Forum menu
BINGO! ........I can finally confirm where binners gets his inspiration from. It's, as I have long suspected, Richard Littlejohn of the Daily Mail.
Richard Littlejohn is a professional bigot who earns his living mocking and ridiculing lefties in his "hilarious" Daily Mail column.
It was you repeatedly going on about donkey sanctuaries in a frankly pathetic attempt to mock lefties and their concerns for "woke" issues binners. I couldn't help thinking to myself "this sounds like pure Richard Littlejohn in his Daily Mail column".
Then my curiosity got the better of me and I decided to google "Richard Littlejohn donkey sanctuary" and yup, bingo, I got a result :
This is the BBC News. There now follows a party political broadcast on behalf of asylum seekers.
Delivered in the same, hand-wringing tone as those daytime TV adverts featuring bedraggled African children drinking dirty water out of polluted rivers, or appealing to you to give £2 a month to a donkey sanctuary, this alleged piece of 'journalism' was in my opinion pure Leftist propaganda.
Presented by correspondent Dan Johnson, with all the credulity of a gullible first-year media studies student intent on a career on the Guardian, it sought to make us all feel guilty over the plight of vulnerable young men banged up on the floating asylum hostel, Bibby Stockholm.
It's all there in a couple of paragraphs binners - your material. And not just the reference to donkey sanctuaries but also "hand-wringing" and "first-year media studies student".
And of course the intent is the same - to push a right-wing agenda.
It's behind a paywall but this link should work :
I don't understand why direct links to archive articles don't work but here is the article :
It should work when copied and pasted on this:
The latest piece of anti-labour fear mongering to be proven completely wrong is the impact of the private school VAT changes on state school applications.
Was always going to be the case. My partner's indepenent school's admissions are at record highs. People with wealth will just find a way to get what they want.
(Hey Labour - now Tax wealth please to recover some of that power and those resources they suck up.)
BINGO! ........I can finally confirm where binners gets his inspiration from. It's, as I have long suspected, Richard Littlejohn of the Daily Mail.
Ha ha. Scratch a Centrist and find a right-winger inside.
"I would have got away with it if it wasn't those pesky kids."
The latest piece of anti-labour fear mongering to be proven completely wrong is the impact of the private school VAT changes on state school applications.
Was always going to be the case. My partner's indepenent school's admissions are at record highs. People with wealth will just find a way to get what they want.
(Hey Labour - now Tax wealth please to recover some of that power and those resources they suck up.)
BINGO! ........I can finally confirm where binners gets his inspiration from. It's, as I have long suspected, Richard Littlejohn of the Daily Mail.
Ha ha. Scratch a Centrist and find a right-winger inside.
"I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for those pesky kids."
Also to the person that quoted me yesterday calling me a bore and defending Labour's trims to PIP etc. Can't be bothered to quote you.
DON'T BE SO GULLIBLE.
Right winger's have been giving us these excuse for years to constantly reign in spending with the excuse of more reform and back-to-work. Etc. Guess what - they simply inflict harm.
Ask yourself a few important questions.
Why is there always money for War?
Why do the tough calls always apply to the vulnerable?
Why is it a saving - when the government and BoE don't have savings account?
And finally understand all government spending is new money spent into the economy and not reliant on tax take, and our government nearly always runs a deficit to put money into circulation. All government spending is some form of investment.
Good luck with your take on the economy and your mini-DOGE appreciation scheme.
Checks thread for the first in yonks. Still a permanent game of insult ping pong between two known offenders? Oh yeah...
Checks thread for the first in yonks. Still a permanent game of insult ping pong between two known offenders? Oh yeah...
There are multiple other (Trump,Musk, Farage etc) threads with seperate discussions on the same themes where everyone agrees who the baddies are.
This is one of two threads about the Labour party where there is at least some critical debate put forward.
I'd embrace that as a good thing.
Wasn't directed at you Rone and I agree debate is a good thing. It's the to and fro slanging match on every page between the same people that's off-putting.
