful, Luton could still exchange places with Preston next season and you will miss the enticing fixture for rather different reasons than those you're now assuming. It's a marathon not a sprint, as they say |
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Feb 4, 2024 9:02:04 GMT
The no deals with the SNP pledge still looks solid though. Yes, Labour prefers to co-operate with right wing parties rather than centre-left parties which is why it prefers to see Tories elected in Scotland than SNP MPs. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 4, 2024 9:05:01 GMT
The no deals with the SNP pledge still looks solid though. Yes, Labour prefers to co-operate with right wing parties rather than centre-left parties which is why it prefers to see Tories elected in Scotland than SNP MPs. Well, I can see the logic for unionist parties occasionally making common cause with each other. They'd be daft not to. |
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Feb 4, 2024 9:07:30 GMT
A view from Wales about UK Labour's response to the independent report commissioned by the Welsh Labour Government about Wales' constitutional future:
|
|
|
|
Post by moby on Feb 4, 2024 9:42:07 GMT
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 4, 2024 9:43:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 4, 2024 9:53:58 GMT
Ah, I see. A little nuance involved. No traitors and sell outs, quite yet. An SNP perspective on Welsh devolution, whilst always welcome, is never going to be the most reliable one doing the rounds. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Feb 4, 2024 10:05:28 GMT
An interesting reflection here on the Tories devolved austerity ruse. A ruse, that many Tories rather openly boasted about, certainly at the time when Osborne was dropping us all in it together. It wasn't us in central government, Guv, it was all those useless Labour councils axeing your key services. Now we have a litany of bankrupt councils, of all political persuasions, revealing the consequences of being starved of adequate central funding for many years. Devolved authorities in Scotland, Wales and NI affected too. Another scandal that the Tories have got away with in plain sight. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/04/tories-starved-councils-thinking-no-one-cared-now-bust-and-we-care-very-much |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Feb 4, 2024 10:15:31 GMT
I for one wish Starmer/Labour was a little more ambitious, but can appreciate their caution. The country's finances are and will be in a terrible state and for the first couple of years prudence will be required It's very easy for parties unlikely to be in power to promise all sorts of things. But if they ever got into power, the realities of it would slap them in the face. One of the worse things a political party can do is over promise and under deliver This is all sounding a bit too George Osborne for my liking. You're probably right that something as drastic as, say, the Green Party manifesto is likely to be could tank a fragile economy in the short term but we need to see a direction of travel from Labour that simply isn't there as they rule out virtually every revenue raising option. "Fiscal rules" might just be OK on borrowing limits (if restrictive to economic levers) but not if you rule out tax rises anywhere. Not denying that any drastic changes could cause a fragile recovery to implode (not that there really is much of a recovery yet except on inflation) but it doesn't prevent an analysis of what tax rises wouldn't drastically affect the economy. There's still a lot of wealth in this country, much of it non productive and not being spent in the economy. I'd suggest there are plenty of revenue raising options that don't tank an economy and may even lead to a healthier economy- CGT being equalised with Income Tax & digital services tax are ones that have both been ruled out by Labour and a redistribution of wealth from higher general taxation on the wealthy and pumped into Green New Deal would undoubtedly be of immediate benefit to the economy rather than tanking anything. I can't find any lurid headlines claiming damage to the Scottish economy with their slightly higher rate of Income tax on higher earners for example. Wealth inequality is what is holding back the economy and while this is a global issue, you can do a certain amount without making the country uncompetitive. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,601
|
Post by pjw1961 on Feb 4, 2024 10:39:55 GMT
"Labour is planning only limited first-term reforms of social care and the House of Lords and a smaller green investment plan as part of a stripped-down general election manifesto, as it seeks to make its policies “bombproof” to Tory attacks." By becoming Tory lite. It must be very disappointing for Labour party activists. I can't pretend I'm very happy with Labour's timidity and lack of ambition, because I'm not. However, I don't think the description "Tory lite" is accurate. The Tory and Labour offers will be significantly different. The problem with the Labour one is that it is getting too close to just being a bland set of minor tweaks, when the country needs radical change. Still looking forward to discovering what the Lib Dem polices actually are though steve! |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 4, 2024 11:13:23 GMT
pjw1961 I'm just winding labourites up I don't think they're Tory lite more a delicate shade of pink😀 As you've asked for policies here's the current as of 2023 policy on the European union "Taking immediate action to improve links with our European neighbours, including building closer ties in education by reforming the government’s Turing scheme. Further steps to build confidence and establish stronger relationships with Europe, including seeking cooperation agreements with EU agencies, returning to Erasmus Plus and seeking to reach a UK-EU agreement on asylum seekers. Deepening trade with Europe, including by negotiating greater access for our world-leading UK food and animal products to the Single Market, securing deals on sector-specific work visas and establishing mutual recognition of professional qualifications. Once the trading relationship between the UK and the EU is deepened, and the ties of trust and friendship are renewed, aim to place the UK–EU relationship on a more formal and stable footing by seeking to join the Single Market." It doesn't in my opinion go far enough neither incidentally does it remove the longer term aspiration to rejoin and return to the heart of Europe, but it's definitely a policy and one which isn't particularly partisan and which the overwhelming majority of Labour supporters( excluding the current leadership) would agree with. But we're not going to be the government and unless polling is massively mistaken we're not going to be able to exert direct influence. So it's up to Labour supporters to explain why the total bollocks of " make Brexit work " is a better plan. Good luck with that.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Feb 4, 2024 11:18:01 GMT
I was just thinking every single one of the dozens of seats the liberal democrats might potentially win outside of Scotland are from the Tories, any seat we lose will be to the Tories.
