MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Lib Dems oppose the cards as do Scottish greens . So I guess it's just Starmer and BLiar that want them.
Lib Dems oppose the cards as do Scottish greens .
youd maybe expect the greens to be luddites, but ironic for the lib Dems considering their former leader went on to become the Mouth of Meta
1) I opened a Revolut account last month and it took about 3 minutes, all through the app. No ID card necessary
2) implementing a nationwide card programme to save 10 minutes in opening bank accounts isn't a great use of money
3) if ID cards are the key to productivity, then why are most of the other European countries (which all have ID cards) less productive than the UK?
1) genuinely intrigued as to have we you proved your identity
2&3) 10 minutes not much but 44k accounts opened every year in uk according to Google , that's a chunk of productivity right there (not just your time but the businesses time), but it's not just that as pointed out on the last page the nonsense of getting a passport signed by a liat of approved professionals from the upper echelons of the Dickensian class system is particularly nuts
I had to renew my postal vote sometime in the last ~12 months, which I only did originally because of the silly vote ID rule brought in by the Tories, but I could have sworn that I requested for it to be my way of voting for at least several years. My passport and driving license both became invalid over ten years ago and I'd misplaced them before the '24 (found them since, might get away with them, albeit photo for both was from ~20 years ago, just googled and expired ones ok if photo is decent likeness).
I'm a bit baffled why Tories are against this digital ID.
Likewise why Reform are against it.
But then allegedly, Boris is against it too, as is Corbyn.
My passport and driving license both became invalid over ten years ago.
Neither of which are free to renew. Or get in the first place.
I’ve just read the LibDems email (was a member a long time ago) and I’d agree with their worries about becoming a “papers please” state… and about how vulnerable people could be excluded… but that’s where we already are, isn’t it? People without formal ID can already be in a difficult position when it comes to employment, housing, pensions etc. We already require people to show their “papers” for many things. I’m not sure if providing a free digital ID for everyone would further embed exclusion, or help reduce it. We need to know more before making that call, I feel.
Peter Geohagen rips into that plastic faced **** Larry Elison (oracle/and largest fundraiser for the genocidal IDF ****s) and Tony Blair for their desire for access to NHS data, then it'll be the id card data, and before long the tech bros will own you
I have no objection to ID since I used to carry one when I was in the far east. Over there when the police stopped us (speeding boy racers) the first thing they asked from us was to show them our ID card. If we could not show our ID, then it would be straight to the police station for hassling. i.e. nothing too serious but they would make us sit at the police station for the entire night/day etc to wait, wait, wait for something. Wait for what? Until our ID appeared then we got charged accordingly (sometimes not). LOL! In those days it was (still is) common practice to show ID in many places where legal documents were required. Then there was a period of fake ID boom, where migrants from neighbouring countries used them to by-pass whatever they needed to do.
Since the UK (Labour) govt is now trying to introduce ID (digital), I wonder if they have considered the implication in the event of security breach? (notice the recent events?) It will become more common in future. Or in the event of losing one's mobile through theft, damage etc? I mean unless you have backup hard copy as proof of your existence, someone may be able to take your existence or at least take over your identity temporarily. It is very possible.
I rather they issue me a smart card type ID (assuming the scheme got implemented) rather just a digital ID. I don't like to put everything in one basket especially my mobile.
Well, it looks like the era of ID is here in the UK but what is the end objective I don't know. I can only assume it is best use for tracking and controlling people. Or if the govt wants to hassle you, all they need to do is "delete" your existence etc and you will be "invisible" with no access to whatever. Also consider the dystopia scenario where your digital ID include the "traffic light" indication of your rights. I can see that coming.
and before long the tech bros will own you
that ship has sailed
I would assume the SNP will oppose as well and not mandate its use in Scotland for access to services. they did this already for house rentals iirc
yeah the people on Facebook 🙄 complaining about this are tying it to climate lockdowns and a ban on eating meat !
if you were wondering why Farage and co were objecting too this, that's your answer, it spins in nicely into their omniconspiracy grifts
I'm a bit baffled why Tories are against this digital ID.