It's the to and fro slanging match on every page between the same people that's off-putting.
There isn't much of a debate any more. There's one, maybe two putting the counter argument to the multiple 'Labour are shit' posters, and one of them does it in a way that is very facetious and I suspect is to goad just as much as Ernie does with his constant pasting of polls and headlines, or Rone does with their incessant 'but MMT'. Pretty much all of the sensible debate has been driven away by the sneery unpleasantness that comes back.
I don't count Binners, who's clearly on a wind up now, seems a picture of a donkey is even more apoplexy inducing than one of Corbyn at his allotment.
suspect is to goad just as much as Ernie does with his constant pasting of polls and headlines
It's relevant to the topic, regardless of whether you find it inconvenient. Just skip past if you're not interested.
Wasn't directed at you Rone and I agree debate is a good thing. It's the to and fro slanging match on every page between the same people that's off-putting.
No it's directed at me because binners constant and completely pointless posting pictures of donkeys, which clearly has nothing at all to do with debating anything, sounded too much like Richard Littlejohn to me and it triggered my curiosity.
I then discover that binners has actually been paraphrasing Littlejohn. It's all there, donkey sanctuaries, hand-wringing, and first-year media studies students.
But I am somehow culpable because binners has a divine right to mock those who disagree with with him in exactly the same tedious way as Richard Littlejohn does in the Daily Mail unchallenged.
The whole point of binners ad hominems and mocking insults is to trash the thread because he can't come up with coherent political arguments, so very much like Richard Littlejohn then. It would be nice if he used his own material though!
I don't count Binners, who's clearly on a wind up now, seems a picture of a donkey is even more apoplexy inducing than one of Corbyn at his allotment.
That's one option.
The other is that despite professing to be an expert on how charities are funded it turned out he wasn't. To cover his embarrassment about that he started on his donkey thing. Then he started to feel a bit bad about continually making a bad joke about an important service being lost while the highest levels of Islamophobia are being recorded. However, he is one of those people whose ego is so tied up in how their perceived on an anonymous forum for people who supposedly like bikes that his only option was to then double down and continue with his donkey shenanigans into day 2 despite the rest of us being done with it.
binners likes this place because it inflates his ego. As far as I know he's mates with owners which he feels gives him special privileges to swan around posting things that would get others warned. Certainly the mods allow him more leeway. Whether that's a conscious or an unconscious choice I don't know. Hence the fact he's been allowed to troll with his donkey thing for three days now while contributing nothing else to the thread.
I'm sure many on here think he's a character, what with his hilarious sixth former comments and witty pictures. I just think he's a sad middle aged man who is far too wrapped up in what a bunch of internet strangers think of him.
Not that I'm saying I'm that different, but I like to think my self-awareness allows me to pity binners for the fact he's not even aware of his neediness.
Is there any chance we can move on from the donkey thing now?
Donkyist!
I guess that's my answer
Anyway in other non donkey sanctuary related news the United States has slapped 25% tariffs on UK steel imports. So much for Starmer's much vaunted meeting with Donald Trump.
Trump appears to have ignored Starmer on everything from the Ukraine to not imposing punitive tariff measures against the UK, despite being offered a unprecedented second UK state visit.
And the UK government has announced that it will buck the trend (as the EU urgently considers countermeasures) and not retaliate against the US. That should have Trump worried.
UK gov has made progress with Ukraine, despite a very incalcitrant White House. On trade, time will tell if a trade deal comes about, or if the EU approach of retaliation is the right one. Scale is important when it comes to that decision of course, the largest trading blocks and countries can hit the USA harder with tariffs, medium and smaller economies less so.
Just seen this
I suspect is to goad just as much as Ernie
Well if that's the case he has failed miserably, it actually does the complete reverse. At one point I had to bite my lip as I thought "don't say anything, just let him keep posting pictures of donkeys". I was worried that he might stop although now in hindsight I shouldn't have been.
I could not be more relaxed by the fact that binners cannot come up with coherent political arguments which he emphasises by posting pictures.
