Forum menu
For corporations, maybe better would be to have an opt-in for shareholders to political donations, funding and lobbying, to be taken from the dividends (after tax), no dividends no political funding that year. I would still only allow 500 per person/organisation per year and those contributions would be the "individuals" contribution, the corporation would just be the collection agency and could top up the with their own 500 (for the whole organisation not per shareholder) contribution to the fund.
Same rules for unions and members, 500 per max.
If the shareholders/ union members opt in through several companies/unions/whatever their total must still not exceed 500.
Imagine how much that would strengthen democracy, it would make a bigger impact than proportional representation, and a far far bigger impact than modernising the house of lords.
I see that Reform have selected their candidate for the Gorton by-election. I've never heard of him, which is hardly surprising as apparently he's a presenter on GB News
Of course he is.
He said ""It's a chance for hard-working, law-abiding people, taxpaying people from this seat to have their say on Keir Starmer"
I don't know if he's ever been to Gorton, but if he's setting the benchmark that high, demanding all three of those criteria, then he may struggle to find any of those.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gr06y3n9zo
Same rules for unions and members, 500 per max.
political levy is way less than that per individual
Yep I know, but to stop the right wingers whingeing, any political levy would be part of the 500 max that is allowed per person/organisation. That should easily cover what 99% of people would want to give or being able to afford to give, and would prevent their voices being washed away by a few wealthy arseholes pumping in 100's of millions to bend political will to their advantage.
personally I'd take 'extremely' wealthy people out of politics entirely. Make them choose either wealth or voting (or donating), but not both. If your money insulates you from the day to day decisions the rest of us have to make, then you shouldn't get a say in how the rest of us organise ourselves..
Is this even a surprise? I mean it was definitely not really on Labour's watch as such. But why things like this aren't seized by the current Labour party is beyond me. People are suffering and things are crapped over, and all they can do is just tweak little things at the edges. There's been no economic development in my local town for years.
(We literally just had an 87 year old die after falling over a pot-hole.)
It's almost as if you don't fix things - it gets worse over time. Driven by the idea that the private sector and market economics always knows the way. Scared of genuine intervention. It's basic stuff.
Where is Starmer? Oh - yeah he's in China. That's a long way to run from current state of things. Of course the other issue is Labour will get the blame for this too.
Why the hell are they so scared shitless of the state? Literally it's the only thing that has the power to fix for public purpose. The only way out of the McSweeney-fest and Reformalong - is to understand people will vote on their material conditions. And they will reject this government if they don't do a transformative job. The bitter right will always be given an easy ride compared as they're better at narratives. Polasnki ought to be giving lessons to the Labour party on narratives.
Is this even a surprise? I mean it was definitely not really on Labour's watch as such.
It's certainly an issue.
I don't do shopping and for the first time since Covid I had reason to go into Derby City Centre on Saturday. It came across to me that anywhere outside of the main shopping centre (Derbian) is very run down. Vape Shops, Candy Shops, Takeaways, Nail Bars, Cheap Tat Shops, boarded up shops and the pavements full of electric Just Eat bikes.
It was like two different demographics with the traditional 'western' culture existing in the shopping centre and the 'immigrants' taking up slack in the shops left vacant.
I'm a Labour voting country dweller and live in my own little bubble and rarely venture into cities, but I can easily see how Reform target these inner cities and gain support.
I don't know if he's ever been to Gorton
He did his post-doc political studies in Manchester, so no doubt he knows the area. Whether in a new constituency that 40% Muslim, has a high density of graduates, and undergrads; his comments and appearances on GB news will do him any good remains to be seen. Personally I'd be happy to stick my neck out and say that Reform's chances in the seat are pretty slim.
rarely venture into cities
Our high streets are in economic decline because people don’t spend in them the way they used to. Doubly true of cities and towns that are near more affluent and successful city centres that are a bigger draw.
rarely venture into cities
Our high streets are in economic decline because people don’t spend in them the way they used to. Doubly true of cities and towns that are near more affluent and successful city centres that are a bigger draw.
That's not the only reason.
Economic development and improving spaces, and making them places that you want to go is part of it.
(Crime puts people off for example.)
Besides, they were going downhill before online shopping took hold.
Either way it's a problem that needs radical investment by local and central government if we want to live in better places.
Again, leaving it to the market ruins bloody everything.
Labour need to do something other than tossing around with a visa-free 30 day trip to China. Life-changing stuff that for a huge percentage of people that one.
Besides, they were going downhill before online shopping took hold.
