Forum menu
Streeting is cut from exactly the same cloth, taking money from private health and I bet promises of a highly lucrative post politics career, to sell out the NHS, greed over service personified.
I saw a guardian article where they've been cleansing waiting lists to look smaller too.
I think borrowing the Tory approach to running the economy/country also comes with the stench of corruption and incompetence too.
(Because it's not possible to fix the country with this plan.)
Ah well, only 3 more years and you'll soon have Farage to constantly criticise.
Indeed. Parliament voted to remove the Tories' two child cap on benefits yesterday. Labour, SNP, LibDem, Green MPs voting for... Tories resisting it because "you don't get a pay rise if you have another child"... and Reform trying to get it retained if any of the children's parents were "not born in the UK", or not in a job... but the "all the same" narrative will continue 'till Reform and the Tories are (back) in government redefining what it it is to be British, and making life worse for anyone not meeting their definition.
Ah well, only 3 more years and you'll soon have Farage to constantly criticise.
Remember when Corbyn lost in 2019 and all the centrists/rightwingers said 'stop blaming the voters and instead listen to them'? Well they should listen to their own advice.
I see Starmer has given McSweeney yet another vote of confidence at PMQs. Just what does McSweeney have on him?
Ah well, only 3 more years and you'll soon have Farage to constantly criticise.
Or, here's a thing - Labour don't have to be so awful? They literally have the power to do transformative things.
Reform is a direct product of Labour doing what they're doing.
In July 2024 Labour were polling approx 37 and Reform 17.
(for one they didn't come to power with a solid plan and then delayed the budget for months, and told everyone hard times were ahead. Truly weapons grade stupidity when you have an electorate sold on change for the better.)
to be fair labour have done some good stuff - it just does not get mentioned. Leaseholder reform, benefits increased, housing rentals made better etc etc
it's not at the level where it counts for much given the pain people have gone through.
Radical change is where it's at.
They served up nice hors d'oeuvres after a re-heated take-away.
For example I'd have done this pretty early on "Treasury may issue direct orders on monetary policy if deemed necessary in the public interest during "extreme economic circumstances".
Insteasd of letting those fools at the BoE play with unemployment to solve a supply-side issue.
You can't on the one hand make logical fiscal decisions and let monetary police just 'happen.'
Reform is a direct product of Labour doing what they're doing.
Reform isn’t new, despite the new name. And nor is support for their agenda. Labour are responsible for a large part of the fall in support for this government, for sure. But they didn’t create Reform, and most of the support for Reform can’t be moved over to Labour by them becoming more progressive and transformative… even if that’s what what many of us think is needed to improve this country. “We” are more adrift from what’s happening in the UK than even the government are. Well, I am. And I feel that you are as well. This whole “just listen to the voters” line is a dangerous one… does it mean listen to the 20-35% of voters who want redistribution and support policies like the Green New Deal, or the greater proportion of voters who want nothing like that?
Reform is a direct product of Labour doing what they're doing.
Reform isn’t new, despite the new name. And nor is support for their agenda. Labour are responsible for a large part of the fall in support for this government, for sure. But they didn’t create Reform, and most of the support for Reform can’t be moved over to Labour by them becoming more progressive and transformative… even if that’s what what many of us think is needed to improve this country. “We” are more adrift from what’s happening in the UK than even the government are. Well, I am. And I feel that you are as well. This whole “just listen to the voters” line is a dangerous one… does it mean listen to the 20-35% of voters who want redistribution and support policies like the Green New Deal, or the greater proportion of voters who want nothing like that?
I will rephrase - the change in support over the last few months for Reform over Labour is a direct product of Labour doing what they're doing.
Point taken - it's not all Labour's fault clearly. It is successive governments. But the euphoria is now stronger than ever.
most of the support for Reform can’t be moved over to Labour by them becoming more progressive and transformative…
Fixing stuff is literally all a government has got. (oh and not looking like a bunch of lying creeps etc.) Greens have certainly done well out of this line of attack.