UK gov has made progress with Ukraine, despite a very incalcitrant White House
I think that is equally unclear especially about any influence on Trump, which Ernie was referencing, vs trying to work round him.
Scale is important when it comes to that decision of course, the largest trading blocks and countries can hit the USA harder with tariffs, medium and small economies less so.
Equally important is balance of trade. Plus what you apply tariffs to. Some selective targeting can make things awkward for specific politicians. Which is what got used last time round.
Friend was annoyed by his jackson kayak having a sudden jump in price for example.
I could not be more relaxed by the fact that binners cannot come up with coherent political arguments which he emphasises by posting pictures.
The rest of the world needs to be united in standing up to the US, going alone will allow single countries to be picked of easily.
Unfortunately there will be pain either way, but the long term prospects will be better if the ROW stands united. There is nothing in the Trump/oligarch era that indicates being a sycophant gains respect and mercy, if anything they screw the life out of the weak and abandon them completely when they are no longer of any use, whether that be people or countries. Not treating the cancer now will kill us all slowly.
The UK made no progress on Ukraine, and have been side lined by the white house, we are still to see if and more likely when Europe has to pick up the pieces and what the eventual cost will be to Ukraine. Europe needs to rearm now not because of the threat of Russia, we have seen how weak that is, but because of the threat from the US who look more likely to form an alliance with Russia than their post war allies.
UK gov has made progress with Ukraine, despite a very incalcitrant White House.
I was talking specifically about the UK government's attempts to court Donald Trump over his attitude to Ukraine. Not the discussions they have had with other governments because of their failure to convince Trump.
The UK has been key in terms of Ukraine. France, Germany and others also. Not just shrugging shoulders in the face of Trump’s bastardry, but continuing to work on ceasefire proposals and pulling the USA in to that has been essential work.
Not just shrugging shoulders in the face of Trump’s bastardry,
Who do you think has been shrugging shoulders in the face of Trump’s bastardry? I can't think of one single government.
What makes the UK stand out appears to be Starmer's delusionary belief in the power of "the special relationship".
Trump appears to have ignored Starmer on everything from the Ukraine to not imposing punitive tariff measures against the UK, despite being offered a unprecedented second UK state visit.
It's fairly obvious that UK exports of steel were lower in 2024, partly due to steel industry plant and furnace closures. The losers are going to be the US, which only imports 5% (£400mn) of UK steel exports anyway.
“UK steel poses no threat to US national security. Our high-quality products serve key US industries, many of which cannot source these domestically. This is a moment where our countries should work together to tackle global steel overproduction, not to be at loggerheads.
From the UK Steel article ^^
Australia and the UK have already said that they won't be imposing counter-tariffs. Boris negotiated tariff-free steel exports to the US in 2022 and we'll see whether Starmer can manage that as well
The UK has had nothing to do with the cease fire proposal, which is in my opinion an opportunity to allow Russia to regroup and re-arm, and then blame will Ukraine for the failure supported by the US. The same pattern have seen and will see in again in Gaza.
Trump is a bully who sides with bullies, there is no being a friend to Trump and the oligarchs, they want everything and if you help them hoping to avoid being a victim they will rape you anyway, that isn't just my opinion that is the view of pretty much everyone who was in him immediate circle of his last term, right wing zealots who thought they could be onside to his demands and needs.
The UK stayed in the process. Starmer, Powell and other UK officials have been key (along with those from other European countries) in getting USA and Ukraine working together towards a ceasefire. Despite Trump.
What makes the UK stand out appears to be Starmer's delusionary belief in the power of "the special relationship".
What makes the UK stand out is that we've made the effort to do something as we have throughout this miserable war.
From training Ukraine's forces starting in 2015 to being third highest military aid donor to Ukraine in €bn despite having only 3.7% of the world arms market.