Yes, they were. I didn’t even mention the internet, mostly because the biggest event to diminish the high street was supermarkets relocating out of them, closely followed by most of the other retailers. Driving to shops away from the high street is the main thing that killed the high street. We all killed the high street. Some, in major cities with lots of add on hospitality and night life will continue to thrive. Smaller high streets that were mostly retail have been killed by our habits, and expecting the government to some how keep them afloat without customers isn’t going to happen.
Oh, knocking attempts to improve trading relations is just dull. It’s the new “Brexit doesn’t matter, we’ll just make/buy our own” isolationist nonsense. Trade matters. Trade with China matters more than it should, but hey, we know why we have a PM scratching around for every little bit of trade advantage he can find… rather than leveraging the power of a trading block for long term more symmetrical deals with China, and others. “We” made it so that our government would have to spend more time and energy on international arrangements, because “we” didn’t want to be involved with a trans-Europe body working on that with us.
It’s what our ministers do now. From the PM down. Pointing at them doing this and asking “why are they spending time on this” post-Brexit is like pointing at long passport queues and asking “why are they spending time on this”…
Labour need to do something other than tossing around with a visa-free 30 day trip to China. Life-changing stuff that for a huge percentage of people that one.
Im not a Labourist by any stretch but i actually think Starmer is playing a good game on international politics. I see the China trip more about influencing Trump more than anything about China
Labour need to do something other than tossing around with a visa-free 30 day trip to China. Life-changing stuff that for a huge percentage of people that one.
Im not a Labourist by any stretch but i actually think Starmer is playing a good game on international politics. I see the China trip more about influencing Trump more than anything about China.
This is becoming a thing now because it's the only thing some observers can draw on.
It's a dud. I don't see the metrics.
Ask the average voter what they care about?
People see what's in front of them. They've had years of being shafted with broken political outcomes. The lack of enthusiasm for fixing doorstep problems is without precedent.
For me it's clearly in his managerial style to flee from the real problems and use this as a smokescreen.
Johnson did this too and Centrists spent a considerable amount of time pointing this out.
Starmer will never ever exert any sort of useful influence on Trump. He's too weak.
All that said China demonstrates the key to much more sophisticated internal investment. The key is that they've used massive amounts of investment to leap ahead of nearly everyone in terms of technology, infrastructure and climate. We should go to them not for their money but to take their resources, experitse and exports for our benefit.
If Starmer could learn something from China that is the power of their own investment.
(Also balancing stuff here but China hardly has had the best human rights record are people now just ignoring that because ... Trump / ICE?)
It's amazing how some leaders are not noticing the shift in globalisation, and how badly prepared countries were to not build their own strategy. The change is happening in front of them.
Mark Carney sort of woke up about this recently.
We simply can't carry on like it was before the pandemic. That system has fallen in itself.
If Starmer could learn something from China that is the power of their own investment.
Exactly. I was reminded of the call Carter had with Trump back in 2019 and he told him why China were going to get ahead of the US. Spend more money on internal investment helping your own companies and country get ahead and don't spend it all on wars and interfering in other countries. Isn't one of the very, very few Brexit benefits that the UK could do that?
Ask the average voter what they care about?
Sovereignty? Pot holes? Doctors with accents?
Think Mandelson could do for Starmer. Instead of kicking him out of the party and forcing him to testify in the US Starmer not only had him as a backroom advisor but then appointed him as Ambassador the the US! No doubt he thought someone who hangs out with sexual predators and peadophiles was a great match with Trump the sexual predator and potential peadophile but it hasn't quite worked out that way. The whole thing reeks of elite 'not a real person' culture and Labour are right in the middle of it. Not a good look with elections coming up.
Indeed... tell the Mandelson "revelations" but with "Reform" instead of "Labour" inserted in as the party name and it would make much the same sense. None of this will play well with the voters Labour need to persuade to come out and vote for them in May's elections at all. The people who'll shrug about Mandelson's lies about Epstein weren't going to vote Labour anyway. So many people will stay home rather than bother to vote Labour this year. Not sure what happens next, or that a leadership battle would help Labour (or the country).
Not sure what happens next, or that a leadership battle would help Labour (or the country).
Think it's fairly likely what happens next. In the absence of Burnham Starmer will cling on til the next election, lose to reform then resign leaving whoever is left to pick up the shattered remnants of whatever is left of the Labour party. Rayner hasn't got the clout to challenge Starmer, and Streeting doesn't have the security of a safe seat to be leader so Starmer is fairly safe I reckon. Burnham was the only option to pose a serious challenge. Starmer and McSweeney have got the Labour party by the balls and they don't intend to let go any time soon.