45 years is too long of a regressive ideaology for us to not see kick-back. Concentrate wealth and what do you expect.
I mean how does our Government "square" - paying (Creating) money to people with money (interest rate policy) whilst telling everyone else there is no money for nice things? Literally the same bank account at the BoE pays out billions in interest to the wealthy - all the time.
Full-on emperors new clothes.
Pretending we’ve had much the same government for 45 years might be a great attack line for parties that have never been in government, like Reform or the Greens, but it’s not true. Policies either going through parliament, or already voted on and being actioned, in the early years of this government… on rail, rent, leasehold, benefits, workers rights, tax breaks for the rich etc are being strongly opposed by members of the Tory (and Tory led) governments that went before it.
I’m not going to address your over optimism about niche economic ideas again, people can just scan back in this and other threads if they’ve not already been through that endless loop.
Pretending we’ve had much the same government for 45 years might be a great attack line for parties that have never been in government, like Reform or the Greens, but it’s not true.
Same ideology. You absolutely know that.
You know the results for Water, Energy, Essential services etc - have been run-down or passed for share-holder value.
Stop obsfucating please.
People will reject lack of meaningful improvement in their lives. If that wasn't the case Starmer wouldn't have stood on those values.
There is literally no defence of what Labour have done. None.
popularity of parties is also incredibly regional - so a policy that plays well in one area goes down like a lead balloon in others. Thats true for all parties.
A policy that drastically improves a community - affects everyone in positive way. Even the wealthy benefit.popularity of parties is also incredibly regional - so a policy that plays well in one area goes down like a lead balloon in others. Thats true for all parties.
We simply have lots of bad policies (economic) that functionally only help people with money.
I’m not going to address your over optimism about niche economic ideas again, people can just scan back in this and other threads if they’ve not already been through that endless loop.
I will remind of you of that when the government next has to dig the country out of a hole.
I will remind you it's a bit niche to do that. (Calling on the power of the state to support us during Covid is the very opposite of niche BTW. )
Politics is an endless loop - mainly because people keep making the same deliberate economic mistakes.
I'm really not sure what you want out of a government. I want a government to substantially improve the country to stop people voting Reform rather than just delivering wishy-washy fantasy economics that keep wealthy people wealthy.
I pretty much said from day one that Labour will not got much growth if at all with their policies. That was what they said they wanted. Because they have it all back to front. Call my take niche but it's correct.
Clearly you're happy with Labour's track-record of not delivering much.
anyway
back to the story of the day...
If McSweeney doesnt get fired soon, he could well take Starmer with him
The issues is no longer about how the Mandleson story will disapear, the issue is what further revelations are due to come out.
I think Starmer's on the front foot for a change isn't he? Basically saying that Mandleson lied to him time and again, and he's releasing the evidence for everyone to see, apart from sensitive stuff, which you'd expect anyway. Pretty much taken the wind out of Badenoch's/Farage sails.
Folks gonna grumble about the fact hat Mandleson shouldn't have been anywhere near the US Ambassador job anyway (I'm in this camp) but folks would do that regardless.
Really? I think those who want McSweeny gone have the ammunition they need with this story (even though it’s for much wider reasons he’s so disliked with many Labour MPs). The day where Starmer has to shift him aside to try and keep his own position is getting closer, in bigger steps. Someone’s judgment was way out on this, and someone will have to go. Truth is probably that both Starmer and McSweeny got this wrong… but we know who’s most likely to have to take it on the chin and move on soon.
A policy that drastically improves a community - affects everyone in positive way. Even the wealthy benefit.popularity of parties is also incredibly regional - so a policy that plays well in one area goes down like a lead balloon in others. Thats true for all parties.
We simply have lots of bad policies (economic) that functionally only help people with money.
Such as?
Relying on Mandelson being a liar as your defence isn’t a good look. Soon it’ll be about the advice given by others, and who was listened to, and who was ignored… and then someone goes…
Such as?