Of course the "special relationship" has suffered, the UK has irritated President Trump too many times from refusing him the right to speak in Parliament in 2017 to more recent assistance given to the Democratic Party campaign, as well as statements from David Lammy and Peter Mandelson, but the fact that we're co-leading Europe's efforts speaks volumes
Well the latest development appears to have knocked the UK government sideways, they don't seem to know whether they should bend over without a whimper or talk tough.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/trump-steel-tariffs-uk-response-b2713488.html
You can't blame them mind :
The UK being subjected to a round of global tariffs by Mr Trump overnight is a blow to Sir Keir Starmer and his new ambassador to the US Lord Peter Mandelson.
At the press conference after their meeting in the White House last month, the US president praised the prime minister for “negotiating hard” to not have tariffs, while Lord Mandelson made preventing tariffs an early priority as he begins his role.
It must have come as a bit of a shock.
The UK has had nothing to do with the cease fire proposal
Do you know that?
which is in my opinion an opportunity to allow Russia to regroup and re-arm,
That works both ways, importantly it gets US arms exports back on track to Ukraine which would become a massive problem within a couple of months. You have to remember that President Trump hasn't donated a thing to Ukraine, everything has come from Joe Biden's authority which Trump can stop.
I think that Russia is highly likely not to agree without considerable changes. It remains to be seen what the US will do in that scenario
Interesting programme on C4 https://www.channel4.com/programmes/michael-sheens-secret-million-pound-giveaway
After two years of trying to speak with UK banks and the UK government, Sheen said he had to bring in former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown to urge the UK government to pass legislation to help tackle unaffordable credit.
"We have got to look transparently at what can be excessively high rates of interest charged by certain organisations," said Brown.
In his debt campaign, Sheen was calling on the UK government to pass the Fair Banking Act - a bill which requires mainstream banking institutions to disclose their performance on financial exclusion.
This would create a system which showed the banks that were doing well, and the ones that needed to improve.
Sheen believes the legislation, which was already implemented in the US, would force banks in the UK to offer affordable credit to low income households.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cewk40gey89o
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgq9e4nx5d2o
"It is a comparison neither would likely welcome, but look closely and the arguments of Sir Keir Starmer and Liz Truss about why government doesn't work well enough are remarkably similar."
Getting rid of Andrew Lansleys ridiculous 2012 NHS reforms seems like a pretty good idea to me. NHS England was always a stupid idea
Everyone said it the time that it would be a disaster and it was. Seems eminently sensible to devolve healthcare decision making back to a local level with regional health services instead
I don't not what I'm more shocked at
that they are reversing the lansley reforms or that this didn't leak beforehand!
Getting rid of Andrew Lansleys ridiculous 2012 NHS reforms seems like a pretty good idea to me. NHS England was always a stupid idea
Hopefully means my Trust will now be forced into investing in my department after years of putting stuff on hold because of changes NHS England were mandating which never materialised.
Yep a much needed change.
Many of the quangos were just about absolving the government of blame for implementing the policies that government direct them to, same can be said for a lot of outsourcing.
Fully support getting rid of NHS England. My mates working in the NHS are pretty happy. Seems like Starmer is taking a leaf out of his mate Trump's book and has finally decided to do some stuff.
I don't not what I'm more shocked at
that they are reversing the lansley reforms or that this didn't leak beforehand!
I’m amazed that there doesn’t even seem to have been any hints this was coming.
Policies announced with no ‘pitch-rolling’ or ‘kite flying’? Whatever next?
Puts the Tories in a bind too, they love to applaud reducing bureaucracy, but the creation of NHS england which has led to a duplicating of so many functions was their baby!
Of course the devil will be in the detail
@TJagain will be pleased. When he wakes up.
The one fly in the ointment is that it probably gives a bit more operational power to Streeting.
Policies announced with no ‘pitch-rolling’ or ‘kite flying’? Whatever next?
Think he's probably looked across the atlantic and seen Trump making big decisions in an authoritative manner (even if you disagree with them) and thought he might benefit from some of the same 'I'm the boss' energy. Same goes for his proposed civil service reforms. He's trying it with benfits cuts for the disabled too but I suspect his MPs might force a partial u-turn on that one.