Burnham was never going to be leader. He did have the mindset to force a leadership battle though. He'd have lost it. Yet again.
Great timing! Honestly if Labour are going to let perverts, paedos and rapists into their party they need to teach them to cover their tracks better.
Think Mandelson could do for Starmer.
I don't think it even moves the dial. I don't think folks could pick out Mandelson in a line-up, let alone remember what his job was.
You know that Norris was suspended from Labour last year and sits as an independent, right?
Sounds like Mandelson the "cross bencher" is going to find it very hard to return to parliament.
You know that Norris was suspended from Labour last year and sits as an independent, right?
He stood as a Labour MP. That's all people will care about.
I don't think it even moves the dial.
On the contrary, what it does is feed the 'they're all the same' narrative. There's barely a person I know locally who intends to vote in May or even a general election let alone anyone who'll vote for Labour. Starmer's main selling points were managerial competence, moral probity and 'we're not like the tories'. He's failed spectacularly on all of them.
Yup, the "stay at home" vote just got that much bigger.
Something else here... it should be Starmer pushing for this investigation after the most recent revelations, but having appointed him so recently he's not just on a back foot, he's wobbling backwards on his heel... so it's down to the last Labour PM to ask for it...
No longer being in Labour isn't nearly enough... relinquishing his place in the Lords won't be enough... his correspondence with Epstein while in government smells of total corruption... if the actions suggested by what's come out this week can be fully corroborated, including payments for them, we're looking at Misconduct in public office, aren't we?
I think it likely pedo mandlescum will be facing police questioning at some point over these leaks if not his Epstein contacts
on the plus side this could see Morgan McSweeney out as he apparently convinced starmer to put him up as ambassador, placating starmers objections
labour also trying to use this to force Tories onto a cross party bid to reform the lords, which is looong overdue - especially with the prospect of farage appointing potentially hundreds of wronguns
It just reveals the motivation behind "new labour", Blair is exactly the same, look at the funding of his foundation and what it promotes, they were happy to sell the country out to the corporations for their payoffs.
And lets not forget this is Starmers DNA, that's why he makes such bad decisions, because he is owned by the oligarchs every bit as much as those he models himself on, he works for the wealthy not for the nation, he is a greedy right wing economic zealot.
The legislation going through parliament this year doesn’t really look like it’s being written for “oligarchs”. And despite scrabbling around for signs of him being “in it for himself”…campaign costumes, safe boxes at football matches etc… I don’t think we’ve really seen much to show that Starmer is on the take.
Mandelson absolutely is of that world though… it’s why at the time I thought sending him to deal with Trump might make sense. But what has come out via the Epstein files… and now we know much more about the warnings Starmer was given when he wanted to appoint him… he should never have been given that (or any) job by Starmer, and the PM’s judgement has been shown to be seriously lacking.
There's barely a person I know locally who intends to vote in May or even a general election
then forgive me, but those folks are dumb as rocks. Our choices next election will probably be; "not my first choice" or people who're nodding along at what's happening in the US and think that it's great, and if the 'people you know' can't be arsed to put an X in a box that says I'd rather not to have something close to ICE, and rule by personal dictate in the UK then they deserve everything they get and they can STFU while it happens to them.
I cannot be bothered any more with people who cannot see, or wilfully ignore that the only realistic choice in the current system we have now that can hold off Reform is voting for Labour, If you cannot grasp that your life and the lives of the people around you is going to be infinitely worse under a Reform govt than even the current labour one, then frankly we're all screwed.
It’s not the “only way”, but not voting at all absolutely isn’t the way. But that’s what many will do this year, and local services are likely to suffer because of that in many areas. Who knows what will happen come the general election though… I expect/hope for a lot of tactical voting (with many beneficiaries, not just Labour). But millions will likely be staying at home and risking a Reform takeover… some because they no longer care… some because they don’t believe Reform / NewTories will do what they say… some because everything is always someone elses problem, and they think others will suffer not people like them (they’re wrong).
I cannot be bothered any more with people who cannot see, or wilfully ignore that the only realistic choice in the current system we have now that can hold off Reform is voting for Labour
Uh huh and I am pretty sure you were trotting out the same shit argument back in 2024 just with "tories" substituted for reform.
Two years down the line and two things have happened.
Labour have let down the left making as minimal gestures as possible whilst dancing to the hard rights demands.
Tories have replaced by reform.
