Looks like the rest of the EU are all keen to follow our example,,, NOT
The same has happened here since we left... we just can't do anything about it.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/987347/brexit-opinion-poll/
I really do wish the UK wasn't the case study on why leaving the EU is such a dumb idea.🙁
It is one of the only silver linings I can think of with Brexit, that at least the example can be learned from by others.
Always leading the way, see?
World leading!
Guardian analysis on why political parties are steering clear of the shifting public opinion
Guardian analysis on why political parties are steering clear of the shifting public opinion
it's the realities of first past the post, if we had PR it would be a no brainer go with the majority but instead we end up "kowtowing" to a small minded minority in marginal constituencies.
I'm not sure I dare tag @tjagain but this is relevant to the earlier discussion, from that article:
Yet among those who voted Conservative in 2019 – the potential swing voters on whom Starmer’s team are focused – only 16% said they would be more likely to back a Labour party promising to rejoin, while 48% said less likely.
This is what I was trying to say - due to FPTP, a majority in favour of rejoin isn't enough, it needs to be the swing voter demographics and that's not what they want.
I read the analysis
The main point i dont accept is that this movement i think would be much greater if Starmer backed remain and I want a labour leader who does not tell blatent lies over brexit
It also makes no reference the couple of dizen seats labour coukd win in Scotland backing remain
Imo those numbers show my position is much stronger than you all tried to tell me
Id love to be able to vote labour again but a brexiteer privitising labour party promising austerity and refusing to even consider the single biggest thing that would ease the multiple crisis we face i cannot vote for when i have two pro europe anti austerity anti privatisation to vote for
Starmer is sacrifing the good of scotland and the uk to appeas a few racists.
+1 tj
Couldn't have put it better.
4 odd years ago I had hopes for Starmer and Labour, more fool I. He’s merely another useless political placeholder that will soon be forgotten as he lacks the balls to stand up and say Brexit has been a totally ****ing foolish exercise in self immolation as he fears the ****s who voted for Brexit
he lacks the balls to stand up and say Brexit has been a totally * foolish exercise in self immolation as he fears the * who voted for Brexit
He doesn't need balls he needs votes. If you think that would get swing voters in the swing constituencies voting for him you're a dreamer.
And another thread goes the same way….
He doesn’t need balls he needs votes. If you think that would get swing voters in the swing constituencies voting for him you’re a dreamer
Molls nails it!
Hang on - my post was about both Brexit and Starmer, I object!
He doesn’t need balls he needs votes. If you think that would get swing voters in the swing constituencies voting for him you’re a dreamer.
Thankfully Labour are irreverent in Scotland, and who gives a **** about those doss ****s who voted for Brexit.
I don't see the benefit of rejoining the EU to be honest.
Yes, there are some economy incentive or freedom of movements but that's hardly anything special at all. Let EU prosper and let them have all the money they want etc.
All those views about how good it is to be EU is just hype. Makes not much difference to me at all since I ain't rich nor earning above average. Just a cog in the machine.
I mean I only set foot twice in my life in EU and that's because I wanted to see what they are. Had to save up just for that. Well, nothing special really. Food is average, people are just people like everywhere else. Can't understand their language but generally people are friendly.
Also, if Scotland wants to gain independence then so be it let them go but be kind to each others. Try not to disappoint King James VI and I even when he is no longer here. If Scotland is allowed to gain independence then I suggest those who want to remain in EU start making plans now. Move to Scotland while you still can. I think Scotland may gain independence in our lifetime so the opportunity to be part of EU is there for those who wish to remain in EU. Oh, try to learn another EU language if you can otherwise you are more or less stuck.
The only way I see UK joining EU system again is after the next great war (III), not before. Therefore, it will not happen in this life time or at least Not in your/my life time. Perhaps in another 3 generations down the line assuming EU system is still the same after the great war.
