steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Jun 15, 2024 9:03:57 GMT
crossbat11One of Marr's main reasons for optimism is he's assuming that Labour leader's are currently lying about the party's position on brexit. Again I hope he's correct.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Jun 15, 2024 9:07:45 GMT
Given that we don't have many unapologetic brexitoids left here, or indeed in the real world, you might have thought that the ones we did have might have been aware that Thatcher was the biggest fan of the single market and the expansion of the European union .
Almost as if they haven't a fucking clue what they're talking about.
|
|
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: 6,700
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jun 15, 2024 9:13:37 GMT
Just for fun I put a theoretical result through ec with the Tories lib dems and refuk all on 18% with Labour in 40. The results are hilarious. The Tories win 1 seat for each percent , refuk manage 2 in total as do the greens, sorry greens I only have you 5% The lib dems win 81 and there's just the 516 Labour mps. The thing is while it's purest fantasy as things stand at the moment it could broadly reflect the actual result in terms of representation. I would love the Lib Dems to do well. The manifesto was positive and progressive. If only we could have a Labour Govmt that takes advantage of a once in a lifetime opportunity to permanently shift the dial by bringing in wholesale constitutional reform, UK federal structures, PR and single market etc. Once those changes were made, there's nothing the reactionary parties could do and the course of our future would be permanently altered. We would not have to be concerned about which right wing party was going to supplant the other and win power in such a way that their values would be imposed on all corners of the UK. People who vote Tory or Reform will always be part of us and will always have a fluctuating but large constituency. That is simply a fact of human nature and one day we will realise that only with real and permanent constitutional reform can the adverse consequences of this be mitigated. Well as I was just saying above, it’s possible you might get some of that Moby: with Starmer being a lawyer like Blair, might operate in a similar fashion. Furthermore, what is also of interest, is not only how things get baked in, but also how they may be undone. We left the EU after all (though some of it we are still locked into). In theory, other legal frameworks might be changed or undone in future. Though even then… we left the EU but still wound up having to retain quite a bit to get a deal. (What interests me in particular, is the alternative method of how you route around things that appear to lock things in, or even make use of them in novel ways) |
|
|
|
Post by jib on Jun 15, 2024 9:13:43 GMT
Given that we don't have many unapologetic brexitoids left here, or indeed in the real world, you might have thought that the ones we did have might have been aware that Thatcher was the biggest fan of the single market and the expansion of the European union . Almost as if they haven't a fucking clue what they're talking about. Absolute nonsense as usual from you, the arch Federal dreamer. Check your facts. www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUZc2Z5PKvUwww.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Ohba25pyU |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Lass on Jun 15, 2024 9:17:06 GMT
It makes one proud to be British ! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2024 9:22:32 GMT
barbara Your post on Starmer perfectly sums up my own view. In the same way I was confident, before the campaign, that the more Sunak campaigned the more people would disapprove I am confident that Labour, once elected will have everything in place to begin the changes needed for this country. What we have had to put up with over the past fourteen years has been an utter disgrace. We will be in repairs for some time.
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Jun 15, 2024 9:25:37 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - "I think batty may be right, that Labour might be more radical than some may think, but of course the question arises as to how, esp. in a financially constrained situation." I actually think that to promote a more radical approach it's better to be in a position of fiscal constraint. That's when systemic change is required. New Labour achieved a considerable amount in power, but much of this was done on the back of strong economic performances and a stealth approach to generating government revenues (along with absorbing the aggregate benefits of mass migration). The systemic change was limited, and the narrative regarding tax and spend, and government intervention in general, remaining intact. This meant that when the inevitable downturn came, and public spending was constrained, the taps were turned off an most of the gains were erased. Starmer needs a different approach this time, and can actually use the fiscal situation as a driver for much of the change we need. In essence, he can hide behind the fact that there is no money to force through the kinds of short term sacrifices some will need to make to get to a more radical change. Whether he does this time will tell, but chucking money at problems is quite easy in the good times. Actually solving the problems is where we need to be now.