They aren't totally against the idea, especially if the Britcard can be used to harass people who look a bit foreign.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/08/07/tories-compulsory-digital-id-cards-chris-philp/
The dilemma the Tories appear to be facing is in relation to the Britcards being compulsory, that would obviously require white anglo-saxon christians to also have them.
The authoritarian wing of the Tory Party is surprisingly committed to guaranteeing an English man's freedoms and liberties.
The petition against the Britcards has reached 1.6 million signatures now
Is it really being called “BritCard”, despite the fact it won’t be a card and will be used by people who aren’t “Brits”?!? If so, that’s some dumb ****ery there.
I’ve been looking to see where the dumb name “BritCard” came from. Just read the original proposal from LabourTogether… they have a bit of hope there that it could help reduce digital social exclusion… but it’s all very much ruined by the intro proposing that the reason it is needed is to EXCLUDE people who aren’t “one of us”. So, while I can see the practical advantages of fixing things like OneGov with a legislative approach to include everyone… if the reason given for this ID (so strongly) is to exclude “non-Brits” from civic life here… on those terms it should be rejected by anyone who wants the UK to be more inclusive, shouldn’t it? Still thinking out loud on this one.
The shitshow around McSweeney is coming out
https://twitter.com/jodymcintyre_/status/1971217938091999434
☝️ Blimey, that's what the real prime minister looks like. I've never seen a photo of him not wearing glasses
The shitshow around McSweeney is coming out
Sack of rats.
Blimey, that's what the real prime minister looks like. I've never seen a photo of him not wearing glasses
Lmfao. Has he a bit of Cummings with hair about him?
I can remember the good old days of Cummings bashing.
It's not so much being against a ID card it's just why now when there's 7000 other more important things to fix.
I wonder if it's because they haven't any good solutions to anything like you know homelessness and the COLC.
Nah not worried about those.
It will sink.
the reason given for this ID (so strongly) is to exclude “non-Brits” from civic life here… on those terms it should be rejected by anyone who want the UK to be more inclusive, shouldn’t it? Still thinking out loud on this one.
devil in the details, for sure, but biggest immigration scandal i can think of recently was Windrush, 50k+ people who were unable to prove their right to live here , britcard (cringe) could've avoided all of that.
of course a future farage government could try and use it to do his mass deportations and Trumps America is showing that you certainly dont need an ID card system to do that . Infact it could be used as a firewall against an incoming reform government against them doing it.
It's not so much being against a ID card it's just why now when there's 7000 other more important things to fix.
Why now? Because right now it is important to show that Labour are tough on illegal foreigners and are determined to use everything at their disposal to deal with the, quote, "incalculable damage" caused by immigrants.
What do you want them to talk about? Rising gas and electricity prices?
the nonsense of getting a passport signed by a liat of approved professionals from the upper echelons of the Dickensian class system is particularly nuts
You only need to do that the first time you apply for a passport...and that's exactly the same thing that'll happen to get you a BritCard for the first time.
The guy sitting next to me the last time I was at the passport office (ages ago) got his photo thing signed by the guy who ran his local off licence. Not very Dickensian.
There's a lot of "ID cards are good because they prevent this minor inconvenience" but it doesn't justify the time and money that would need to be spent on them.
There's a lot of "ID cards are good because they prevent this minor inconvenience" but it doesn't justify the time and money that would need to be spent on them.
as i pointed out 'minor inconvenience ' is just pointless red tape and that very much has a cost- look at Brexit!
A lot of that work is ongoing and will continue anyway. It’s needs legislation to be complete and as effective as possible though. So I wouldn’t worry about the cost of this thing… we’ll be paying to improve/integrate systems and their digital verification anyway. I would worry about it being used as a political distraction and another attempt to look tough on scapegoats.
It's not so much being against a ID card it's just why now when there's 7000 other more important things to fix.
Why now? Because right now it is important to show that Labour are tough on illegal foreigners and are determined to use everything at their disposal to deal with the, quote, "incalculable damage" caused by immigrants.
What do you want them to talk about? Rising gas and electricity prices?
Nah don't worry about that - it's only a vote winner that one.