So when our resident obsessive turns up bemoaning the possibility of lib dems electoral success what he's actually saying is he'd prefer the Tories to hold their seats and win more.
Interesting concept of supporting Labour!
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on Feb 4, 2024 11:23:15 GMT
I think the debate on the wisdom and likely success of Starmer's tactics is a valid one, and worth having, however niggly it sometimes gets. The two views, a little polarised at times, could be summarised as one side thinking that the strategy is woefully over cautious and lacking the plans for the sort of radical change that the country needs, thereby uninspiring and lacking appeal, while the other side prioritises electoral success, the removal of this Tory government and, to that end, the need for party discipline, a teflon coated and detail-light policy offer and a general belief that you let your opponents get on with losing the election. Keep your powder very dry. Whilst disingenuous attacks from political opponents are all the fun of the fair, and easily dismissed, criticisms from those who want a change of government and wish Labour well, shouldn't be dismissed. I feel I'm right in supporting Starmer's strategy, but I can't be sure that I am. At times, I do wish Labour had a more charismatic and bold leader who inspired more than the current one does. Maybe he doesn't fully grasp the radicalism required to set the country on a better path after the wreckage of the last 14 years. Maybe those saying his strategy is a disastrous one, both in opposition and in government, will be proved right. All I do know is that the party seems motivated, disciplined and wholly committed to win the next election. Starmer has brought about real change to it and whilst it's easy to belittle this achievement, and where it's put Labour in terms of opinion polls and by elections/councils won/councillors gained, as purely the result of government unpopularity, I think we may be missing how successful Starmer's approach is proving. I think it's too early to be writing off his putative government too, should of course it ever come about. I'm sticking with both Starmer and the strategy for now. There is an article of faith involved, I admit, but I've seen too many failed Labour bids for power over the years, and I can see all the mistakes that were made in my mind now. Burned painfully in my consciousness. And Starmer's avoiding most of them. I would find that more convincing had Harold Wilson felt the need to be so timid prior to the elections of 1964 and 1974 - but he behaved very differently. |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Feb 4, 2024 12:09:24 GMT
I think the debate on the wisdom and likely success of Starmer's tactics is a valid one, and worth having, however niggly it sometimes gets. The two views, a little polarised at times, could be summarised as one side thinking that the strategy is woefully over cautious and lacking the plans for the sort of radical change that the country needs, thereby uninspiring and lacking appeal, while the other side prioritises electoral success, the removal of this Tory government and, to that end, the need for party discipline, a teflon coated and detail-light policy offer and a general belief that you let your opponents get on with losing the election. Keep your powder very dry. Whilst disingenuous attacks from political opponents are all the fun of the fair, and easily dismissed, criticisms from those who want a change of government and wish Labour well, shouldn't be dismissed. I feel I'm right in supporting Starmer's strategy, but I can't be sure that I am. At times, I do wish Labour had a more charismatic and bold leader who inspired more than the current one does. Maybe he doesn't fully grasp the radicalism required to set the country on a better path after the wreckage of the last 14 years. Maybe those saying his strategy is a disastrous one, both in opposition and in government, will be proved right. All I do know is that the party seems motivated, disciplined and wholly committed to win the next election. Starmer has brought about real change to it and whilst it's easy to belittle this achievement, and where it's put Labour in terms of opinion polls and by elections/councils won/councillors gained, as purely the result of government unpopularity, I think we may be missing how successful Starmer's approach is proving. I think it's too early to be writing off his putative government too, should of course it ever come about. I'm sticking with both Starmer and the strategy for now. There is an article of faith involved, I admit, but I've seen too many failed Labour bids for power over the years, and I can see all the mistakes that were made in my mind now. Burned painfully in my consciousness. And Starmer's avoiding most of them. When Labour has a 20 point lead which shows no sign of easing up, even if down to the Tories imploding, it's no good me arguing that the tactics to win an election aren't correct. Certainly no good me saying that the Tories are so bad Corbyn would have won as well because that might not have been the case (the opinion poll a year or so back had Labour under Corbyn neck and neck). Obviously Corbyn has been trashed so the exact comparison would be someone else with Corbyn policy but not Corbyn but even then I couldn't honestly say that was a guaranteed winner either because the right wing press would be down on them like a ton of bricks. I think the argument is more about how much bomb proofing really was needed and how boxed in Labour now are now for doing any good with their "fiscal rules" and whether they even want to break out from this especially when they have new friends donating to Labour. Donations are coming from everyone from bankers (£2m) to private healthcare to Israeli lobbyists and Labour will be relying on continued support from those groups. It's not hard to argue that a lot of the polices they have dropped are linked to those donations and will have to keep those groups sweet in the future now membership income is drifting. Similarly if they are in danger of losing a core vote of left wing, greens, Muslims, LGBT and relying more on the vote of ex Tories then how likely are they going to want to be half way radical in the future? I'd suggest this is why Blair was less effective in his second and third terms because he was focused on the middle class swing voter and took his eyes off the deprived that moved to will not vote and became amenable to UKIP. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2024 12:16:59 GMT