Any political leader wanting to rejoin EU now will probably be taking a huge risk.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, even the Brexiteer dimwits at the top of Tory party are finally reacquainting themselves with reality
UK may shelve controversial Brexit protocol bill in show of goodwill to EU
About ****ing time!
Whereas thebrexiteer leading labour .. ......
Is swimming against the stream. That polling clearly shows that rejoin is gaining momentum and his highly popular amongst the swing voters as well
Rejoin would be a big vote winner all over the country including amongst the swing voters.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jan/13/brexit-mistake-northern-ireland-protocol
<h1>Voters know that Brexit was a mistake, so when will our politicians admit it?</h1>
When their analysis shows it will win seats not cost them, of course. How do you think politics works?
Remember there's no point winning more voters in already safe seats. Nationwide polling doesn't reflect that.
That polling clearly shows that rejoin is gaining momentum and his highly popular amongst the swing voters as well
doesn't tally with a 3:1 direction change away from labour if they were to change
Yet among those who voted Conservative in 2019 – the potential swing voters on whom Starmer’s team are focused – only 16% said they would be more likely to back a Labour party promising to rejoin, while 48% said less likely.
And that's without the inevitable campaigning by the tories, which forget not, they are very good at and absolutely will lie and twist that narrative. At the moment they don't have that to use against labour.
No, right now it's about winning the vote in the battleground constituencies and there is a clear tactic for that. It might not be what you or I want in an idealised world, but big picture is that it's about getting a win 'by any means possible' vs another 5 years of tory rule.
In following this line Starmer is ignoring all the seats he could take with a rejoin agenda ie 25 seats in Scotland. He is alienating Scotland all the majority who want to rejoin. How many abstentions he will get losing him seats all over the uk.
You and him are also ignoring the galvanising effects a pro rejoin leadership would have
I look at those figues in the article and reach differnt cinclusions. Perhaps in part because unlike England living in Scotland I can see the positve effect on public opinion leadership can have.
If the polls are moving so strongly towards rejoin how much more would they move with a pro rejoin labour party? Thats the bit you ignore.
Starmers policy is out of date and counterproductive. He is alienating and disenfranchising large parts of the electorate and that will lose votes and seats.
He is also telling lies.
So you think pro brexit campaigns by the tories will gain them votes. Ie leadership changes opinions and votes but labour showing leadership and campaigning cannot?
Its a huge logical fallacy
In following this line Starmer is ignoring all the seats he could take with a rejoin agenda ie 25 seats in Scotland.
Speaking personally, as someone south of the border… I think the SNP MPs in the main have a great voting record in the UK parliament, and I see replacing them with Labour MPs as the lowest of priorities. It’s Conservatives we need to lose seats, as many as possible.
So you think pro brexit campaigns by the tories will gain them votes
It’s not just that they’ll campaign in a “pro Brexit” way if Labour give them the chance… it’ll be “they want to overturn your vote, they are undemocratic, and preaching”, and “our priority is to fix the NHS broken by Covid, and turnaround the cost of living crisis caused by Putin, not waste time negotiating with those Europeans, Labour’s priorities are all wrong”. It’s all nonsense and disingenuous of course, but emotive, and the media will support them in pushing those lines. It’ll need someone other than Sunak to make it stick… but Labour have to be alert to the threat. And if the Tories manage to make that campaign work, and win… we’ll waste another 5 years, and you can forget closer ties with Europe for decades.
So you think pro brexit campaigns by the tories will gain them votes.
I think if Labour switch to a rejoin policy, the tories will mobilise on that point, which they are very good at, in the battleground constituencies that will decide the next election. And the labour support will diminish, if not evaporate completely in those areas. Back to the tories - possibly - depends how damaging the next period is to the tories on other matters, and what alternatives are offered. If it does, it's potentially disastrous, including a further 5 years of tory rule.
I can almost write the facebook adverts to be pushed in these areas now.
25 votes in Scotland will be pissing in the wind in comparison. And increasing the vote share in already held remain leaning constituencies is worth zilch as well.
