Viewing 40 posts - 19,161 through 19,200 (of 21,869 total)
  • Sir! Keir! Starmer!
  • zippykona
    Full Member

    Yesterday I was agreeing with Dumbojo on the environment now I’m liking what starmer says

    https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-we-dont-want-to-diverge-from-eu-says-sir-keir-starmer-12966338

    squirrelking
    Free Member

    What makes it especially surprising is that the the Parliamentary Labour Party is so solidly behind Starmer, and barely a murmur of criticism is ever heard.

    I wonder why that would be? I’m truly stumped.

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    Yesterday I was agreeing with Dumbojo on the environment now I’m liking what starmer says

    Well Rishi Sunak is very much on the right of the Tory Party (although for reasons which I don’t fully understand many seem to believe otherwise and appear to think that he is merely attempting to appease right-wing Tories) So you don’t have to be particularly left-wing to be at odds with him.

    Something which both Johnson and Starmer can manage to do fairly easily!

    rone
    Full Member

    Even I can’t get my head around this one.

    Well there you go.

    Snap election Territory.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Publicity.  the more a politician is in the news no matter what for their vote goes up

    Its also margins of error – the differnce between last poll and this is well within the margins of error

    kelvin
    Full Member

    Sunak’s in touch with you, Jo Motorist. It’s having a small effect.

    Some conservative swing voters have forgotten all about him borrowing someone else’s “normal” car to fill up with fuel, and not knowing how to pay for it. Do we think he ever drives himself anywhere, ever? These attempts to pretend to be in touch with the little people would never float without the help of the papers (and other media that follows them).

    rone
    Full Member

    Not sure. I would have expected stuff to have got way worse for the Tories recently.

    And as for margin of error there’s polls showing 24+ leads. That’s a big margin.

    Tax cuts tax cuts blah blah.

    Hopefully it will put a rocket up Starmer’s arse to define a difference.

    rone
    Full Member

    Sunak’s in touch with you, Jo Motorist. It’s having a small effect.

    For sure, short memory syndrome is a thing in the UK.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    And as for margin of error there’s polls showing 24+ leads. That’s a big margin.

    Polls use different methodology.  to track a trend you either need to average them all or follow one only.  comparing one poll companies results with another does not work

    Most polls claim an accuracy of 2 or 3% IIRC so 3% is just within margins of error

    also rounding.  the previous one may have been 41.6% and the current one 39.4%.  so just over 2% differnce.  round it and it looks like 3%

    kelvin
    Full Member

    That’s good news Ernie. I for one hope Labour double down on the switch away from fossil fuels… (ie listen to Miliband) but fear that despite surveys like that one you’ve posted they’ll be timid about putting even their existing plans (which are way beyond what the Tories are offering) front and centre. We’ll see come their conference…

    [ those currently saying they’ll vote Labour next time might well be citing climate change as a live issue for them, but those returning to the Tories in recent polls might be all for Sunaks’ pro fossil fuel industry agenda ]

    [ some iffy journalism in there…

    Head: “Tory swing voters switch to Labour after Sunak’s green retreat, poll finds”

    Subhead : “Survey shows nearly 90% of 2019 Conservative voters say green industry is vital to UK’s economic growth”

    Neither of which is backed up by the detail : “Almost nine in 10 voters who intend to switch their support from Conservative to Labour candidates in the next general election believe that “green growth” is important for the future of Britain’s economy, according to a poll.”

    The polling doesn’t show switching “after” Sunak’s dumping of green targets. And it doesn’t show that 90% of Conservative voters say any such thing about a green economy, only that 90% of voters saying they’ll switch to Labour do.

