Forum menu
See that lack of imagination I was talking about up the thread
It's not imaginative to just "import" skilled foreigners (as if they were commodities) to fill gaps in the UK labour market and ignore the consequences. That's exactly what's been done since 1945 and what got us here. We need to solve the structural problems and move the people already here into higher value roles - not just ponce off foreign countries' education and public health services.
He’s a fully signed up gooner eng-er-lan type,
Loving the reinvention of Starmer as a casual that'll stamp on a 19 year old's legs outside a pub near Elland Rd after 15 Holsten Pils on the train up from Kings Cross. Makes a change from him being called the most boring, unambitious middle manager on the planet.
Apart from the obvious point here...
What is the obvious point? I am trying to figure out whether the threat to stop arms exports to Israel is likely to be primarily motivated by genuine humanitarian concerns, or whether it is an attempt by ministers to cover their arses, in the event of them being taken to court for arming a country which they know is committing war crimes with the supplied weapons .
Obviously the latter doesn't concern Starmer - he cannot be prosecuted for not calling on the UK government to stop arms export licences to Israel.
Apart from the obvious point here…
That the headline is making.
It’s not imaginative to just “import” skilled foreigners (as if they were commodities) to fill gaps in the UK labour market and ignore the consequences.
I never claimed it was imaginative, I also said it was a short term plan while the longer term plan (actually filling the gaps in the UK Labour Market with training, incentives, decent wages, new buildings, process changes etc,. where required). When the longer term plan is complete (n years) then the import of labour stops as the n years Visa are running out.
So would you wait 5-10 years before seeing any improvements or would you rather see something in a year?
(you don't need to answer that one)
@kerley it's not about what you want but rather what is realistic.
I work for a company many orders of magnitude smaller than the NHS, recruitment for a couple of positions can take 3 months and that's just from the ad going out. Then there's the basic training that can take up to a year just to be allowed to work on your own without mentorship. For the sort of drive you're talking about you're probably talking the guts of a year minimum just to plan for it never mind start the actual process.
It's not just nurses that's needed, it's admin staff (that would allow medical staff to actually do medical things), estate staff (if the NHS wasn't doing what it did it would have been shut down by the HSE years ago) and probably loads more folk behind the scenes.
I'd say you're not going to start seeing the benefits before 3-4 years as the organisation adapts and gets used to it's new norm. It's doable, it's noticeable within a term but a year is just completely unrealistic.
And I wouldn't be buggering about with anything else until the main body is sorted (or at least significantly improved), that's just asking for trouble. Second term goals.
"So would you wait 5-10 years before seeing any improvements or would you rather see something in a year?"
A hospital has a 30 year lifespan and they're unbelievably complicated buildings. In the dialysis unit near me, the wiring and gas piping for each bed had to be designed on a computer before any physical works could begin. This is going to shock you, but actually there are not many people in the world that have those design skills and they're busy as hell - and that's just one tiny element of designing and building a hospital.
You seem to be one of these "stuff and nonsense" types that thinks that all that is required is to have a gästarbeiter in a bulldozer pushing earth around begin work, and then everything else follows. This is the Boris Johnson approach that involves him getting photographed in a high viz vest and then buggering off. Actually, it's not the case that everyone else is slow and unimaginative, and that you're the visionary. It's that some of this stuff is very, very complicated and takes time.
There are some people who get stuff done and others who just put up excuses. I will leave it at that.
Let's not improve things because someone on the internet said it's going to be tough.
What hell kind of logic is this?
Do you understand how an economy expands. It uses residual labour and resources that could be directed away from less important private projects to more necessary infrastructure projects.
The only limitation are resources - granted.
As long as we're not at full employment then this can be done without crowding out the private sector. Of course there are hurdles.
Things are so far behind there needs to be a huge push in the right direction which will have a positive benefit anyway.
Let’s not improve things because someone on the internet said it’s going to be tough.
Pretty sure they want to improve things, but to be realistic on the timescales for achieving the aims.
I've known two things about government over time, first is if they try to do something fast it invariably costs a lot more, or if they try to 'streamline' the timescales without budgeting for it, they end up late and over budget, even though it arrives in a timescale that was originally planned, and the government department get a kicking, which tends to mean the hierarchy take it out on those who do the work, further demoralising them and making them leave.
There are some people who get stuff done and others who just put up excuses.
You sound like some the managers I've had over the years, we need to do something, anything now! Results lots of pissed off people, wasted resources and we're worse off than when we started. This is the Tory way, lots of noise and ignore the detail and nothing delivered.
Meanwhile those of us who actually understand how things work quietly get on with the job doing the boring hard miles and actually make positive sustainable improvements.
Meanwhile those of us who actually understand how things work quietly get on with the job doing the boring hard miles and actually make positive sustainable improvements.