It's just such a typically technocratic way of dealing with entrenched problems caused by not dealing with decline. That is to blame the foreigners for governmental short-cummings that deliver this sort of hatred in the first place.
It's not even a fix. It's stupid on every level.
No wonder neoliberal moderates love it. They love to support failure of centralised systems and that's what this will be.
There's a lot of "ID cards are good because they prevent this minor inconvenience" but it doesn't justify the time and money that would need to be spent on them.
as i pointed out 'minor inconvenience ' is just pointless red tape and that very much has a cost- look at Brexit!
Brexit was not a minor inconvenience
that's the point , you only need to apply for an EORI number and fill out a full customs invoice when shipping to the UK from the EU now....
thats literally one form it led to a huge drop in trade
https://bifa.org/2024/09/23/new-report-highlights-decline-in-uk-eu-trade-following-brexit/
that's the point
Sorry I am confused here since obviously it isnt "one form" but instead everything that form covers once the UK exited the single market.
To quote someone above "Theres a lot of silliness over this," and this is about the stupidest I have seen.
drawing up a customs invoice really isnt that complex
theres no extra voodoo being outside the SM, the invoice just has to be checked against the contents
(im currently making a portal to autogrnerate one in my institute) get it right and it will breeze through customs, but pre Brexit you just didn't need one
but scale that up for every item in an articulated lorry and you have a stupendous amount of red tape- if its all one shipment you can get away with a separate line for each on the invoice., but combine a few and you need a fat wadge of paper
that 1 bit of paper was enough for plenty of companies to just say fk it, not worth the hassle
trying to get vaguely back on topic , removing the need to check multiple documents just to employ someone would be a genuine boon to business- we employ several people to do that in work! and thats just 1 small aspect of what a linked up universal ID could do
🫣
Good luck.
Voters in Switzerland are going to the polls on Sunday to decide whether to introduce electronic identity cards.
It is the second nationwide ballot on the issue, after voters rejected the idea in 2021 over concerns about data protection and unease that the proposed system would largely be run by private companies.
Under the revised proposal, the new system would remain entirely optional and in public hands, with the data on the electronic IDs stored on users' smartphones rather than centrally.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c20e4z2z8n7o
Switzerland is probably the closet to a real democracy with direct democracy IE referendums the norm
Chasing Reform was the death of Tories and it looks like it's going to be the death of Labour. Attacking the indefinite leave to remain, what do they want them to do? Paint roundabouts and fly flags?
It's pathetic.
https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/1972011998943871450?t=CJ49P0YLJNhBorP-j69DiA&s=19
Come on Andy.
Help put some of this mess right.
Keir Starmer is the most unpopular PM in the history of Ipsos polling.
Not true. If that were the case Labour MPs would be briefing the press against him, queuing up to publicly denounce him, and doing everything else possible to undermine him and create the conditions for a leadership coup.
Sir Keir Starmer is clearly still a vote winner in the eyes of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
Hate to break it to you, but Richard Murphy has zero credibility outside his little loony left youtube bubble. As evidenced by this video:
Unlike Sir Keir Starmer's and Rachel Reeves's boundless creditability outside the centrist bubble?
Edit : Btw extra points for using "loony left", it's an underused insult these days.
Probably because of the irony of right-wingers using it 💡
Btw extra points for using "loony left", it's an underused insult these days.
It's not an insult, it's an objective description. People like Murphy, Rone, the Greens etc. are completely detached from reality. There are certainly those on the right who are detached from reality, but the far left is inherently detached from it due to their socialist/communist ideals. Generally the right is quite happy with capitalism, or conventional monetary policy, they just want less of their hard earned money being given to those who do not deserve it.
It is not hard earned and why should they decide who deserves it? If that is the reality you want then I would say you are the loony.
People like Murphy, Rone, the Greens etc. are completely detached from reality.
Don't be ridiculous.
Which one is detached from reality the people that have to earn a living based on neoliberal constraints or the lucky buggers that are given interest income in apparently times of hardship.
You like many have reality back to front because there is no other way apparently.
If you want to challenge me on anything - give it up instead of just talking like you swallowed the Telegraph.