|
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on Jun 15, 2024 9:29:00 GMT
<Panto> Oh, yes, it is! </Panto> Even though the Germans were aided by Clarke picking a Championship (or as I still think about it, Second Division) goalie with chocolate wrists. Isn't there a better goalie in the whole of Scotland? Yes - we have two at Hearts. He left the best one (Craig Gordon) behind. Zander Clark is the other one but Clarke is notoriously stubbornand loyal (he kept playing Marshall to the point he ost us matches) |
|
patrickbrian
Member
These things seem small and undistinguishable, like far off mountains turned into clouds
Posts: 316
|
Post by patrickbrian on Jun 15, 2024 9:44:42 GMT
Mercian
"but we should take pride that such a small country has had such a massive influence on the world"
Yes, that's probably the nub of the difference between our attitudes and general political belief systems. At about the age of 16, at a top public school, I formed a contempt for most of what the school stood for, especially the British Empire. Which I viewed then and now as an awful thing - something to be ashamed of, if anything (but I don't really do pride and shame). I'd read all the books, the dodgy history; Clive, Rhodes, General Gordon, and even then found them racist and unpleasant. I was in a minority , though not a small one. Over the years I haven't changed my view on that, but grown more tolerant of people who see things differently. I wouldn't want to live in a country where everyone thought the same way .
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Jun 15, 2024 9:49:19 GMT
Interesting that our arch brexitoid provides a clip of Thatcher 5 years after the Tories had thrown her out and she ceased to be prime minister speaking at a meeting of the precursor to the MAGA republicans as proof of her objection to European federal control while she was PM.
There was of course no European federal control of the UK before, during, or after her time in office it's a brexitanian fantasy.
Thatcher was a strong proponent of the single market which of course meant that trading regulations required to be aligned , otherwise it wouldn't work.
It must have also passed their notice that at no time during our membership were we governed by ECB decisions and there was no realistic short or medium term prospect of the UK BOE being subsidiary to the ECB right up to national shoot yourself in the foot day.
It's almost as if they have a preconceived notion and will write any load of old cobblers that they think proves their point.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jun 15, 2024 9:52:01 GMT
Two thoughts and a conclusion re Labour, tax and public spending.
(a) the Conservatives are correct to point out that Labour spokespeople (and they are all resolutely on message) have been very specific about which taxes they will not increase, leaving a whole raft of others that might. When challenged on this the Labour line is "there is nothing in our manifesto that requires tax rises other than those announced". True as far as it goes, but what about things that are not in the manifesto?
(b) I find it impossible to believe, if only for the survival of his government, that Starmer wants to spend the first few years of power presiding over hundreds of councils going bust, policing, courts and prisons in crisis, record waiting lists in the NHS, etc. It could be blamed on the previous government, but it would still make it impossible to maintain the positive narrative of change and improvement needed to get re-elected.
Conclusion - old taxes will be reformed, new taxes will be implemented and overall taxation will rise. There will be more money for the public services; not enough to repair the damage done by the Conservatives - that will take at least a decade - but enough to ward off an immediate crisis.
I am basing this on the political logic of the situation rather than hope or trust, although I do have some of the former.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbold on Jun 15, 2024 9:53:46 GMT
With regard to the notion that Starmer and Labour will be more radical in office than he and they appear now, I have to say that my experience of all Labour Governments from 1964 onwards is that they have been LESS radical in office not more. I'm afraid I remain very sceptical that this Labour Government will be any different.