No one is claiming it’s easy, quite the opposite. But the current narrative coming from mainstream parties is that it’s unaffordable which is total bollocks. What’s worse? Trying to do something and failing, or not bothering at all?
"Let’s not improve things because someone on the internet said it’s going to be tough."
FFS, absolutely no one has said this apart from you, because it doesn’t fit your preferred narrative.
We need to push for improvements as quickly as we can - that involves planning, recruitment, training, resources, msterials and all of those require time to make sure the money we're throwing at it is not wasted getting carried away and ****ing up.
Let’s not improve things because someone on the internet said it’s going to be tough.
FFS, absolutely no one has said this apart from you
Which I assume is why it wasn't offered as an actual quote. I believe that the correct term is 'paraphrasing'.
Which in relation to what was being said is quite reasonable imo. There seems to be an attitude by some that it better not to bother that to try and then fail.
What’s worse? Trying to do something and failing, or not bothering at all?
According to our very likely next Secretary of State for Health trying to do something and failing is worse than not bothering at all.
In fact he goes as far as saying that no hope is better than false hope. Yup, he is indeed offering us a large dollop of "no hope". And apparently we should be grateful for that.
"False hope is worse than no hope. Labour won’t make promises it can’t keep"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/09/labour-promises-tory-mismanagement-public-finances
I particularly liked the last paragraph in that article:
"Imagine Britain leading the G7 with the highest sustained economic growth, with a million more jobs in green energy"
After making the case of not making promises that might not be delivered he then offers his readers the sunlit uplands. How on earth can he guarantee that the other six G7 countries will perform worse than the UK under a Labour government?
And where are those "million more jobs in green energy" going to come from? Since writing that piece Starmer and Reeves have abandoned the hope they temporarily gave us with their £28bn green pledge. In fact it turned out to be nothing more than false hope.
Streeting concludes his piece with:
A platform you can trust us to deliver
In reality less than 12 months later you cannot even trust what he actually wrote in that article.
"Let’s not improve things because someone on the internet said it’s going to be tough.
What hell kind of logic is this?"
Dunno, you might get an answer if you tag the person who actually said that because from here it all looks like a leap on your part.
Nobody is saying do nothing, what people are saying is that expecting meaningful results for that specific example within a year is daft.
"There are some people who get stuff done and others who just put up excuses. I will leave it at that."
Jesus wept, Douglas Renham was parody ffs...
Sigh - we've already got no hope.
I'm glad we've decided to not bother - just let the wealthy have their cake then. No point moaning about the Tories if there's no point then.
False hope is worse than no hope. Labour won’t make promises it can’t keep
Spot on.
And where are those “million more jobs in green energy” going to come from?
The switch to renewables by 2030, and improving our housing stock and business processes.
I’d prefer more of those jobs to be in the public than private sector through much higher state investment, but the pushing of these green issues with policy will create them anyway.
I’m glad we’ve decided to not bother
Who said that? You’ve decided it’s your way or no way.
False hope is worse than no hope. Labour won’t make promises it can’t keep
Spot on.
If you agree with that claim by Streeting then perhaps you can explain why he is talking about Britian leading the G7 with the highest sustained economic growth, whilst describing it as "a platform you can trust us to deliver".
He cannot not possibly know that a Labour government will deliver the highest sustained economic growth of the G7.
And if they don't it will have turned out to have been a "false hope". Streeting doesn't even bother sticking to his own "don't offer false hope" mantra.
If no hope is better than false hope, as Streeting boldly claims, surely he should be trumpeting the fact that it is very unlikely that under a Labour government that the UK will have the highest sustained economic growth of the G7?
Spot on.
And that is why we have a politics which delivers crumbling public services and next to nothing for normal people. If those of us who claim to hate what the tories stand for can’t summon the will to to do better then there’s no point. Depressing.
Again, no one is saying they don’t want, and expect, better… except the same naysayers over and over again looking to blame Labour for the state the country has become under the Tories. And these same people are already looking to blame Labour for how long it is going to take to fix the damage… before they are even in government… they might not even make it into government! The ship will take time to turn around once/if the Conservatives are moved on… promising the economy and society can change direction on a sixpence would be a mistake… for all the reasons already outlined.
except the same naysayers over and over again looking to blame Labour for the state the country has become under the Tories.
Did you write that nonsense with a straight face? No one has blamed "Labour for the state the country has become under the Tories". What a truly ridiculous claim.
And the "naysayers" are those who have given up and are claiming that Labour cannot be expected to make a very significant difference - which is all that anyone is asking for.
Not silly claims about the highest sustained economic growth of the G7. something which is just as likely unachievable as achievable and is directly linked to how well other G7 countries perform - being 3rd if they all perform really well will be great, being first if they all perform really badly not so much.