I will say again for all the neoliberal centrists there is no modelling or evidence of the banking system you believe to be accurate.
Just what the wealthy have told you.
Generally the right is quite happy with capitalism, or conventional monetary policy, they just want less of their hard earned money being given to those who do not deserve it.
You know why this is all so pushed back on? because the rich benefit from state issued money.
Why do you think interest has been kept so high for so long? That's free money to people with money.
What's hard-earned about that?
You see, MMT always applies - always - in a fiat system - it's just the rest of us aren't allowed access to the money.
That's all that's going off in neoliberalism. Plenty of money around just not for the rest of us. And it never trickles down.
The wealthy do not create wealth -workers do.
If the system you believe to be true is so good - why the hell is everything in such a mess?
you certainly dont need an ID card system to do that . Infact it could be used as a firewall against an incoming reform government against them doing it.
Good luck with that using a system with data off-shored by Palantir to USA and access by any of their three letter agencies that Trump and Putin's friend Nigel can ask for help. The Patriot Act started this and those of us with a long-term view could see where it was all heading and were laughed at by those whose idea of long-term is 5 to 10 years.
I would accept an ID card where I get an annual report of everybody who asked to see my records like one of the Baltic/Scandinavian states do. Bear in mind that MI5 is now a busted flush in the courts due to their perjury and some police services are not trustworthy either, we will need a right of record review.
the lucky buggers that are given interest income in apparently times of hardship.
Ah deary me, you still think that 'the rich' are sitting at home collecting 4% interest on their millions as income. That fact alone is enough to reveal that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Because the super rich work so hard for their money and are always the ones who are hit the hardest when things go tits up?
If only we had governments who cared more about them!
Remind me again who has absolutely no idea what they are talking about?
Starmer finally taking the fight to Reform including calling them racists. about time.
I reckon it's time for this Michael Foot quote
We are not here in this world to find elegant solutions, pregnant with initiative, or to serve the ways and modes of profitable progress.
No, we are here to provide for all those who are weaker and hungrier, more battered and crippled than ourselves.
That is our only certain good and great purpose on earth, and if you ask me about those insoluble economic problems that may arise if the top is deprived of their initiative, I would answer 'To hell with them.' The top is greedy and mean and will always find a way to take care of themselves. They always do.
Starmer finally taking the fight to Reform including calling them racists. about time.
And you don't see the irony of that ?
Generally the right is quite happy with capitalism, or conventional monetary policy, they just want less of their hard earned money being given to those who do not deserve it.
It's simply a fact that the rich deserve to be rich, and the poor deserve to be poor.
Starmer finally taking the fight to Reform including calling them racists. about time.
It’s welcome, but you can see the plan clearly now… throw asylum seekers under the bus to try and neuter Reform’s more wide reaching anti-immigrant appeal. I don’t think it’ll work though. And it’s ugly watching it play out.
He's not taking the fight to reform, he has just realised how much support with the wider public and within labour he has lost. He is now fighting to save his own job in the next few months, the hypocrisy and stench of the racism he has been loudly promoting will not be easily forgotten by the voters he has already lost.
But Starmer can't possibly be a racist........ he's just accused Nigel Farage of being one!
Farage is a super racist whereas Starmer is just a beginner but clearly keen to learn from Farage, the master.
I don't think Nigel Farage is, I reckon like Sir Keir Starmer he is quite a subtle racist. And no doubt like Starmer Farage doesn't even believe half of the nonsense that he publicly spouts. They both try to appeal to bigotry in the search for easy votes, and to distract from the fact that they have no real answers.
If Nigel Farage was a proper full-on racist he would never have had Muhammad Ziauddin Yusuf as his party's chairman. Can you imagine the BNP having a chairman with a name like that? No I can't either.
Muhammad Ziauddin Yusuf's appeal is that he is a little shit, just like Farage. Skin colour, the single most important issue to a proper full-on racist, doesn't come into it.
I reckon that the differences between Starmer and Farage are a lot less than many people imagine. They both dog whistle for their own personal political gains.
Probably the most significant difference between them is that unlike Starmer Farage is more honest and doesn't pretend to lead a "left-wing" political party.