|
|
|
|
Post by jib on Jun 15, 2024 9:55:27 GMT
Interesting that our arch brexitoid provides a clip of Thatcher 5 years after the Tories had thrown her out and she ceased to be prime minister speaking at a meeting of the precursor to the MAGA republicans as proof of her objection to European federal control while she was PM. There was of course no European federal control of the UK before, during, or after her time in office it's a brexitanian fantasy. Thatcher was a strong proponent of the single market which of course meant that trading regulations required to be aligned , otherwise it wouldn't work. It must have also passed their notice that at no time during our membership were we governed by ECB decisions and there was no realistic short or medium term prospect of the UK BOE being subsidiary to the ECB right up to national shoot yourself in the foot day. It's almost as if they have a preconceived notion and will write any load of old cobblers that they think proves their point. One clip was of her at the despatch box. As usual, your weak grasp on facts has been exposed, and you now try and redefine the narrative to cover your tracks. Maybe we can expect an appearance from jen to try and put the boot in shortly. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jun 15, 2024 10:01:24 GMT
That great tradition was honoured last night in Munich and I have every confidence that, early in the knock out stages, England will similarly perform their national duty in a penalty shoot out defeat to a "surprisingly good Belgian outfit" (quote from match report in the Daily Star). I'm not in a good position to comment as I don't watch Premier League and to be honest only really watch football live in the lower leagues plus England and any other favoured teams at World Cup etc, but seems to me there is no good reason why one of these days England can't win a major tournament. I usually have to be told by the lad who any of the new England players play for. He was very upbeat before this tournament claiming we have the best player in the world or something like that (I think Bellingham who, typically, is a player I've never really come across other than not standing out in the previous tournaments- no doubt to your horror). I'm not one of those people who think "we invented the game", "we have the best league in the world" and so on but I do think we should at least be getting our fair share of a cake of winners that includes Portugal, Greece, Denmark and we did have a chance against Italy last time. No particular reason why we should be losing on penalties (and we do actually win a fair number- just not the ones that really count). So keep the faith I say! Don't always take me at face value, shevii, especially on football. I was being a little rhetorical and unserious in my lament to the England and Scotland football teams. I too think that England have a reasonable chance of winning this tournament, along with Germany, Spain, Portugal, France and Italy. Maybe one or two others like the Netherlands and Belgium too. International football is very competitive and tournaments tend to contain a whole host of credible likely winners. That's why they are so hellishly difficult to win. England's chance lies in playing a more expansive game than I sense Southgate instinctively likes to play, but I think even he now knows that it's best to play to the team's intrinsic strengths. Foden, Saka, Kane, Rice and Bellingham are stellar talents and Palmer a fast emerging one. I very much like Ize and Mainoo too The defence is vulnerable but in Stones, Pickford, Shaw and Walker it still contains some very fine players. I won't be pining for Maguire, Madison, Phillips and Henderson but I'll miss Jack though and I think the squad may too. Shuffle that pack of talent well Gareth, and with a following wind and a bit of luck, Starmer's honeymoon may include a Downing Street celebration for Gareth and the lads in late July! Come on England. |
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Jun 15, 2024 10:02:57 GMT
@danny Totally agree with you about the Falklands War. A shocking failure of diplomacy that led to a needless totem war and consequent loss of life. It recused Thatcher's floundering premiership though. Lord Carrington, an honourable man, was absolutely right to resign over the diplomatic disaster. The ultimate needless war. A bit like saying that it was Liz Truss's fault that Putin invaded Ukraine. |
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Jun 15, 2024 10:04:33 GMT
It's disappointing to see the rather shallow analysis of last night's football result. It is only on the simplistic and unfair Goals at Final Whistle system that Germany won. On the fair and progressive Proportional to Population System Scotland outscored Germany significantly: 1 goal to 5m of population for Scotland to 1 goal to 17m of population for Germany ( rounded to nearest million). Germany should be deeply concerned at their underperformance.
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jun 15, 2024 10:08:19 GMT
Just read Alan Bates has accepted bauble. Oh dear. The British Establishment's spider's web draws in another unwitting member. A thorn in the side now swallowed whole. Gulp. Swallow. He's gone. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Jun 15, 2024 10:08:33 GMT
Howver I do think something bolder is required over the really big issues, particularly health, social care, and infrastructure, where a consensual long term strategy is required. Also, although I know none of them will do it, tax wil have to rise substantially to sort out the country's problems. I mentioned that GPs are calling for a bigger share of the NHS money to be directd to them, because in the long run it will do more good for the nation's health. Its better to catch people and delay their needing to go into hospital than treat them once they are there. The problem with this though is if you did it, then waiting lists would rise even further. Its exactly the same as the argument that money spent on covid was wasted. Considering the huge sums spent in closing down society so as to try to save some elderly people who were the most susceptible to covid, that money would have generated more health benefit if instead they had been left to die, but it was spnet on normal priorities. Which would of course include normal hospital activities, much better value than the covid expenditure, as well as more GP services