Is Trump making decisions? I thought he'd outsourced it all to Musk
But this has been trailed for a while- the 10 year NHS plan was announced last year, to be released in Spring this year
https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-term-plan/
When it gets published in full we will have a better idea of whats going to happen
Would be good to hear more on social care reform, thats a huge drain on the NHS,
This is Streeting's baby not Starmer's anyway. He's been talking non-stop about NHS England being an obstacle... with many claiming that his words were an "attack on the NHS"... without considering what was really being said.
"He's trying it with benfits cuts for the disabled too"
i must have missed that bit.
Interesting that getting rid of NHS England seems to be universally supported. Haven't seen anyone crying foul yet.
It won’t be universally supported, a lot of people will need to change jobs because of this. Real lives affected. Let’s not forget about them. It’s a change that many people agree is needed though.
Interesting that getting rid of NHS England seems to be universally supported.
Because even the Tory government back in 2019 under Theresa May, when it introduced "the NHS long-term plan" accepted that the stated aims of the Health and Social Care Act 2012, IE market competition within the NHS, had spectacularly failed.
I assume that taking back direct control means that we will once again return to the founding principle of the NHS and the Secretary of State for Health will be responsible for the health of UK citizens, not the market.
Edit : It's worth remembering that the Health and Social Care Act 2012 occurred during the time of the coalition government, so it couldn't have happened without the support of the LibDems, even if they deny responsibility.
Ah well if only the Labour at arms length machine would see the MPC at the BoE - and the OBR in the same light.
But you can't mess with finance can you because that might actually deliver some actual results.
This won't do a whole lot just like all the other Labour trimmings.
Nothing to see here. We're into the bureaucracy being the reason things don't work debate. Pretty much Reform level politics.
It's entrenched that each new government de-quango the last one and replace with stuff.
Nothing to see here.
You would say that. Everything is nothing to you unless it’s … “ignore all the experts except mine, forget budgets, don’t examine the effects of policy, just do everything with no account of costs, inflation, currency crashes, etc”.
with many claiming that his words were an "attack on the NHS"... without considering what was really being said.
Or maybe they have and disagree with the spin you are putting on it? At the risk of godwinning the thread remember the "an obstacle" is the claim being made by Musk and co as well.
So far he has announced NHS England is being replaced by something directly under his control. So lets see if he rolls back all the other damaging features of the lansley reforms before cheering.
Spin? What spin?
I’m not even sure it’s the right move, or the right time. I was just saying that the minister responsible has been talking negatively about NHS England and promising changes for quite some time… and been under fire for doing so.
managing a top down reform like this without disruption of NHS will be a challenge and take time
It does seem ludicrous that so kuch work was duplicated by 2 departments, there was never going to be a good time to do this with the nhs in permacrisis
Many of the quangos were just about absolving the government of blame for implementing the policies that government direct them to
This is a bit simplistic and Daily Mail. Quangos are a good way of depoliticising routine "service delivery" and decisions that are too contentious to be partisan.
It's also simply unrealistic to expect a Minister to be accountable for the whole range of things the modern state does. It was okay when 90% of citizen-state interactions were via the Royal Mail, but there are now so many government bodies that it's silly to pretend that a small group of people like the Cabinet can scrutinise all of them.
Spin? What spin?
That others are incapable of reading what he has said in the past especially your simplification to him just talking about NHS England.
There was also your casual condescending of "without considering what was really being said."
So bearing in mind all that has been announced is him consolidating power to himself I think I wont be getting excited yet.
managing a top down reform like this without disruption of NHS will be a challenge and take time
Which is the eternal problem with the NHS. Despite the politicians announcing the problem is its a sacred cow and reforming it cant even be discussed the truth is, apart from the payment model, it has been under continual "reform" with basically every government messing around with it.
The problem is their reforms has often made things worse especially the false free markets (its odd how many believers in free markets dont grasp that creating an artificial market is the furthest thing from a free market possible) and means way too much NHS time is spent reeling from one reform to the next.