[hit enter by mistake]
I reckon like Sir Keir Starmer he is quite a subtle racist.
I wonder, did he become a racist (and a dishonest one at that) after spending the first half of his working life as a human rights lawyer? Or was he a dishonest racist all along, and just did all that human rights stuff for the money? Must be a tough for a racist to have to spend their time working to abolish the death penalty in Caribbean countries.
I don't know if he was a fake when a lawyer but he is absolutely using racist tones to suit his needs. As a non racist person I would never use the language he seems to happily use so would agree he is in the subtle racist category
Must be a tough for a racist to have to spend their time working to abolish the death penalty in Caribbean countries.
What a strange comment. Sir Keir Starmer has never been a politician in any Caribbean country, abolition of the death penalty is an issue for politicians. Are you referring his time as a paid lawyer? The cases that lawyers take up and their personal views and opinions don't necessarily match.
I have no idea what any of this has to do with whether Sir Keir Starmer is a "subtle racist" or not. You can be racist to the core and still fully support a judicial system which places limitations on punishment, the British Empire was full of examples of that.
Under Starmer the Labour Party has become a nasty right-wing authoritarian party with racist undercurrents. Make what you will on how that reflects on Starmer.
Rachel Reeves at conference making ears bleed with tough choices.
In her universe despite all her financial restraint the 10 year bond yield is currently above the Truss period. And it came down recently.
Reeves
UK 10 years bond yield 4.72
Truss
UK 10 years bond yield 4.42
Now this wouldn't be my metric but maybe she's maybe needs to check her script.
Anyone got any thoughts on the 'Job guarantee' for young people?
Can't help but feel it's just going to end up being another way to transfer public money to private companies with very little benefit to the limited number of 18-21 year olds it will actually 'benefit'.
https://www.ft.com/content/aed9feef-b0c5-40c6-8515-1b6fc7ace635
Tony Blair's son Euan's company Multiverse looks to have a hand in the BritCard. Funny that.
☝️ I don't think that is true, Multiverse is a company that deals with education not digital ID.
Tony Blair's son Euan's company Multiverse looks to have a hand in the BritCard. Funny that.
Says who? I'm no fan of the Blairs but there's enough nonsense floating around without unsourced rumours.
Edit to add: i bet every consultancy under the sun will be scheming how to get on this gravy train.
Anyone got any thoughts on the 'Job guarantee' for young people?
I suspect it will be a bit like forcing unemployed people into 'placements', they'll end up on less than minimum wage and the companies that 'employ' them get pretty much free labour.
I suspect it will be a bit like forcing unemployed people into 'placements', they'll end up on less than minimum wage and the companies that 'employ' them get pretty much free labour.
I pretty much owe everything to the '97 Labour govt which forced me to get a job after two years on the dole after uni. I was skint, effectively homeless and sofa-surfing at mates houses, pretty much no work experience and a shit degree (a 3rd in Computer Science). One day I turned up to sign on and was told I was being sent on something called the 'graduate gateway scheme' and if I refused would have my dole money reduced. I went willingly (you'll do anything after trying to live on £35 a week for two years), had my dole doubled to £70/week, was placed with a small IT company where I had 3 months to prove I was useful. Luckily I managed to do that and was offered a job. Without that scheme christ knows where I would have ended up, quite possibly on the streets. I know these schemes generate a lot of cynicism, and in many cases that's deserved, but if they can help even just a few kids like I was into work then I'm all for it.
As usual Labour are 180 degrees from a solution.
A proper Job guarantee can make the economy function more efficiently - it can act as a stabiliser to inflation by putting people in work as opposed to putting them out of work. Employer of last resort.
It should be provided and paid for by the state and be transitional that takes place when the private sector is contracting. One then moves from a state job to a private sector job as the private sector begins to grow again.
Last of all it shouldn't be coercive - it should be optional.
https://gimms.org.uk/job-guarantee/
I think I mentioned this a few years ago and the usual lot attacked it. I'm guessing now Labour are doing a version that involves chucking money at the private sector - this is now a good thing?
Either way we need solutions that break the mold from the way we do things so this is an interesting if wonky step.