and indeed home help. (inidentally, most people who died from covid did so either at home or in care homes) So the problem is, the greater good is served by concentrating resources on those actually still well to prevent them ever getting sick, then on those who will benefit most so probably the still relatively young, and then least effective treating the very sick and elderly who have chronic disabling disease and need huge resources to keep them going. To get the best outcome in quality life years for your money, you need to concentrate more money on the relatively healthy and less on the chronically sick, and politicians are not willing to face that choice. It implies rising waiting lists - which they have chosen as the metric of success rather than measuring total national health. As to prvatising health care, the US demonstrates how disastrously expensive a fully privatised health system becomes. There is also a real issue from calls to involve the private sector more, that they have always cherry picked the easiest cases, and in a situation where there just arent enough doctors or nurses to go around shifting more into the private sector just means there are fewer available to treat people in the NHS. Typically the same consultants work in both private and public hospitals. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jun 15, 2024 10:09:58 GMT
It's disappointing to see the rather shallow analysis of last night's football result. It is only on the simplistic and unfair Goals at Final Whistle system that Germany won. On the fair and progressive Proportional to Population System Scotland outscored Germany significantly: 1 goal to 5m of population for Scotland to 1 goal to 17m of population for Germany ( rounded to nearest million). Germany should be deeply concerned at their underperformance. You've been listening to too much Graeme Souness!! |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Jun 15, 2024 10:14:46 GMT
Two thoughts and a conclusion re Labour, tax and public spending. (a) the Conservatives are correct to point out that Labour spokespeople (and they are all resolutely on message) have been very specific about which taxes they will not increase, leaving a whole raft of others that might. When challenged on this the Labour line is "there is nothing in our manifesto that requires tax rises other than those announced". True as far as it goes, but what about things that are not in the manifesto? That's actually not true as we have a fiscal black hole after the election, caused by Jeremy Hunt cutting various taxes. Every economist is saying that there will need to be tax rises or spending cuts after the election just to stand still. That's before you get to your lists in point (b). The "good" news appears to be that CGT equalisation with Income Tax has not been ruled out and this is one of the big money earners. Also possible reforms to council tax that might not be labelled "mansion tax" but could have a similar result. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jun 15, 2024 10:17:14 GMT
We should get an Opinium poll at 8pm this evening, so it will be interesting to see if the figures match to the same dynamics we've seen in other pollsters.
opinium's pre-election averages in 12 polls this year were:
Lab 41.5%
Con 26%
LD 10%
Ref 11%
If the movements are similar to others, we should expect something like this:
Lab 39%
Con 22%
LD 12%
Ref 15%
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 15, 2024 10:23:11 GMT
'Why have we always got to assume the worst of centre-left Labour politicians! '
I would not go along with 'always' , but in terms of recent history two words are likely to suffice -'Tony Blair'. I say that whilst ignoring the status he deserves as a war criminal.
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Jun 15, 2024 10:33:02 GMT
It makes one proud to be British ! This is the sort of shit that over the course of decades has degraded public debate in this country and I would say degraded us all morally. This country never got over 'winning' ww2. Just like Russia. Fortunately brexit while still very destructive is somewhat less bloody than Russia's equivalent reaction but the impetus is similar. An international has-been giving a fu to the world. |
|
|
|
Post by nickpoole on Jun 15, 2024 10:38:01 GMT
It's disappointing to see the rather shallow analysis of last night's football result. It is only on the simplistic and unfair Goals at Final Whistle system that Germany won. On the fair and progressive Proportional to Population System Scotland outscored Germany significantly: 1 goal to 5m of population for Scotland to 1 goal to 17m of population for Germany ( rounded to nearest million). Germany should be deeply concerned at their underperformance. I thought Germans got all the goals? I saw somewhere that Rudiger is now Scotland’s joint top scorer at tournaments for last 25 years |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Jun 15, 2024 10:40:10 GMT
Conclusion - old taxes will be reformed, new taxes will be implemented and overall taxation will rise. There will be more money for the public services; not enough to repair the damage done by the Conservatives - that will take at least a decade - but enough to ward off an immediate crisis. I am basing this on the political logic of the situation rather than hope or trust, although I do have some of the former. One other point to consider on this is the timing (on your assumption that it does happen which I remain less than convinced about). Governments tend to get the "bad news" out the way very early on but ruling out tax rises during a campaign and then producing rises in year one would look politically dodgy- they will certainly need the reviews and reports first from "independent experts". Leaving it too late will be a reminder for anyone affected by the tax rises when they come to vote as well as leaving it too late for any improvements those rises produce in public services. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jun 15, 2024 10:54:05 GMT
Tales of the campaign trail - Braintree edition
Until yesterday, my personal campaign had been going about as well as Rishi Sunak's. All the canvassing sessions were at times I couldn't make or places I couldn't get to due to either work or domestic commitments. Given you wait decades for such a favourable set of circumstances to come along, it was extremely frustrating to have done nothing useful!