    ]

    dazh
    Full Member

    I for one hope Labour double down on the switch away from fossil fuels…

    I hope they don’t. They need to focus on one thing and one thing only, the cost of living. If they can sell net zero as a way to bring that down then fine, but otherwise they should steer well clear of the climate issue. If they are smart they’ll abandon their ridiculous promise to spend bugger all and announce a scheme to help working people switch to electric cars with a massive scrappage scheme and price caps on electricity bills to charge them so they can argue that driving will be cheaper under labour than the tories.

    molgrips
    Free Member

    announce a scheme to help working people switch to electric cars with a massive scrappage scheme and price caps on electricity bills to charge them

    No, this is a terrible use of funds. They need a huge programme of on-street charging rollout and city centre fast charging hubs that are really cheap for people with no on-street parking. The cars will make their way down the market of their own accord. Making EVs super cheap will heavily penalise those who can’t charge at home, which includes a lot of lower income households.

    kelvin
    Full Member

    I’d like Molgrip’s post… but the like button/counter seems to have gone AWOL.

    molgrips
    Free Member

    IMO the majority of people like the idea of EVs and would happily drive one, so I don’t think a lot needs to be done in terms of demand.

    squirrelking
    Free Member

    IMO the majority of people couldn’t care less where the power of their car comes from as long as it’s convenient.

    I’m with you though, the coal stations are all but gone and gas prices have only gone one way. Energy prices could easily be fixed with market reform leaving plenty of funding for efficiency measures and green initiatives.

    molgrips
    Free Member

    I’m just looking forward to having a government that will actually do stuff to try and move us along. I hope I’m not disappointed.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Depends what you expect MOlgrips. If you have any expectations of anything much I think you will be disappointed. I think far too many folk have wishful thinking about Starmer.

    rone
    Full Member

    Yeah don’t count on it.

    As per TJ.

    kimbers
    Full Member

    Tories set quite the trap for Starmer

    if they sell off the land itll be virtually impossible for Labour to go ahead with northern legs

    ernielynch
    Full Member

    The good news is that Starmer is lazer-focused on “better connectivity”.

    And although the Tories are using wrecking ball tactics Starmer would “bulldoze through the barriers” in the way of house building if elected at the next general election.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67016873

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    The main problem with Starmer is that – being a reasonable, compromising, nerd – he thinks that merely being sensible and responsible is enough to win an election and govern. imvho people want action and the hopey-changey stuff.

    announce a scheme to help working people switch to electric cars with a massive scrappage scheme and price caps on electricity bills

    Free stuff for everyone!

    rone
    Full Member

    Free stuff for everyone!

    It’s never about what is free or what needs to be paid for but what a government can do with the power of the state in the face of what the private sector will never do successfully.

    That is the purpose of the state.

    It is also why we are in such a dismal mess pretending (lying) that the private sector must generate money for the state before we fix anything.

    How many more failures do we need before we realise that it will come down to the government to fix many of the faults of lack of investment – just about everywhere you look.

    Waiting for the private sector to show up and bail the state out is not how it works.

    kelvin
    Full Member

    That is the purpose of the state.

    To even further subsidise car purchases for people with off road parking? Strange priority. A focus on investment in renewables, the grid and a shared public charging network would be preferable. You see, decisions about where money is spent, and where it is recovered, is still the job of government. No economic theory removes that role. You can’t do everything everywhere all at once. Reality is waiting for any politician that thinks otherwise.

    Northwind
    Full Member

    kimbers
    Full Member

    if they sell off the land itll be virtually impossible for Labour to go ahead with northern legs

    The downsized Euston development is also expansion-proof

    mattyfez
    Full Member

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brush-teeth-schools-teachers-labour-dentist-b2424945.html
    Surely childeren should arrive at first year toilet trained as a minimum.

    A primary school teacher cannot change nappies and teach a class at the same time.

    chestercopperpot
    Free Member

    His big policy announcements consist of don’t worry old people/majority of the electorate we won’t change anything.

    rone
    Full Member
      <li style=”list-style-type: none;”>

    To even further subsidise car purchases for people with off road parking? 

    Well meant as a general comment towards progressive policies.

    Whereas neither party is doing **** all, and being trapped in a dead-lock over who dare spend any cash.

    Let’s face it we’re not getting anywhere without the money.

    You can say whatever you want about economic theories and accept there is no money or you can make a case against Starmer that there is money to do things because Reeves and he believe they can’t do a thing without private sector growth.

    Seriously.