So, why exactly, can the same not happen for Labour? Obviously there is the one that those saying vote Labour as the only alternative will refuse to vote for anyone who doesnt meet their ideological demands and hence let reform in but who knows they might stop being hypocrites.
Starmer making noises about rejoining the EU.
I'll take that. I'm starting to feel less depressed about voting labour in the last GE now.
If Labour take on a pro-EU stance that's really going to put the brexit blame where it belongs... On the tories, or Tories 1.1, AKA reform.
Starmer making noises about rejoining the EU.
When was that?
A couple of weeks ago in an interview he said something about rejoining the single market while in the same sentence ruling out freedom of movement and confirming we won't be joining a customs union. Which we all know is just Trumpesque gibberish hoping different groups of listeners fixate on the bits they want while ignoring that the circle doesn't square.
Starmer's probably only making noises because politically he's got to appear to balance between the Green and Reform's positions.
I.e impossible and he doesn't really have a position.
I've googled and come up with nothing more than he said a couple of days ago:
https://www.politico.eu/article/keir-starmer-vows-take-uk-deeper-into-eu-single-market/
Nothing workable. He has a choice of existing models such as Norway but if he thinks he can do better he's deluded. No freedom of movement, no deal significantly better deal. No cake and eating it, that was what Thatcher negotiated and you threw that away.
I'm old enough to remember when people suggested Mandelson was the right man for his recent job despite being potentially linked to dodgy stuff.
Well maybe just maybe he was a good at his job because he was a corrupt insider trader / informer?
(Also passing information to Jamie Dimon.)
So the man for the job was only the man for a job because it appears he was a cheating corrupt capitalist spreading info about the government and our gilt markets.
Mandelson gave Epstein advance notice of a €500bn bailout from the EU to save the Euro, according to documents in the Epstein files. He has been approached for comment
It's as if historical record was never really looked at.
Also Jamie Dimon... Guardian back in November 2025
This week – hours after banks were spared a tax rise in Reeves’s £26bn budget – Dimon unveiled plans to build a 279,000 sq metre (3m sq ft) tower in the Canary Wharf district of London, with a caveat that a “continuing positive business environment in the UK” was required.
I'm old enough to remember when people suggested Mandelson was the right man for his recent job despite being potentially linked to dodgy stuff.
Well maybe just maybe he was a good at his job because he was a corrupt insider trader / informer?
(Also passing information to Jamie Dimon.)
So the man for the job was only the man for a job because it appears he was a cheating corrupt capitalist spreading info about the government and our gilt markets.
Mandelson gave Epstein advance notice of a €500bn bailout from the EU to save the Euro, according to documents in the Epstein files. He has been approached for comment
It's as if historical record was never really looked at with regard to his track-record when appointed in 2024.
(Also Jamie Dimon... Guardian back in November 2025)
This week – hours after banks were spared a tax rise in Reeves’s £26bn budget – Dimon unveiled plans to build a 279,000 sq metre (3m sq ft) tower in the Canary Wharf district of London, with a caveat that a “continuing positive business environment in the UK” was required.
Optics, innit, if he wants a chance of beating the toried, or reform, who are mostly ex-tories anyway... this is a good platform to stand from.
Double down on brexit with the farrages, Trumps and tommy Robinsons for more poverty? or forge closer ties with our friends and allies in the EU.
If those numbers for the byeelection are right I bet Burnham is glad he is not standing - there is no way his standing would have made more than a few points difference - maybe enough to split the green vote and let reform in 🙂
I thought was just the EU youth mobility scheme
https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/discussions-youth-mobility-starmer-eu-5HjdRdg_2/
All this (somewhat unsurprising) stuff with Mandy once again proves what I’m always amazed at. Just how cheaply our political ‘elite’ can be bought off.
Its embarrassing
Want the most hyper-sensitive market information possible, then using it to move your billions around and make yourself vast quantities of money? The kind of information any international financier would kill for?
75k to you guv. No questions asked.
Someone at the very top of government was prepared to forward that kind of information straight from the cabinet meeting in return for the loose change Epstein found down the back of his sofa
Its pathetic!
You’d like to think that that sort of corruption and insider dealing would lead to prosecutions and jail time, but this is Britain, so absolutely nothing will happen. It’s just the way things get done here old chap
I think Nathan Gill would disagree with my honourable member 🙂
He got 10.5 years for £40k(I think), I suppose it was treason and he wasn’t really an MP being a euro MEP.
IMHO It’s usually the perjury that gets the MP’s rather than the actual crimes.