Then word came through on Wednesday that canvassing is on temporary hold while we get 60,000 leaflets distributed across Braintree and Witham. Whoops of joy from me, because whereas you shouldn't really canvass alone and so are bound to the organised times, leafletting can be done at a time of your choosing. I got my bid in and 550 nice glossy leaflets duly arrived at my house on Thursday evening - joy unconfined.
To digress a moment, the leaflet itself doubles as a window poster and has the sort of thing you might expect about the candidate (Matthew Wright) and Labour's "5 missions to bring change to Braintree constituency" but it also has the traditional 'dodgy bar-chart', although in this case it is mostly true. It notes that the Lib Dems and Greens "can't win here" and that is entirely accurate. The more questionable part is that it has Labour leading the Conservatives by 42% to 39% and cites Electoral Calculus as the source. Even this is not too far off - having had a look at EC this morning it has Labour leading 39.4% to 38.7% and gives Labour a 53% chance of winning the seat.
So getting back to the matter in hand: Last night, after watching a bit of Starmer v Nick Robinson and then Scotland going 0-2 down, I forsook all that and knocked off the first 100 houses, mostly in my own street. This morning I went out early and polished off another 130, ranging further afield. I had three conversations with residents who happened to be about - I said I was leafletting for the election but no politics was discussed, however all very friendly.
Incidentally, if anyone thinks leafletting is a harm free activity, I have taken the skin off the knuckles of my right hand wrestling with the man-traps some people choose to have as letterboxes these days. Some seemed designed to actively prevent any mail being delivered. Every time I do leafletting my admiration for postmen/women increases.
I shall get the rest of the leaflets done and then see what more needs doing (last I heard 16,000 had already been delivered). I am very keen to get some canvassing in later in the campaign, but I think I will need to take leave from work to achieve that. I have already booked off the day of the election and the day after. Enough for the moment, but I will try and post a few anecdotes from Labour colleagues on how things are going later.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2024 11:05:48 GMT
'Why have we always got to assume the worst of centre-left Labour politicians! ' I would not go along with 'always' , but in terms of recent history two words are likely to suffice -'Tony Blair'. I say that whilst ignoring the status he deserves as a war criminal. Well ignored Graham… |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2024 11:06:21 GMT
@danny Totally agree with you about the Falklands War. A shocking failure of diplomacy that led to a needless totem war and consequent loss of life. It recused Thatcher's floundering premiership though. Lord Carrington, an honourable man, was absolutely right to resign over the diplomatic disaster. The ultimate needless war. A bit like saying that it was Liz Truss's fault that Putin invaded Ukraine. It was. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jun 15, 2024 11:06:41 GMT
Conclusion - old taxes will be reformed, new taxes will be implemented and overall taxation will rise. There will be more money for the public services; not enough to repair the damage done by the Conservatives - that will take at least a decade - but enough to ward off an immediate crisis. I am basing this on the political logic of the situation rather than hope or trust, although I do have some of the former. One other point to consider on this is the timing (on your assumption that it does happen which I remain less than convinced about). Governments tend to get the "bad news" out the way very early on but ruling out tax rises during a campaign and then producing rises in year one would look politically dodgy- they will certainly need the reviews and reports first from "independent experts". Leaving it too late will be a reminder for anyone affected by the tax rises when they come to vote as well as leaving it too late for any improvements those rises produce in public services. I pose one question as an example - do you think Labour will be content to allow 100+ councils, including many controlled by their own party, to go bust in the first year? I'm not talking morally here, but in terms of raw political 'optics'. I don't see that as politically sustainable. Therefore, somehow, local government will get enough of a bail out to prevent that happening. I think Labour has plans for tax rises that have been omitted from the campaign and manifesto, hence the very precise language that is being used. CGT reform, Council Tax reform, Inheritance Tax are obvious ones - but I think we may get entirely new taxes that have never been mentioned. |
|
|
|
Post by jib on Jun 15, 2024 11:09:53 GMT
David Cameron moaning that Mr Farage is trying to destroy the Tory Party.
He is trying to destroy your Tory Party Lord Cameron, and he actively wants the likes of you, Sunak and the rest of the wets out so he can take over.
Where do centre right pro-EU orphans like these end up after the election? The Tory Party already in the hands of populist right wingers will look to Truss the reboot.
Lib Dems maybe? An attractive proposition if the Farage factor gives them an unexpected bonus in numbers of MPs?
|
|