This is getting embarrassing. The other team score 4 and we still don't manage to lose. I was looking forward to a visit to Preston North end. Careful, Luton could still exchange places with Preston next season and you will miss the enticing fixture for rather different reasons than those you're now assuming. It's a marathon not a sprint, as they say I hope Luton avoid relegation, I’ve been really impressed with them and their manager. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Feb 4, 2024 12:36:46 GMT
I think the debate on the wisdom and likely success of Starmer's tactics is a valid one, and worth having, however niggly it sometimes gets. The two views, a little polarised at times, could be summarised as one side thinking that the strategy is woefully over cautious and lacking the plans for the sort of radical change that the country needs, thereby uninspiring and lacking appeal, while the other side prioritises electoral success, the removal of this Tory government and, to that end, the need for party discipline, a teflon coated and detail-light policy offer and a general belief that you let your opponents get on with losing the election. Keep your powder very dry. Whilst disingenuous attacks from political opponents are all the fun of the fair, and easily dismissed, criticisms from those who want a change of government and wish Labour well, shouldn't be dismissed. I feel I'm right in supporting Starmer's strategy, but I can't be sure that I am. At times, I do wish Labour had a more charismatic and bold leader who inspired more than the current one does. Maybe he doesn't fully grasp the radicalism required to set the country on a better path after the wreckage of the last 14 years. Maybe those saying his strategy is a disastrous one, both in opposition and in government, will be proved right. All I do know is that the party seems motivated, disciplined and wholly committed to win the next election. Starmer has brought about real change to it and whilst it's easy to belittle this achievement, and where it's put Labour in terms of opinion polls and by elections/councils won/councillors gained, as purely the result of government unpopularity, I think we may be missing how successful Starmer's approach is proving. I think it's too early to be writing off his putative government too, should of course it ever come about. I'm sticking with both Starmer and the strategy for now. There is an article of faith involved, I admit, but I've seen too many failed Labour bids for power over the years, and I can see all the mistakes that were made in my mind now. Burned painfully in my consciousness. And Starmer's avoiding most of them. When Labour has a 20 point lead which shows no sign of easing up, even if down to the Tories imploding, it's no good me arguing that the tactics to win an election aren't correct. Certainly no good me saying that the Tories are so bad Corbyn would have won as well because that might not have been the case (the opinion poll a year or so back had Labour under Corbyn neck and neck). Obviously Corbyn has been trashed so the exact comparison would be someone else with Corbyn policy but not Corbyn but even then I couldn't honestly say that was a guaranteed winner either because the right wing press would be down on them like a ton of bricks. I think the argument is more about how much bomb proofing really was needed and how boxed in Labour now are now for doing any good with their "fiscal rules" and whether they even want to break out from this especially when they have new friends donating to Labour. Donations are coming from everyone from bankers (£2m) to private healthcare to Israeli lobbyists and Labour will be relying on continued support from those groups. It's not hard to argue that a lot of the polices they have dropped are linked to those donations and will have to keep those groups sweet in the future now membership income is drifting. Similarly if they are in danger of losing a core vote of left wing, greens, Muslims, LGBT and relying more on the vote of ex Tories then how likely are they going to want to be half way radical in the future? I'd suggest this is why Blair was less effective in his second and third terms because he was focused on the middle class swing voter and took his eyes off the deprived that moved to will not vote and became amenable to UKIP. I very much agree with that. In some ways Starmer reminds me of Ed Milliband's approach in the run-up to the 2015 election. He was far too cautious and failed to inspire - and would have made a much more positive impact had he adopted policies akin to Corbyn's 2017 programme. There was little sense that he was going to make a difference - and that is very much the attitude prevalent today. Starmer's likely success owes everything to the Tory implosion - and very little at all to anything he has to offer himself. He risks becoming seriously exposed very quickly. |
|