I think a Job guarantee can work if used in tandem with Universal Basic Income. Like rone said, the first thing is it has to be optional with no penalties for opting out.
It should also be organised highly locally with tailored solutions for each individual.
The Austrians recently completed a successful 4 year experiment that seems to have implemented the scheme correctly:
(In this case the participants could also choose to start their own businesses, with one person making mountain bike trails.)
It just seems that Labour's scheme is going to end up being primarily punative and time limited. In a few cases a young person might find themselves with a career they wouldn't have otherwise. But I think the most likely outcome is they will turn 22 and the only benefit will be for employers who have had a cheap dogsbody for a year or so.
I pretty much owe everything to the '97 Labour govt which forced me to get a job after two years on the dole after uni. I was skint, effectively homeless and sofa-surfing at mates houses, pretty much no work experience and a shit degree (a 3rd in Computer Science). One day I turned up to sign on and was told I was being sent on something called the 'graduate gateway scheme' and if I refused would have my dole money reduced. I went willingly (you'll do anything after trying to live on £35 a week for two years), had my dole doubled to £70/week, was placed with a small IT company where I had 3 months to prove I was useful. Luckily I managed to do that and was offered a job. Without that scheme christ knows where I would have ended up, quite possibly on the streets. I know these schemes generate a lot of cynicism, and in many cases that's deserved, but if they can help even just a few kids like I was into work then I'm all for it.
I'm glad it worked out for you, but I think the biggest problem is that it's not '97 anymore. The party is well and truly over.
And even for you, it's possible the stars just happened to align. Seems like 97 was the perfect time to have a shit CS degree and still make it work. Even kids with spectacular degrees today are going to struggle compared to kids with shit degrees in 97.
The Austrians recently completed a successful 4 year experiment that seems to have implemented the scheme correctly:
I think a lot of the issue with this country is any such scheme to be 'popular' has to be seen as being punitive, not supportive.
The media etc don't like dole scum, why should they get any oppurtunity to better themselves? Much better to have successful well off business owners have free labour.
https://twitter.com/kitty_donaldson/status/1972276168779784199?t=pisifHRMht2r05Qk5PHRaw&s=19
MAGA Labour hybrid.
There's so many 'in-your-face' issues with the way we run the economy. It's bonkers that we've gotten this far! Even more bonkers that no one really wants to take a microscope to it.
Take the current system of increasing interest rates to slow demand (i.e put people out of work) to then control inflation.
The flip side of this hostile regressive policy dressed up as economic sense - is that both Labour and the Tories want people to work! The lazy, the ****less etc - but their own system currently needs less people to work to apparently reduce demand and thus inflation.
Which way around is it? Same issue in the USA - Mexicans are both needed to do a lot of the work in the USA but at that same time - clear off!
This is the nub of economics in this country - it's simply not well thought out but it's become that entrenched we accept they must know what they're doing.
But very little is evidenced or written about.
Interest rate adjustment is perfunctory and barely any journalists are asking the right questions and just assuming it works as intended - which it does in terms of handing money out to people with wealth.
The scale of the problems in this country are absolutely huge and the level of reversal needed to stop decline is now massive.
Also they're missing a trick. Politicians hate inflation. So....
In academic terms, a JG acts as a price anchor to subdue inflation and also as an automatic stabiliser that maintains economic activity in the real economy when total (aggregate) demand falls below the level required to maintain full employment. The pool of Job Guarantee workers expands during economic downturns and shrinks during economic booms as workers are taken back into the private sector. It smooths out the fluctuations that occur during the business cycle by helping to stabilise total wages and consumption. In plain English, the public sector becomes the employer of last resort to provide jobs for the unemployed population in areas of the economy and community where demands are not being met. The Job Guarantee resolves the problem of the unemployment that government taxation creates, enabling the population to earn the currency. When the private sector cannot employ all workers, (especially in an economic downturn), the government can step in by providing public sector employment, at a living wage, to facilitate their transition to private sector employment as the economy grows.
Whereas UBI alone would likely be inflationary. Would work as a hybrid with UBI.
https://twitter.com/kitty_donaldson/status/1972276168779784199?t=pisifHRMht2r05Qk5PHRaw&s=19
MAGA Labour hybrid.