Hence they shout loudly that they werent allowed to carry out their reforms to hide the fact they did a shit job.
double post
I hear Starmer has talked about the Civil Service being "flabby" and I feel personally attacked!
BUT WHY HAVEN'T THEY DONE IT SOONER!! THEY'VE HAD YEARS TO PLAN IT!!
So like what Trump's doing? That's going well isn't it.
A great example of what I've said before - time to take stock, look at the situation with some very smart advisors and civil servants, and then take action. From where I sit, absolutely not in the tent but with occasional chances to look through the flaps, there's a whole lot of this grown up thinking going on away from the front benches and front pages, and a whole lot of small g government in a range of policy areas to come.
But of course it won't be enough for some, who can only see in negative.
So like what Trump's doing? That's going well isn't it.
Yes it is actually.
You might disagree with the results, as do I, and many of the people who voted for him are going to be rather unpleasantly surprised but it is going great for Trump and those who have managed to endear themselves to him.
The "improvements" are going to be very difficult to undo which is the point. Get the changes in early and they are very difficult to undo.
If we take Streetings plans thats a year or so wasted messing around with high level management. Now remind me when the social care review is going to finish bearing in mind if you want to "fix" the NHS then you need to start there.
As a quick edit going back to the NHS. I would suggest you look at the history of the NHS and how even during a World War the Labour party of the time managed to think about what they would do if they got elected.
Or... they have been talking about NHS reform for the last four years... I don't know why anyone is surprised that some of that is being announced in the first year of government. The Trump talk is just nonsense.
It turns out that Streeting himself wasn't expecting it and before the general election had absolutely no intention of major reorganization of NHS England:
Before Labour won last summer's election, Mr Streeting said he had "absolutely no intention of wasting time with a big costly reorganisation" of the NHS.
And it wasn't until after Starmer had dropped the bombshell that Streeting claimed that he had changed his mind :
However, hours after Sir Keir Starmer dropped the bombshell that NHS England, the administrative body that runs the national health service, will be abolished to slash red tape, the health secretary said his mind had been changed.
Edit : To be clear "dropping bombshells" is not the usual way that health reforms are announced in the UK, so it does have something of the Trump about it.
I reckon that Morgan McSweeney has been keeping a close eye on Trump's modus operandi and learning a few tricks. Can we expect some more "bombshells"..... maybe in education, defence, etc?
It is certainly making politics more interesting and unpredictable, Trump style.
tbf the signs were there for a while, theres been talk of job cuts at NHSE for the past month and the leadership were moved on a few weeks ago. Its only a bombshell if you hadnt been paying attention and pretty desperate to try & link it to Trump!
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/feb/25/amanda-pritchard-quits-nhs-england-chief-executive
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/mar/06/stephen-powis-step-down-nhs-england-medical-director
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdrxz85886xo
NHSE was an extra layer of bureaucracy that didnt improve outcomes (even ignoring covid) its amazing it lasted as long as it did tbh
the real question is how the new central structure will be run and how the change will be managed and we wont know the answer to that for a while.
To be fair this probably impacts on Streeting's strategy to give his private healthcare backers open access to the NHS, so no wonder he looked a bit wrong-footed. He probably had a late night call from them with some questions to answer.
My wife is fairly senior in the imaging department of the local NHS trust. I asked her if she thought that abolishing NHSE was going to be broadly beneficial or not. She said broadly beneficial, but not evenly. You cannot have two supposedly interdependent organisations of the size of the NHS and NHSE and there not be some beneficial and vital stuff accruing to the NHS from NHSE handling certain things.
But she reckons that if NHSE is cut correctly and the right roles/responsibilities taken in by the core NHS, it will be less wasteful. She cited the current example of a colleague of hers with about 25% her experience. This colleague is on a secondment to NHSE, being paid on the same band as her yet 'doing bugger all'. Mainly because NHSE don't really know what the secondment role ought to include.