No, it's not right but it's about winning in the constituencies that matter. Lies - if you like, but win dirty if necessary >>>> lose clean.
And that’s without the inevitable campaigning by the tories, which forget not, they are very good at
Any rejoin campaign would just have the Tory attack machine in the press telling the countries racists, who we now know there an awful lot of, that Labour wants to allow 7 million Turkish rapists to move in to a free council house and take their job/school place/hospital appointment all while simultaneously living a life of luxury on benefits
That’s the reality
It’s worked repeatedly over the last seven years and it would work again
It’s a total non starter and if you think otherwise you’re absolutely delusional
TJ, you need to let this one drop. Most of what you say is correct, but as I said earlier in this thread, and many others have since suggested too, we do not live in a democracy. FPTP means that the majority is largely irrelevant, and what matters is a small proportion of voters/potential voters in a few swing seats. They will be suckers for the attack lines that @binners sets out above, so Labour's position has to be one that doesn't give the Tories the opportunity to deploy those lines. If we had PR the argument would be very different, but we don't.
Someone speaking commonsense.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64248048
He is, absolutely.
He's also not fighting for votes in Workington, or Walsall, or Rotherham, or.....
He’s also not fighting for votes in Workington, or Walsall, or Rotherham, or…..
And yet Starmer also needs to fight for votes elsewhere.
Pandering to the hard right press just allows them to normalise their lies and begs the question why vote for someone who is going to dance to their tune.
We have been there and done that hence why we are in such a mess.
He doesnt need to say we will be rejoining the EU, after all thats a long drawn out process, but simply acknowledge it was a mistake to leave and that the hard right lied about the benefits and lied about the root causes of the issues.
Point out brexit didnt solve those issues because the issues are the fault of the tories and those too spineless to stand up to the hard right.
Whilst there are the idiots who will reliably repeat the hard right press attack lines at least some of them should be quiet this time round since they dont have to destroy the evil left.
And yet Starmer also needs to fight for votes elsewhere.
Increasing vote share in constituencies he already has while nice, makes no difference to the overall result.
Pandering to the hard right press just allows them to normalise their lies and begs the question why vote for someone who is going to dance to their tune.
True, that's the bit where I too need to hold my nose a bit*. But - who's a genuine alternative in reality? No-one else can beat the tories overall.
I agree that being able to say 'It's turned out to not be a good decision, it has caused a lot of damage to us / the economy, but it's what we voted for and so now I'm committed to doing the best I can to make it work' - should not be an issue. And it doesn't make him a brexiteer. But it would be weaponised nonetheless. Don't even give the opportunity; there will be time a-plenty to do that once in power.
* I don't - I'm voting Libdem, as per a few pages back I live in a Tory-LibDem marginal with Labour miles back, but it's about getting this lot out.
Not committing to rejoining is not ‘pandering to the hard right’ it’s an acceptance of the reality of both our electoral system and the uncomfortable fact that there are an awful lot of racists and anti-EU sentiment in seats Labour needs to win
Any commitment to rejoin the EU would result in a frenzy of pearl-clutching ‘denying the will of the people’ bollocks. Combine that with the inevitable ‘7 million Turkish rapists moving in next door to you’ headlines and it’s electoral suicide. An absolute gift to the Tories which they would ruthlessly exploit
With the polls as they are at the moment, Labour would have to be mad to throw a massive spanner in the works at this point, given the only beneficiary would be Tory Central Office
We need to get brexit done, the brexit "we" voted for , £350 million for the NHS and not leaving the single market.
Increasing vote share in constituencies he already has while nice, makes no difference to the overall result.
Ermmm, yes it does. It aint just the red wall seats he needs to worry about.
Don’t even give the opportunity; there will be time a-plenty to do that once in power.
Highly problematic for two key reasons.
The first is once something has become normalised it becomes very hard to push back on. We can see this with the useful idiots repeating the attack lines without the hardright even needing to bother doing much.
The second is you are normalising the say one thing and then do another. Which leads to the they are all the same and if you cant trust any of them you might as well go for the most extravagant lies.