And yet over and over again the same couple of individuals will back whatever Starmer says, even if it is the complete opposite to what he said the previous month, and which they also totally supported.
For them we have in Starmer the perfect politician who never says anything wrong. Or so it would appear.
And yet over and over again the same couple of individuals will back whatever Starmer says, even if it is the complete opposite to what he said the previous month, and which they also totally supported.
Simple maths puts them in their place.
Ms Reeves said Labour would "not waver from strong fiscal rules", and it would continue with the Conservative's current rule that public debt must be falling as a share of the economy by the fifth year of an official forecast.
Reduce the public 'debt' you reduce the government's contribution to the economy. Bye bye growth, bye bye state investment and bye bye any semblance of improvement.
That's called not even having a go.
But somehow they will spin that as a good thing. Let's get behind Reeves and Starmer because the ace in their pack is they're not going to do anything at all.
Genius thinking that and something to get behind.
It will totally fall apart very quickly.
And these same people are already looking to blame Labour for how long it is going to take to fix the damage
You are missing the point spectacularly although not unexpected.
From day 1 they will be held accountable and we will be told that it is all down to them.
That they are binding themselves to act like the tories wont help them. The tories will deny all knowledge just like they complain about deregulation resulting in a lot of the problems in 2008 despite their only issue at the time is the deregulation wasnt extreme enough.
They have a limited time to deliver change.
If they dont then people will be looking elsewhere and the populist right, despite causing most of the damage, will be happy to take advantage.
They have to provide a clear cut line between them and the tories. Serving the centrists vs everyone else will just help the populist line of they are all the same.
So in 2029 we will be screwed.
"I’m glad we’ve decided to not bother"
Direct quote please, put up or shut up.
Labour says it will stick with workers’ rights plans despite Mandelson remarks
"Keir Starmer’s new deal for working people would give employees more rights such as protections against unfair dismissal, sick pay and parental leave from day one but many business groups are lobbying to water it down."
Excellent news - both the proposed employee enhanced rights and the fact that Starmer has chosen to ignore the Prince of Darkness.
How any member of the Labour Party can claim that it is acceptable to unfairly dismiss someone in the first two years of their employment is beyond me.
Prince of Darkness.
How any member of the Labour Party can claim that it is acceptable to unfairly dismiss someone in the first two years of their employment is beyond me.
I think you answered your own question there.
Rupert Soames, the new president of the CBI, told the FT last month that the UK needed to avoid a “European model” of employment rights and resist excessive regulation that undermined productivity in order to rediscover its competitiveness.
God forbid we do anything they do. It's not really anything new though is it? It's just rewinding the clock with a little extra (day 1 as opposed to 2 months). Have they actually come out and said that though? Restoring rather than making something new.
Ed Miliband still exists... popping up today to talk about the new publicly owned power generation company... and the 2030 goal for fossil fuel free electricity generation...
[ I'm listening to PM on Radio4... presume he's doing the rounds though ]
Labour says it will stick with workers’ rights plans despite Mandelson remarks
I would rather they hadn't voiced their support for the reforms, now they have it can only be a matter of time until the inevatable u-turn.
There are some people who get stuff done and others who just put up excuses. I will leave it at that.
I've worked for many Managers and 'Leaders' over the years who spouted bollox like this too.
One of the benefits of having spent 30 years in a audit-type roles is having the ability & experience to see straight through these kind of people AND write their 'post-mortems' 🙂
He's done that many U-turns, what's the odds that once elected he U-turns again and turns out to be an orthodox Trotskyist republican and Reeves starts banging on about absolute and relative surplus value?
Hmmmm, thought not.
I have no idea if Starmer will perform a U-turn on workers rights, hopefully he won't. But I do know that that Starmer is occasionally consistent and reliable over certain things.
This includes being supportive of Israelis who are accused of war crimes. Back in the days when he was Director of Public Prosecutions he used his position to protect an Israeli politician who faced arrest for alleged war crimes.
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL5E7L62ND/
"Britain's Director of Public Prosecutions has blocked an attempt to seek the arrest of Israeli opposition leader Tzipi Livni for alleged war crimes during a visit to Britain, officials said on Thursday."
European prosecutors were less sympathetic than Starmer over Israeli politicians accused of war crimes
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/1/23/tzipi-livni-cancels-brussels-trip-amid-threat-of-arrest
"Ex-foreign minister cancels Brussels visit after prosecutors said they would question her over war crimes allegations."
Starmer - consistently helping Israeli politicians accused of war crimes over many years.
As I said, UK law… put in place by a government without any Labour involvement. What’s the complaint here then, that he did his job… but you’d rather he acted as he if was creating law not acting within it? What would the basis of arrest be? How would that get around UK law?