    I’d really like to know how you believe economic growth occurs. Feel free to offer an alternative *theory* (Reminder MMT Is the only theory that starts with the way Government’s currently spend. There is no othery theory that does that. The main alternative monetarist view starts with the idea rich people are the source of the ££££. Which is demonstrable bollocks.)

    As for car subsidies – yeah on a micro level we got our first EV 6 years ago and charger – with some state subsidy.  It wouldn’t have happened without it. But you very well know this is micro is not macro.

    rone
    Full Member

    His big policy announcements consist of don’t worry old people/majority of the electorate we won’t change anything

    He simply follows where the Tories go.

    Time after time we keep seeing this and yet supporters find ways to hold their right wing hero in high regard whilst at the same time screaming at the Tories.

    It’s totally perplexing.

    Outcomes keep getting worse, politics keep shifting rightwards and Centrists never stop to analyse their position in this process that they are being shifted ever rightwards.

    This is all fine if you want things to constantly be on a downward trajectory.

    I really hope Starmer is just faking it to be in power but I can’t see it. That’s my 10% hope.

    MSP
    Full Member

    The main problem with Starmer is that – being a reasonable, compromising, nerd – 

    There is no evidence in his leadership of the labour party that he is in any way compromising, in fact he has quite effectively eradicated alternative views. What I think you mistake for compromise is lack of any political ideals or philosophy, his aim is to be in power and he will tell an audience anything to achieve it. Which leads to making contradictory statements on different days, which isn’t an an indication of compromise it is a display of dishonesty.

    He has shown us who he is, it is time people started believing what his actions demonstrate rather than trying to pick up on just the bits in his speeches that they like and agree with. Because doing that is just the same as the maga crew and the boris fanboys.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Rutherglan byelection anyone?

    Fine result for labour and a bigger margin than I expected – tories lost their deposit but they didn’t really campaign or try – the labour / tory pact again?

    dander
    Full Member

    Hmmm, a bit more significant than that TJ I think, despite the context of the election. I thought labour were absolutely gone up here – obviously took advantage of the SNPs issues and it is a ‘traditional’ labour seat, turnout was low, but still a shock.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Not a shock at all.  A shock would have been the SNP holding the seat.  Its a bigger margin than I expected but most of that is Tory voters voting labour as an anti SNP vote.

    Its not the huge seismic shock that the Grauniad has it as

    ransos
    Free Member

    Surely childeren should arrive at first year toilet trained as a minimum.

    Of course, but some don’t. What do we do about that?

    kelvin
    Full Member

    School starts before year one as well. And don’t forget in some areas breakfast club is about getting some food into children that would otherwise go hungry without schools intervening… it’s not just for the parents’ convenience. Or course no child should be going hungry… but welcome to the UK that many teachers see and most people never come into contact with. Adding tooth cleaning lessons to breakfast clubs make sense… but both should be staffed and paid for, not relying on existing teaching staff. Schools in less well off areas need more staff, and (officially) longer days.

    fasthaggis
    Full Member

    Its not the huge seismic shock that the Grauniad has it as

    Indeed, it’s a blip ,poor old (Scottish) Labour will now try and milk it as their heroic/triumphant return.
    I love how they think that folk up here have forgotten how much they were ignored/shafted by UK Labour.

    cultsdave
    Free Member

    People are utterly fed up with the total incompetence of the SNP. Hopefully this is the start of a revival of Labour in Scotland.

    timba
    Free Member
    Surely childeren should arrive at first year toilet trained as a minimum.Of course, but some don’t. What do we do about that?

    A child with either a disability or educational needs must be catered for within school policy. Entry at 4 years isn’t a legal requirement, the difficulty comes at Year 1 where either a disability or needs haven’t been identified

    Keir would do better to identify what he’d do to improve parenting to help children

    kelvin
    Full Member

    Or course “parenting” needs improving. In the meantime, kids need help and schools fill in the gaps. If they don’t, kids suffer.

    [ remember… SURE START CENTRES !! ]

Viewing 40 posts - 19,161 through 19,200 (of 21,869 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.