It isnt simply about "about getting this lot out.". That kind of short term thinking is half the issue. If you chose the wrong tactics now then you fix their position as the norm and then a few years down the lines you end up with an even more extreme position.
In both the UK and the US there has been plenty of pandering to the loons. All that has happened is the baseline shifts.
Increasing vote share in constituencies he already has while nice, makes no difference to the overall result.
Ermmm, yes it does. It aint just the red wall seats he needs to worry about.
Please explain? What difference does winning by more in the seats already held make?
It isnt simply about “getting this lot out.”.
It really is!
Can you imagine the state this country would be in with a potential 7 more years of ‘this lot’
It’s all very nice having a wish list of rejoining the EU etc but right now we just NEED a non-Tory government
It’s that simple
The first is once something has become normalised it becomes very hard to push back on.
Not being in the EU has been normalised. It’s a fact of life now. It was a damaging mistake to throw away EU membership, but not one that can be reversed unilaterally. For the next 10-20 years it’s about divergence or restarting cooperation. Those are your real choices when helping choose a UK government with your vote. Labour promising to rejoin after the next election would be a political lie, whether it’s a vote winner or not.
Defeatist arguments that cannot be supported by the polling and the facts.
Goibg down this road means the end of the uk and a continuing slide into poverty and irrelevance for rUK
Again. If public opinion is shifting so far and fast to rejoin with labour and tories on a brexit stance hiw much more would it shift with labour on a rejoin stance.
Its absurd to say to say that tories can move public opinion but labour cannot
Snp have shown leadership and moved public opinion
You and him are also ignoring the galvanising effects a pro rejoin leadership would have
Of course those pro rejoin should be ignored. No way should they be entertained at all. That's called politics. (referring to both sides of the politicians i.e. they do the same to each others)
I look at those figues in the article and reach differnt cinclusions. Perhaps in part because unlike England living in Scotland I can see the positve effect on public opinion leadership can have.
I suggest Scotland takes the lead by pushing that agenda to the rest of UK and continue with their independence stance. If Scotland wants independence then go for it but trying to tell the rest of UK to rejoin ... yeah right. Go with your independence. Go in peace. If the pro rejoin think they can win then by all means focus on that topic and go.
(Note: I don't mind Scotland becoming an independent country, because I see the good in doing so but they need to "fight" for it.)
The concept of EU is the best for the political class and elite because they are practically untouchable, very difficult because they are protected by layers of bureaucracies, once they become part of the EU machine/system. If anyone of you hates your politicians now then multiply that in EU. Those politicians are oxygen wasters. No way should they be given those power to rule. Like the monarchies of the past, these so called EU leaders see themselves as above all else. Therefore, no way should they be give more power. At least Not from me.
Defeatist arguments that cannot be supported by the polling and the facts.
FACT
Yet among those who voted Conservative in 2019 – the potential swing voters on whom Starmer’s team are focused – only 16% said they would be more likely to back a Labour party promising to rejoin, while 48% said less likely.
How does that support anything other than a policy of rejoin will result in reduced vote share for labour, and the potential loss of the marginal seats that matter? A 32% negative vote swing. In a marginal constituency.
Look, I'm out. I get what you want but telling me the facts don't back up what needs doing, is just plain wrong.
Goibg down this road means the end of the uk and a continuing slide into poverty and irrelevance for rUK
I see no issue there at all of a breakup. Nothing. Nil.
In fact your concerns for UK sliding into poverty etc is actually defeatist considering the call for Scottish independence. What are you trying to say?
Also isn't that the intention of Scottish independence? That's the calling to break up the UK.
Poverty? People just have to do thing different after that or start innovating.
What difference does winning by more in the seats already held make?
You are assuming its still going to be safe. This isnt a hard concept.
Your cunning plan is pander to the redseats who used to be safe seats whilst telling others to go whistle.
Labour promising to rejoin after the next election would be a political lie, whether it’s a vote winner or not.