Private financing of government initiatives like GBenergy, it is just debt that is more expensive than traditional government debt but hidden from the accounts. The taxpayer pays more so the wealthy can get their cut, the same things Streeting wants to do with the NHS, I bet that Mandelson has introduced him to lots of private healthcare executives.
Relying on Mandelson being a liar as your defence isn’t a good look. Soon it’ll be about the advice given by others, and who was listened to, and who was ignored… and then someone goes…
Exactly, known liar lies, and you ignore the problems brought up by the vetting process is hardly being "on the front foot"
Folks gonna grumble about the fact hat Mandleson shouldn't have been anywhere near the US Ambassador job anyway (I'm in this camp) but folks would do that regardless.
the latest revelations about mandy: betrayal, lies, bribery, being a Russian asset, besties with a sex trafficking paedophile..... Hes sounding like a better fit for Trump & co than ever!
he had something the previous ambassador didn't
anyway McSweeney wont last the week
apologies - I wanted examples of policies that would be universally liked right across the UK by left and right as Rone seemed to say such existed
Could go in a number of threads... but the Media Show on Radio4 now has Jim Pickard (FT) talking about the Epstein files, with particular attention to Mandelson...
Clips from Parliament suggest to me that the PM isn't on the "front foot" at all... Labour MPs have forced a climb down on keeping anything secret from Parliament (the committee will see all, and decide what is to be publicly released)... but it's what they've said and how that's more important... have a listen if you can. It's not just fury at Mandelson, it's fury about Mandelson directed towards the PM and his inner circle.
Clips from Parliament suggest to me that the PM isn't on the "front foot" at all..
he shouldve just ditched McSweeney straight away
trying to keep stuff back on tne grounds of national security was daft
i suspect the national security issue, will be not letting Trump see the email exchange that saw mandlescum get the job....
KS "we need an ambassador on Trump's level"
MM "I agree, they must be utterly corrupt, a shameless liar, au fait with bribery & comfortable around Russian agents/ paedophiles/ sex traffickers"
KS "know you of such a creature?"
I think this will be the thing that does for Starmer
I think Starmer's on the front foot for a change isn't he?
No. It was obviously a misjudgment at the time, which was always likely to bite him
the thing is I still don't know who will replace him
and Labour MPs will be thinking the same thing
And this is Labour… a leadership battle will be long, convoluted and unpredictable. And a further shift to the right followed by Labour MPs quiet quitting around them is quite likely.
I know some people think the Greens are ready for an early election where Labour fade away and they rush into government… but on a national level I don’t see the result being anything other than a ReformTory government if we go to the polls prematurely after months of Labour leadership squabbling and the appointment of a new “unelected” PM.
Having said that, I can’t see Starmer being in his post when/if we get to the 2029 election.
And this is Labour… a leadership battle will be long, convoluted and unpredictable. And a further shift to the right followed by Labour MPs quiet quitting around them is quite likely.
I know some people think the Greens are ready for an early election where Labour fade away and they rush into government… but on a national level I don’t see the result being anything other than a ReformTory government if we go to the polls prematurely after months of Labour leadership squabbling and the appointment of a new “unelected” PM.
Having said that, I can’t see Starmer being in his post when/if we get to the 2029 election.
Yeah, tricky..I think Starmer should stay in post at least until the next GE... I don't think a leadership battle would be helpfull, nor do I think an early GE would be helpfull.
[quote data-userid="9141" data-postid="13694399"
you ignore the problems brought up by the vetting process is hardly being "on the front foot"
What vetting process? What did it consist of and what were the results?
And this is Labour… a leadership battle will be long, convoluted and unpredictable. And a further shift to the right followed by Labour MPs quiet quitting around them is quite likely.
I know some people think the Greens are ready for an early election where Labour fade away and they rush into government… but on a national level I don’t see the result being anything other than a ReformTory government if we go to the polls prematurely after months of Labour leadership squabbling and the appointment of a new “unelected” PM.
Having said that, I can’t see Starmer being in his post when/if we get to the 2029 election.
Yeah, tricky..I think Starmer should stay in post at least until the next GE... I don't think a leadership battle would be helpfull, nor do I think an early GE would be helpfull.
