Forum menu
I didn’t know Streeting was gay until this thread.
you're not calling him "pet shop boy"
I read “configuration” is an alias for a former, banned member of STW.
If that's the case he must have been pretty obscure.
If that’s the case he must have been pretty obscure.
I'm not aware that the gender of this person is known. Regardless, I'm merely stating what I read.
Regardless, I’m merely stating what I read
Don't believe everything you read...
Actually, it is possible I might have been a 'member' of this, or a very similar forum, many years ago. Like, 10 or more. I think I wanted to ask some questions about a broken Rockshox Sid fork. I don't believe I was banned. I probably got bored and wandered off, as I had a far narrower attention span back then. I couldn't even tell you what username I had. I've been a member of so many forae I've lost count. Woodworking, Photography, design, art, all sorts. Even a local Labour Party one prior to the last election! 🤣 I think that dissolved quite quickly though. But hey; keep imagining whatever you want, if it gives you pleasure. Or you could, you know, get a life. Just a suggestion.
I didn’t know Streeting was gay until this thread
Neither did I, until I read that FT article I linked to.
Don’t believe everything you read…
A redundant point as I didn't say I believed it.
But hey; keep imagining whatever you want, if it gives you pleasure.
Thanks, but I don't need your permission.
Or you could, you know, get a life. Just a suggestion.
Having an imagination is now grounds for a personal attack? How sad.
Holy shit- the lightweight BBC favourite and all round economic embarrassment that is Kate Andrews gives the thumbs up to Wes Streeting.
https://twitter.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1590717109071273985?t=3_DBe-dL01U6AdrclTUXFg&s=19
Clear off you daft cow. You haven't ever said anything remotely useful that isn't failed free-market top trumps.
Kate Andrews gives the thumbs up to Wes Streeting.
She recognises, as I do, that it can be far easier for a right-wing Blairite government to pursue certain policies, which are generally associated with the Tories, than the Tories themselves.
From starting pointless wars to privatisation of public services/provisions.
Quote:
Either we accept ever-rising levels of tax (with the overall burden already at a 72-year high) and a pivot in Whitehall to being a health service with a country attached, or we start talking seriously about reform.
It says significant, too, that Labour is leading this discussion. It is politically easier for Streeting to do so than the new Health Secretary Steve Barclay, who would immediately get accused of “privatising” the NHS.
Right-wing Labour politicians are extremely useful to the Tories and their supporters who have to accept the inalienable fact that every few years they will have to hand power over to the Opposition.
Western parliamentary democracy cannot function with the same party constantly in power, it completely undermines the illusion that there is choice.
I love Alexei fair play
"Piece of hotel art made man"
LOL
About fracking time
Yup - one good statement but unfortunately it doesn't make up for him publicly stating he has good friends that are tories. The way he stated that disgusted me.
I'm not sure if our recent problems have come from the house of lords, have they?
No.
The house of lords has actually provided some protection against the nutters in the house of commons.
It would be better to reform the latter however he is buying into the claim thats impossible.
Admittedly it is hard given all the special interest groups who find it easy to bribe two parties rather than a multitude but there are options such as asking all those former ukip voters why their votes counted for nothing directly in westminster vs the EU (lets skip over the votes being wasted in the EU since they voted for a bunch of lazy bastards).
Same with the greens.
Lots and lots of opportunity to appeal to voting reform as being an answer to the political elite since, well, it is vs brexit which was the opposite.
Also agree reform is needed rather than abolishment.
This is just the same old soundbite populism.
Strange comment TJ… I have friends, and family, who are Tories. They are wrong about the politics this country needs, as current events make evident, in my opinion. I won’t disown them though.
The lords needs to go completely. No need for a second chamber assuming we have an actual democratic single chamber ie PR
Agreed TJ. I don’t see Starmer embracing PR for the commons though… that’ll take a very different Labour leader to happen. He might stop the removal of PR at regional levels though. That the Conservatives are doing this with little public push back is worrying.
Kelvin - the voters I pity.
The party and politicians I loathe with every fibre of my being. They have deliberately and cruelly caused massive harm to huge swathes of the citizens of this country. death, poverty, illhealth. It is utterly disgusting what they have done and done deliberately. Its not an accident. Its deliberate premeditated and utterly repugnant
many folk are insulated from this. I am not.
the point being that if Starmer can make friends with tory mps then he has no understanding of the reality of what they have deliberately done and the harm they caused.
Fair.
Also agree reform is needed rather than abolishment.
Did you read the article as opposed to just the misleading Guardian headline?
Starmer is proposing the reform of the House of Lords not its abolition :
"House of Lords reform is just one part of that … People have lost faith in the ability of politicians and politics to bring about change – that is why, as well as fixing our economy, we need to fix our politics.”
He added that it should be “truly representative” of the UK’s nations and regions, meaning it should have a clear role in safeguarding devolution.