Yes I know. Which is why I said precisely that.
There is a large difference between that though and acknowledging the mistake and pointing out that the reasons people were given were flawed.
He could start by pointing out the lies of the leave campaign around what deal we would be getting vs what they have now decided on.
That way you arent accusing people of being idiots for voting leave. You are addressing what they were promised. This leads directly into restarting cooperation.
Then also address why some voted for brexit. I am not talking the simple minded accusing them all of being racists but the actual reasons many had.
Not least the idea of identikit politicians because they were all chasing a small subset of voters.
Bowing down to the hard right press either means we stick with a hardright brexit or he is planning to lie and then switch positions which help stick the they are all the same into memory and help out the biggest liars.
Then also address why some voted for brexit.
He did that in his last speech. The one that hung the “take back control” mantra on the localism proposals that came out of Gordon Brown’s work.
I go back to Brexit. Yes, a whole host of issues were on that ballot paper. But as I went around the country, campaigning for Remain, I couldn’t disagree with the basic case so many Leave voters made to me.
People who wanted public services they could rely on. High streets they could be proud of. Opportunities for the next generation. And all of this in their town or city.
…
It’s not unreasonable for us to recognise the desire for communities to stand on their own feet. It’s what Take Back Control meant. The control people want is control over their lives and their community.
So we will embrace the Take Back Control message. But we’ll turn it from a slogan to a solution. From a catchphrase into change. We will spread control out of Westminster. Devolve new powers over employment support, transport, energy, climate change, housing, culture, childcare provision and how councils run their finances.
OK got you. It's not telling them to go whistle, there's a raft of other reasons to vote labour still (not least to get the tories out) But to follow it up, is there any polling in 'safe seats' on the question of:
If labour do not change to a rejoin policy, are you more likely or less likely to vote for them at the next election.
Because odd as it sounds, staying with where we are (left EU, now need to make best of what we have done) is far less controversial among those who wish we hadn't than reversing the leave policy is to those that wanted it. It might cause a bit of shift but I think the numbers are smaller and not a 3:1 negative effect. IMHO at least
(and that's before the dark arts of electioneering, where it's perfectly possible that the message pitched to red wall / leave leaning marginals can be different to the message to safe / closer ties constituencies)
He did that in his last speech. The one that hung the “take back control” mantra on the localism proposals that came out of Gordon Brown’s work
And this is going to be absolutely front and centre of Labour policy from now until the election. Devolving real power to the regions and out of London. This is going to be really pushed as a contrast to the Tory instinct to hoard power in Westminster and treat us all like colonies to be ruled over. There’s not many people in northern seats feeling like they’ve ‘taken back control’ of anything
That and “Great British Energy”… policies that can benefit all of us, with extra work/attention/campaigning given over to bringing Leave voters along. I get that some people think that working to bring Leave voters onside, with targeted attempts to explain how they can answer their concerns with policies that can/could improve the UK for all of us, makes Labour look “pro Brexit”, but so be it. Bridging the divide will always raise the hackles of some people determined to change people’s minds over Brexit ASAP, rather than persuade them to choose a path forward after Brexit other than the one we’re currently stuck with.
How does the reform brexit differ to the labour brexit?
Will the red wallers be prepared to accept they were wrong or will they double down with this latest bunch of idiots?
Reform? Tice seems to be focussing on radically lowering direct taxation as the answer to everything. He knows the Truss debacle limits how the Tories can campaign in that area, so is selling fantasy politics he knows can use in a battle with them but that he’ll never have to implement and deal with the fallout from himself.
Anyway, is another London Mayor lining up his approach to try and get the PM job…? Might be a 15 year plan… whatever, won’t lose him support in London…
https://twitter.com/sadiqkhan/status/1614240395034267649?s=21
"We need greater alignment with our European neighbours - a shift from this extreme, hard Brexit we have now to a workable version that serves our economy and people."