The downside to all this is more direct political interference - which we all know can be bad as well as good. I also think it will enable the likes of Streeting to plug his backers in more directly.
NHSE was an extra layer of bureaucracy that didnt improve outcomes (even ignoring covid) its amazing it lasted as long as it did tbh
The only reason it lasted as long as it did was because if the Tory's had abolished it, it would be an admission that their own policy was the monumental **** up that everybody warned them it would be at the time
Can we expect some more "bombshells"..... maybe in education, defence, etc?
It is certainly making politics more interesting and unpredictable, Trump style.
Exactly what I was saying. I think the penny might have dropped in No. 10 that voters are sick of seeing politicians making excuses for not doing stuff and that they much prefer decisive and authoritative action even if they don't necessarily agree with it. Seems like JFDI might be the new motto in govt, lets hope it's used to tackle some more progressive issues (yeah I know!) like poverty, housing and education.
tbf the signs were there for a while, theres been talk of job cuts at NHSE for the past month and the leadership were moved on a few weeks ago. Its only a bombshell if you hadnt been paying attention
To be fair talk of "job cuts" in NHS England is very different to talk of scrapping it. When organisations talk of job cuts it is generally assumed that it will continue to operate.
Wes Streeting makes it very clear in the Sky News video clip above that he hadn't planned to scrap NHS England. So the announcement was unexpected, that is why it is widely described as a bombshell.
Will the malleable Centrists now get in line and remove the big boy layer of Tory bureaucracy in the form of the OBR? And let the Government take full control of its own finances?
You know if you want some real change ...
Reeves getting in her excuses again for more low growth in Jan. Sigh. We have years of idiocy proving cuts don't lead to growth. All Labour have done so far it cut and cut more. So unless you put the seeds of growth in, celebrating NHS England going is not really the point - besides the Mail and Bruges Group are endorsing this one - that makes me nervous.
There's just going to be lots of nodding about Job duplication now, and efficiency etc. It's all a bit DOGE lite.
Also GBEnergy - no employees! That's looking like a total and utter failure. But that was pretty much a given.
Slow to act... carefully examining how things are operating (with the access and resources you only get once in government)... then when announcing plans and actions... LOOK, HOW TRUMP LIKE.
On current spending levels... I'm with you on the need to relax the fiscal rules and spend more Rone... but that doesn't require a "jump without looking" abandonment of the OBR or more direct control of the BofE. The government can transparently change budgets and targets, and have them analysed and acted on.
LOOK, HOW TRUMP LIKE.
Oh come on, for at least a decade now big announcements like this and every other major political event (ie the budget) have been pre-announced in the media via tipoffs to certain journalists, press releases or other mechanisms. Then Trump comes along with his off-the-cuff unorthodox 'look at me getting shit done' PR whirlwind and suddenly we're getting surprise announcements about abolishing organisations, cutting thousands of jobs and saving 100s of millions. It's not a coincidence.
Not saying this is a bad thing BTW. It's quite refreshing to see a PM/govt take decisive and radical action on something that clearly isn't working. More of this please!
Other than negatively effecting our economy with his trade policy chaos, and destabilising European defence, both putting further pressure on the UK government and the choices it faces... this has bugger all to do with Trump. Eagerly giving him credit where it isn't due is an odd line to take.
Anyway, it sounds like Laura Kuenssberg was wise to change her MO... that dripping of near daily "tipoffs" her way might be over. We can only hope...
So Labour have selected their candidate for the Runcorn and Helsby by-election and she is an unknown, you have to assume that she is a sacrificial lamb.
Because this being the first by-election in the current parliament you would expect it to be a shoo-in for former shadow cabinet minister and Morgan McSweeney ally Jonathan Ashworth, who lost his seat at the last general election.
After losing his seat Jonathan Ashworth expressed a strong desire to return to front line politics and Runcorn and Helsby is after all a safe Labour seat with a huge Labour majority.
So why miss this opportunity? You have to assume that Labour are considering the possibility that this by-election might be a catastrophic disaster for them.