Clearly Starmer staying in post is going to be catastrophic.
I'd run with the idea they still have time to make a difference without him. (But I wouldn't bet on it.)
With him they're absolutely doomed.
And this is Labour… a leadership battle will be long, convoluted and unpredictable. And a further shift to the right followed by Labour MPs quiet quitting around them is quite likely.
I know some people think the Greens are ready for an early election where Labour fade away and they rush into government… but on a national level I don’t see the result being anything other than a ReformTory government if we go to the polls prematurely after months of Labour leadership squabbling and the appointment of a new “unelected” PM.
Having said that, I can’t see Starmer being in his post when/if we get to the 2029 election.
Yeah, tricky..I think Starmer should stay in post at least until the next GE... I don't think a leadership battle would be helpfull, nor do I think an early GE would be helpfull.
Clearly Starmer staying in post is going to be catastrophic.
I'd run with the idea they still have time to make a difference without him. (But I wouldn't bet on it.)
With him they're absolutely doomed.
No. LOL 🤣
I can only speak for myself, but if there was a GE tomorrow I'd vote for starmer, as the alternative is reCONform getting in.
Not replying to anyone so apologies if I put my foot in it!
Starmer has to go.
Sooner the better as there is still time to turn things around before the GE. I think Labour losing the by election coming up will seal his fate. He's not a bad man (Starmer) but he's not upto being PM in the chaotic world we currently live in.
Even if he hasn't left, I'll still vote for Labour, Green or Libdem, basically anyone** to keep Reform out.
**I'd find it impossible to vote Tory to keep Reform out. I just couldn't bring myself to do that. They are potential coalition partners with Reform too so that's a more logical, less emotional reason.
I’d hate to be born with a nose like that.
Never mind that! The big guns have arrived in Gorton
Sir Oink A-Lot — The Official Monster Raving Loony Party
Nick Buckley MBE — Advance UK
Charlotte Anne Cadden — Conservative Party
Dan Clarke — Libertarian Party UK
Matt Goodwin — Reform UK
Sebastian Moore — Social Democratic Party
Joseph O’Meachair — The Rejoin EU Party
Jackie Pearcey — Liberal Democrats
Hannah Spencer — Green Party
Angeliki Stogia — Labour Party
Hugo Wils — Communist League
The communist league sounds a bit sketchy... I didn't even know that existed!
No ‘Your Party’ candidate?
I thought they had a well-oiled electoral machine ready to go?
The communist league sounds a bit sketchy... I didn't even know that existed!
I just assume any party that has League in the title is fascist.
So if the Communist part cancels out the fascist part then maybe they are the ultimate centrist party.
We, I e the voters, the country, need Burnham in Westminster and downing st. He's the best Labour have and most likely to get support.
The sketchy ones are literally the current Centrist Labour party. Literally covered in muck and shit six foot deep.
Looking forward to McSweeney pulling up his desk in pissing rain and wind and explaining to the public live on TV his version of events.
Then, the Labour right need sod off and never come back. So do the excuses by their supporters for their terrible political choices that have yet again laid stronger foundations for Reform.
(Say what you want about Corbyn he wouldn't have appointed a paedo connected disaster mate. Ah I do wonder why Mandelson hated him...)
You can't now blame the public for saying they're all the same. (Freezing the oldies, signing off on genocide, u-turning on whacky politics, appalling tax decisions, and appointing failed desert island dodgy buddies.) Would you still have voted for them?
(Tip: the left get to these conclusions faster.)
Resign now Starmer look like you mean it or forever drown the Labour party.
Burnham is just a temu Starmer with better PR. His maneuvering proves he is only interested in himself not the party or the country.
Whatever the question is he is not the answer. I would not vote for a labour party led by him.
Temu Starmer. 🤣 Good one.
Burnham can't be worse than Starmer.
I'm not buying that.
Starmer has to go not because he's useless (he is) but they need to clear out this legacy now. They need a yard sale and quickly.
Whomever replaces him is not worth debating currently.