👏🏼
That and “Great British Energy”… policies that can benefit all of us, with extra work/attention/campaigning given over to bringing Leave voters along.
Good luck to that "Great British Engergy" policies as I don't see any improvement in the immediate future.
Good luck to that “Great British Engergy” policies as I don’t see any improvement in the immediate future.
Ageed, it’ll take a few years to begin to pay off, and can’t even begin ‘till we’ve had a general election and people have voted the Conservatives out of office. The same goes for most of Labour’s policies. Sticking plaster policies will still also be needed for a good few years… no lasting change can happen “immediately”.
Meanwhile… some Brexit loud mouth grifters might be starting to feel the pennies drop…
https://twitter.com/tomhfh/status/1613965325195673620?s=21
No suggestion as to where those working-age people are to come from then?
What an absolute bell end that bloke is!
Rejoining the EU in the near term is politically fraught, as this thread shows. Rejoining the Single Market shouldn't be. It makes economic sense, it fixes the NI issue and it doesn't contradict the referendum result; staying in the Single Market was discussed at length as a possible form of Brexit, and it was Parliament's decision, not the people's.
The working age population of the U.K. is too small relative to the non working age population.
In order to afford a functional welfare state, we need more working age people.
— Tom Harwood (@tomhfh) January 13, 2023
I don't mind working till I drop tbh especially if I am able to start my own business.
If they want people to work longer then they need to relax some of the rules related to business start up, especially street food stall coz I find councils rather arsey about not letting people set up stalls in some empty part of the city.
If the govt can't look after the people, at least make it easy for people to look after themselves by giving them the ability to earn a living themselves.
I don’t mind working till I drop tbh especially if I am able to start my own business.
You’re not prepared to work in Social Care or any other public service though, are you? The population demographics mean that we need more carers, more health staff etc… and they need paying… it’s not just about you hoping you’re lucky enough to be well enough to work well into your 70s or even 80s yourself… you may be, or you may be less fortunate… but the sheer numbers of people who will be less fortunate are the issue here, not your individual circumstances.
PS: if you ever do start up a street food stall, I’ll be there ASAP to try out what you’re offering. I’ll come hungry!
This is going to be really pushed as a contrast to the Tory instinct to hoard power in Westminster and treat us all like colonies to be ruled over.
The problem is more deep seated than that. It's a treasury mantra on centralised cost control that the current government are happy to go along with as it suits their purpose. If Starmer is set on this course then it could all get a bit messy.
it could all get a bit messy
Ooo… is it time to start dusting of the “chaos with Ed Miliband” banners?
Wise not to mention Germany come the election, but shifting power away from central government in the way Labour proposals lay out looks a lot like a move towards the federal system they have there… something the UK needs to do if it’s to stay together and also move away from near total central control, in England at least, and genuinely build up the regions economically outside the South East.
You’re not prepared to work in Social Care or any other public service though, are you?
No, just starting my own business. If I can't take care of my own then I can't take care of others. They can tax me for my profit and use the money to pay someone else to provide for social care etc.
They can tax me for my profit and use the money to pay someone else to provide for social care etc.
Agreed. Assuming you can still work. And I hope you can, but none of us know what later life will bring us. Now, where do the extra young workers come from to run our services that will face so much extra demand from all the older people?
Agreed. Assuming you can still work. Now, where do the extra young workers come from?
I don't think there will be many young workers wanting to come into that sector tbh, unless the pay is very high as not many are gear up for care work.
In fact, not perfect in any way, is to pay family members for their efforts in looking after their elderly if they can or want to. (I think there is a system in place now?) Obviously, they need to be trained or provision put in place if they work full/part-time and system must be put in place to check. i.e. to avoid abuse of people and system etc. Those without family perhaps will need another system to take care of them.
Yes, carers allowance exists. You need to have savings or be prepared to live by meagure means. And of course not everyone has someone. And what happen when carers need care? But this still doesn’t solve the demographic issues. If many younger people give up work to become carers, who fills their posts? What if they work in public services and have to leave the workforce? We still need more young people here to cope with the additional demand on services from all our old people. Shuffling people into paid/supported carer roles doesn’t change that. Where do we get the extra young workers from?