He has my full support if not TJ's in achieving that. But it needs to really include proper devolved English regions imo.
meaning it should have a clear role in safeguarding devolution
That’s promising.
What he said on reform of parliament is fair enough as far as it goes - but its too timid.
Agreed. But compare it to what they Tories are doing… and who they are stuffing the HoL with.
It is based on Gordon Brown's recommendations which I don't know the details of.
Worth checking out. Brown’s recent comments on the HoL and making the Union work (it currently does not) have been spot on (people north of the border may not agree).
Brown is a died in the wool unionist. Devolutions main weakness is the lack of real power and revenue raising.
The days of the union are numbered and its not worked for Scotland for many decades. there is no way of making it work at all.
The days of the union are numbered and its not worked for Scotland for many decades.
Agreed.
there is no way of making it work at all.
If what Brown is proposing had come in 10 years ago, I think it could have worked. I agree that it is probably now too late.
Oh for chaos with Ed Miliband. 😿
Election promises. Always acted upon.
Brown was the architect of "the vow" for devo max. It never happened. He is not trusted north of the border
Please note - I only mention Scotland not because I have forgotton Wales and NI but because I don't know enough about their politics
The other thing Starmer said which I do like is he would ban mps taking "consultancies" which will all know is legalised bribery
But again too timid. all second jobs should be banned all investments must be put into proper blind trusts etc etc
We have an incredibly corrupt parliament - just they legalised the corruption
No need for a second chamber assuming we have an actual democratic single chamber ie PR
That's quite an assumption, don't you agree?
Did you read the article as opposed to just the misleading Guardian headline?
Nope. There's a certain irony there, don't you think?
Oh yes. But if we had a properly democratic first chamber that actually reflected votes cast we would have no need for a second chamber. We only need a revising chamber due to the undemocratic nature of the HOC.
While the Lords needs scrapping/reforming, most people I talk to are far more worried about the shocking state if the Commons.
'We only need a revising chamber due to the undemocratic nature of the HOC.' Oh boy!!! Learnt nothing from the last 12 years?
A revising chamber is a very good idea. What about a revising chmaber selected by PR as you're a long way from getting a PR HOC?
Makes sense to me wbo.
wbo - we need to fix the cause of the issue ie the undemocrativc HOC first then no need for a second chamber IMO
True. But it doesn't have to be one then t'other. There's things we could do pretty easily, like minimum standards to be a lord, stronger minimum attendance (since iirc the current rule has been used only 8 times ever)- stick in a category of voting vs honorary lords so that pms can still give the title out to cronies if they want or so that people can transition up and down from voting to honorary depending on performance- like having a first team and reserves. Obviously the lords spiritual need fixed, I'm not 100% against it but if it was proportional, and tbh I think that'd be pretty funny. Probably most of all a reversal of the bloat- something like the 1999 "reset".
I'm all for "fix the house of commons and then the lords can just be done away with" but that's a bit like having a "things to do" list that starts with "learn esperanto" and has "do the dishes" second.
Yup, don't let perfect get in the way of better.
Ian Byrne selected despite Starmer's 'leadership'. Result!
I doubt that Starmer will lose much sleep over the occasional working-class candidate committed to the Labour Party's founding principles managing to get through the reselection process without his cohorts finding some spurious excuse to bar them.
He has been overwhelmingly successful in his relentless battle with the left and his determination to pack the PLP with compliant and pointless blairite clones like himself.
He has been overwhelmingly successful in his relentless battle with the left and his determination to pack the PLP with compliant and pointless blairite clones like himself.
You saying that you're not a fan?
I can happily go along with an elected second chamber providing it is pr.
Fptp is crap but they are clearly not willing to change that for the commons so we need the "lords" to be pr even if it does give a voice to some lunatics
And worth remembering, not all of those in the Lords are party funders - quite a few have proper knowledge and experience of key areas whose input scrutinising legislation is much needed. Hell, some of the firmer ministers (from all sides) have the experience and benefit of hindsight that should help rein in idiotic policies.
Without wanting to distract from the non-issue of the house of lords, I saw this over the weekend which was very interesting. Neoliberalism appears to be dead and buried. There's a big opportunity here for the Labour party if Starmer and Reeves can take their heads out of the sand and see the bigger picture.
https://themarket.ch/interview/russell-napier-the-world-will-experience-a-capex-boom-ld.7606
I can happily go along with an elected second chamber providing it is pr.
One problem with a voted for revising chamber - regardless of the method chosen, (and you can be damned sure that neither Lab or the Cons will in favour of and form of PR) is that it just becomes a different way for the two parties to manipulate it - as they do now with the Lords. Unless the population has a say in who the candidates are, we'll just be offered a "choice" by the parties, you could just end up with the Senate/House stalemates that defines US politics.
I think we're overdue some parliamentary reform, but as @Northwind points out, it's quite far down the list of things to do