In the running for the Labour leadership? Not a chance.
Steve Reed represents the extreme right of the Labour Party, replacing Starmer with him would be pointless, they might as well stick with what they've got now.
The political logic is straightforward. Labour’s leadership team is triangulating the threat from Reform UK on the right while insulating itself from the soft‑left threat posed by the mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham. The goal is to be rhetorically tough on migration and spending while still gesturing towards fairness and security.
Ah, the centrist's enduring and flawed logic....try to please everyone by claiming that you agree with them and yet end up pleasing no one.
I'm sure that if they keep trying it will eventually work.
What the actual F....! Utterly clueless and out of touch.
Waving a few flags won't attract Reform voters - but will drive others away from Labour. 🤦♂️
Waving a few flags won't attract Reform voters - but will drive others away from Labour.
Also shouldnt it be the Union Jack for the Labour conference?
...they had those too!... 🙂
If you're happy to Labour to sit back and be painted as "anti-English" or "anti-British", as they so often have been while in opposition, then go ahead and moan. Whether it's swapping the red flag for the red rose, or having Union Jack membership cards and billboards at election times, much more of this "marketing" is needed if you want to fight against the "vote Reform to save your country" movement that is coming. It's going to have so much more momentum than we've seen before, ever more than in 2016 & 2019, now that the USA (that dominates/controls our public online spaces) has swung that way. The battle is going to be bloody... a sea of flags at party conference is nothing compared to the Britanniashagging that'll be needed on the run up to the next election.
The battle is going to be bloody... a sea of flags at party conference is nothing compared to the Britanniashagging that'll be needed on the run up to the next election.
Or they could do their job well and we'd need none of this bullshit.
we'd need none of this bullshit
Fantasy. If at the next election all the key "metrics" are up and people are better off it absolutely will not stop the country swinging towards populism. It is not enough. Anyone that thinks people will look at the facts or metrics and decide that if everything is going their way then on that basis they will turn away from Reform is living in dreamland. The old adage that when people feel worse off they will turn to the far right is still true... but that doesn't mean we should think that in the modern age people being slightly better off materially will neuter the far right... they play by different rules now, they can, and will, pull people towards them even if they are living in a rising economy and are getting a fair share of the benefits. Don't give them an easy ride by being shy of claiming flags and other signifiers. You can be sure they won't.
If you're happy to Labour to sit back and be painted as "anti-English" or "anti-British", as they so often have been while in opposition, then go ahead and moan.
You need to change the company that you apparently keep, accusations of being anti-English or anti-British isn't how I hear Labour often described. Clueless and inept seems to be much more common.
And since you mention it while in opposition Labour was seen as the most patriotic party, more so than even Reform UK.
https://www.moreincommon.org.uk/latest-insights/patriotism-polling/
Instead of throwing in the towel and trying to ape the far-right perhaps Labour should focus more on exposing the fake patriotism of divisive politicians such as Nigel Farage?
The metrics don't matter (they won't be up, anyway) because after 40 years of neo-liberal dismantling and flogging public services to the friendliest bidder, what is needed is a government that can articulate a vision and a plan that will reverse the damage. This government can't bring itself to do that so they furiously wave their wee flags instead.
Temporarily slowing the decline doesn't cut it anymore. Actual change is needed.
Torn on this one its good to see them reclaiming the flag, I dont want it to be a symbol of the far right & xenophobic morons, that said they look awkward af! but the absence of a pushback on Reform claiming the narrative this summer was utterly depressing, the Tories obviously have given up the ghost on being any sort of moderate party.
The reality is the old 'working class labour heartlands' dont really exist, they switched to reform/ukip etc at the brexit vote and they are never coming back, the battle for them is between the Tories and Reform.
Im more than happy for Starmer to push back and condemn the resurgent racism we are seeing, but Labour need to deliver on improving on cost of living/ services and bringing in voters on the left on things like recognising a Palestinian state , workers rights and green energy etc, other wise a fragmented left wing vote will just end up inviting the chaos of a reform minority government