So, do you armchair experts really think that you know more about what's best for Labour than the people who analyse and research this exact topic for a living, all day every day? Just wondering.
Slight distraction to Brexit.
Yes, carers allowance exists. You need to have savings or be prepared to live by meagure means.
I don't know how much they get but if it is not attractive enough, no one will bother. As I said in the NHS thread, it must be made attractive to ensure willingness. Allowances and perhaps other incentive must be included such as energy cost reduction/tax allowances if that make sense.
And what happen when carers need care?
The external care should be provided similar to people without family.
But this still doesn’t solve the demographic issues. If many younger people give up work to become carers, who fills their posts?
It all depend on the type of care needed I guess. Young people can still work full/part-time but provision must be included in the system so that those who are also carers will not be penalised if they have another job.
What if they work in public services and have to leave the workforce?
I guess that will depend on the care level provided, if they wish they can either go full time being a carer or part-time or simply use whatever provision they have by adding some of their own for external carer. Details need to be trial.
We still need more young people here to cope with the additional demand on services from all our old people.
Not necessary young people but people who are able. If you take too much out of the young labour force, there will be labour "shortage".
Shuffling people into paid/supported carer roles doesn’t change that. Where do we get the extra young workers from?
Not many people want to be carer, young or able etc, but many want to be cared when it is their turn. The care does not necessarily has to come from young people but any able body in the society or community. For example, in a community the task of carer can be specialised or divided like someone doing all the cooking for several people in that locality, someone check on them, someone clean, someone do something else etc. But all of them qualified for whatever provision/incentive provided by the system.
Slight distraction to Brexit.
But it isn’t. When ending Freedom of Movement, something that has only occurred because of Brexit… we made a recruitment problem in our struggling care and health systems even worse by deterring workers. Where do the workers come from now? That question needs still answering. It isn’t going away.
Anyway, is another London Mayor lining up his approach to try and get the PM job…?
If Sadiq Khan wants to be PM he's going to need to look a bit healthier. He looks like and anaemic zombie.
but none of us know what later life will bring us
Failing health, misery, depression, death. That's about it isn't it? 😀
As I've proposed before, give everyone a suicide pill at age 75 and reward them for using it by waiving inheritance tax on their estate, or for those below the IT threshold, pay the estate half the average health care cost for over-75s til death. Problem solved.
So, do you armchair experts really think that you know more about what’s best for Labour than the people who analyse and research this exact topic for a living, all day every day? Just wondering.
First thing you have to do is decide what the best outcome is. If you use the narrow definition of 'get the most seats possible at a general election' then I have no doubt they are doing what is 'best'.
However, I also have no doubt the Labour party will happily sacrifice doing what's best for the country in order to do what's best for the party.
If we subscribe to the theory that many on here are putting forward that once Labour are in power SKS will start moving toward the SM/CU/EU then he really will just be confirming to the electorate that all politicians lie and they are all the same. Definitely not good for the country.
If he gets elected and then does what he says and stays away from the SM/CU/EU then he will be harming the country in the name of maximizing the number of MPs returned.
I want to see Labour saying they are going to move toward the SM/CU and then actually doing it after getting elected. It might not be best for the party but it will be best for the country.
Given that politicians putting party before country is a large part of the reason the UK is where it is now I'd be happy to see less party first politics.
But it isn’t. When ending Freedom of Movement, something that has only occurred because of Brexit… we made a recruitment problem in our struggling care and health systems even worse by deterring workers. Where do the workers come from now? That question needs still answering. It isn’t going away.
No, that does not solve the problem. My view is that at that time there was economy or other incentive provided to attract workforce from other regions. It can still be done if there is better provision in terms of employment rules.
It can still be done if there is better provision in terms of employment rules.