I suspect that Labour has been keeping a very close eye on opinion polls which the usual suspects on here dismiss as "pointless".
And the result of this by-election will not be pointless, no matter how large the government's majority. Losing a very safe Labour seat will reinforce the sense of doom within Labour which currently are polling not much more than 25%, and if Reform win it it will massively boost their claim of being an alternative to the three main parties.
I do think there is a reasonable chance that Labour will hold on to the seat though, which would be a massive blow to Nigel Farage, it is just not as certain as it should be.
Oh come on, for at least a decade now big announcements like this and every other major political event (ie the budget) have been pre-announced in the media via tipoffs to certain journalists, press releases or other mechanisms.
Since always. Even the finer details of speeches yet to be made are released to the media. Dropping political bombshells is not the British way. Or at least it hasn't been.
To be fair talk of "job cuts" in NHS England is very different to talk of scrapping it. When organisations talk of job cuts it is generally assumed that it will continue to operate.
Wes Streeting makes it very clear in the Sky News video clip above that he hadn't planned to scrap NHS England. So the announcement was unexpected, that is why it is widely described as a bombshell.
Actually it was talk of 50% job cuts a few weeks ago, which is exactly the number that was mentioned yesterday
And yes in the link it says that in August Streeting said he wasnt going to scrap NHSE, but from the scale of job cuts and the 'resignations' of the chief exec it was obvious from last month that something big was coming
That it didnt leak is the amazing thing, I suppose after the last decade plus where every policy decision is leaked weeks in advance it comes as a bombshell that the preferred lobby journos didnt get a heads-up
After losing his seat Jonathan Ashworth expressed a strong desire to return to front line politics and Runcorn and Helsby is after all a safe Labour seat with a huge Labour majority.
So why miss this opportunity?
Clearly you’ve never been to Runcorn Ernesto 😂
That it didnt leak is the amazing thing, I suppose after the last decade plus where every policy decision is leaked weeks in advance it comes as a bombshell that the preferred lobby journos didnt get a heads-up.
One of Boris Johnson’s former advisors was on Five Live the other week saying how he was watching one of the newspaper news live feeds and it became clear that somebody, presumably a minister, was leaking the content of the cabinet meeting they were all in, in real time
Actually it was talk of 50% job cuts a few weeks ago, which is exactly the number that was mentioned yesterday
Which is completely different to saying that an organisation will be scrapped. With announcements of job cuts it is generally assumed that the organisation will continue to exist.
Clearly you’ve never been to Runcorn Ernesto 😂
It has long been one of my political dreams, that a new fit for purpose parliament building is built, on an industrial estate in Runcorn. I think that is the only chance that a true nationwide regeneration policy is enacted instead of the current "south east first" everywhere else last policy.
And if the politicians moan too much we could build a parliamentary "halls or residence" in Widnes.
After losing his seat Jonathan Ashworth expressed a strong desire to return to front line politics and Runcorn and Helsby is after all a safe Labour seat with a huge Labour majority.
So why miss this opportunity?
Clearly you’ve never been to Runcorn Ernesto 😂
Never, but I assume you have. So what can the Richard Littlejohn tribute act tell me about this very safe Labour seat?
Are you going explain why despite apparently being the bookies favourite now Reform UK didn't win the seat last July and instead Labour won it with a huge majority?
Anything to do with donkeys?
I’m absolutely with you on that one MSP. That’s genius! A fate worse than death would soon get them to sort things out properly!
Eagerly giving him credit where it isn't due is an odd line to take.
Eh? Who's giving him credit? I'm just pointing out that Starmer is copying his MO and PR strategy in the hope that it has the same effect here as it does in the US. Whether you agree with Trump or not you can't deny that the way he approaches politics resonates with voters. You might be a fan of carefully planned and considered technocracy and incremental reform, but the vast majority of voters just want to see politicians getting stuff done and making changes to stuff that doesn't work. Starmer finally seems to have understood that and he'll benefit from it.