As for the lack of transparency… who’s decision is it now to withhold the details of the process that occurred back then… and is there anything unusual about that happening in this case?
It's his previous employer's decision what to release under FOI, and when starmer was employed as a lawyer it was his job to advise on the law, and make prosecution decisions accordingly.
I expect to see more of these types of empty smear as an election nears.
Maybe it's worth looking two years earlier when Livni had the same issue with universal jurisdiction charges against her, which were dropped and she got an apology from the PM, Gordon Brown, at the time.
I believe there are groups with links in the middle east who raise these charges in Europe and the UK against a lot of Israeli personnel, i don't think there's ever been an arrest made under this of an Israeli official, anywhere, but hey, that would ruin yet another 'it's all Keir's fault' post from some fringe lunatic off twitter 🤣
Mark Blyth knows his economics.
https://twitter.com/MkBlyth/status/1772557398697201977?t=TmBKADmIAf3QscwvQk5r4A&s=19
I bet he's proud of what he's done to keep Assange incarcerated without trial, 'don't you dare' drop the allegations to the Swedes. Sums him up.
https://twitter.com/sjwrenlewis/status/1773256490884751605?t=ec0h6cD74ABvOSjw3YoVtg&s=19
Well yeah of course.
https://twitter.com/StephanieKelton/status/1773323982990610865?t=h8ulZY74rQmXhrOjAz4J7Q&s=19
Oh.
https://twitter.com/Feargal_Sharkey/status/1773252137440395616?t=GwhZsz8841Ism_5oSKgLZg&s=19
Got ya.
Do it once and **** them all off.
I'm sure there will be someone along in minute to defend Sunak and Starmer's position on this. Because they're the same.
https://twitter.com/premnsikka/status/1674163643196354560?t=V8H23WxRqBKPovZHh3iAaQ&s=19
Imagine pursuing neoliberal solutions when all you end up with is a shit fest?
Worthwhile posting this here, You’ve probably heard of Gary by now.
Yeah I watch him a fair bit.
Look at Reform in this poll:
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1773287328137531826?t=Xz0fyImiYgnzto_Tjmj3DA&s=19
https://twitter.com/wethinkpolling/status/1773364694352322780
The very latest opinion poll, which was conducted today and yesterday, gives Reform UK a much less generous level of support.
The YouGov poll giving Labour only 40% share of the vote is worrying. That is exactly the same level of support that Labour received in the 2017 general election - which they didn't win.
Obviously the big difference is that the Tories are now deeply unpopular and losing a significant amount of votes to Reform UK, but with a margin of error of about 3% if Reform UK voters suddenly back the Tories on election day, the very thing papers like the Daily Mail and the Sun might urge them to do, it could deny Starmer a majority.
Which would be a disaster in my opinion - even more claims of the need to "compromise" undoubtedly.
Just shows around 35% of voters really don't care. To bump up their vote share though Labour need to move further right or at least appeal more to the leftish end on the conservative voters. Moving leftwards might hoover up a few Lib dem / green votes but the bulk of votes needed are more right wing.
The worrying thing is people still hate Labour, many can't get over the Corbynesque caricatures.
Had a really depressing conversation the other day with a neighbour, typical working class Tory, got his own business having worked his way up from being on the tools, it's all the fault of immigrants and the conservatives have looked after him (business grants, Covid support etc. all on the back of him probably not declaring everything through the books, it's the sort of business that can put jobs through cash without leaving a trace). The most mental thing he said was all Labour politicians are corrupt and looking out for themselves, bit rich given his (probable) tax avoidance status, but eff me given the behaviour of the Tories over the last 10 years he still levelled that accusation at Labour MPs. Really don't know what Labour need to do to overcome dyed in the wool prejudice like that.
Mind you he topped it off saying he thought he might vote reform. When I pointed out Reform are effectively a privately run vehicle for various mouth pieces bank rolled by a really dubious individual his eyes just glazed over, cos you know immigrants and stuff.
One thing that is signalling the white flag for the tories is the amount of MPs who are not standing at the next election, this will mean a lot of fighting going on within the tory party for nominations, will Rishi get his type of candidate, or are the weirdo's at the right of him going to start pushing for their candidates.
Labour just need to not get bogged down in any of the fighting, or any of the negative press, which is already spinning up with the usual 'do you still beat your wife' questions for the labour leadership.
To bump up their vote share though Labour need to move further right
I know it sounds crazy but how about not doing that and instead coming up with a compelling argument which makes the case for alternative policies and points out that Tory right-wing policies are wrong?
You cannot expect voters to believe your policies are correct if you have so little faith in them yourself.
Really don’t know what Labour need to do to overcome dyed in the wool prejudice like that.
But you just gave your solution - move further right.