Okay, so you answer is “make the UK a more inviting and easier place for people to come to from all over the world”…? If so, fair enough. You could have said that earlier. How do we make that happen?
My view is that at that time there was economy or other incentive provided to attract workforce from other regions.
If we incentivise people from other regions to relocate, why not bring in people from other countries? What's the difference?
I took him to mean other regions of the World. If they do mean that, it seems a sound practical approach, even if it’s not what other people wanting FoM to end sought or expect to happen.
Just a reminder that every Brexit voted for was different.
Okay, so you answer is “make the UK a more inviting and easier place for people to come to from all over the world”…? If so, fair enough. You could have said that earlier. How do we make that happen?
There must be a filtering process in place to avoid system being abused. Remember if the young people in the UK are not interested in the sector, I think it is the same for people from other places (the world and not just EU). How? The govt or people who need care have to pay for that unfortunately otherwise nobody want to work in the sector.
If we incentivise people from other regions to relocate, why not bring in people from other countries? What’s the difference?
The difference is that if the care is local then it might be more affordable since provision is already in place. For example, some of the basic infrastructure for the local carers are already in place, and providing care is just something extra that can be compensated via financial incentive in the form of tax, allowances etc to make up a living or good wage. Whereas if you get someone from other countries you need to provide an entirely "new" infrastructure for them. i.e. place to stay (unless live in carers), health provision, since they themselves might need care too if they fall ill.
and providing care is just something extra that can be compensated via financial incentive in the form of tax, allowances etc to make up a living or good wage
How about we just pay carers a higher salary instead of bringing in arbitrary and administratively complex tax breaks?
Whereas if you get someone from other countries you need to provide an entirely “new” infrastructure for them.
So people relocating from somewhere else in the UK don't need housing, schools, healthcare etc? If you bring people into an area from somewhere else you will need more local services. That applies whether they're coming from the UK or another country.
I want to see Labour saying they are going to move toward the SM/CU and then actually doing it after getting elected. It might not be best for the party but it will be best for the country.
That's what I'd LIKE. That would be the 'honest' thing to do. It also relies hugely on the country 'fessing up to the mistakes that have been made over the last 6 or so years, which I don't think we have the ability to do. In fact, rather than a general movement, it relies on the most anti-EU parts of the country holding their hands up and saying they've been duped. I don't see any prospect of that.
Consequently, I fear it would risk another Tory government and I don't think it's worth the risk.
How about we just pay carers a higher salary instead of bringing in arbitrary and administratively complex tax breaks?
Need both to be in place because not everyone fits into one category.
So people relocating from somewhere else in the UK don’t need housing, schools, healthcare etc? If you bring people into an area from somewhere else you will need more local services. That applies whether they’re coming from the UK or another country.
True, but I suspect people don't move around that often.
Wise not to mention Germany come the election, but shifting power away from central government in the way Labour proposals lay out looks a lot like a move towards the federal system they have there
Bring it on, along with the death of the charity sector at home because we pay our taxes and a revenue that puts the fear of god into evaders/avoiders like the Finanzampt. Charity abroad should still be in place but it has no place in UK, we're a (nominally) rich, first world country.
True, but I suspect people don’t move around that often.
Oh, I gave the chewkw the benefit of the doubt, silly me. I didn’t think anyone would propose that the solution to the ageing population of a county was to just shuffle people around the regions within it.
True, but I suspect people don’t move around that often.
So it's not a solution then, because that's what it would require. It's a pretty simple problem. We need more carers, nurses and doctors. If there are enough people in the UK to do the job but don't want to then the solution is to pay them more, and to sort out public services and infrastructure to support a mobile workforce, that needs lots of govt spending. If there are not enough people in the UK to do it - which I'm pretty sure is the case - then we need to bring people in from other countries. We almost certainly need to do both. Either way if we want a functioning social care system, and also a functioning health system in the short term then it needs lots of money spending and lots of immigration. Two things that the average brexiteer doesn't seem to want. 🤷♂️
I agree.