UK Election!

It is staggering to think about what sort of country would put those two up against each other in a presidential race rather in a than a care home. It really is beyond belief.

The very fact those questions are being asked says to me it’s time to step down – both of them are older than my dad, as much I love him I wouldn’t trust him to run a country

Oh well. Another generation of naive voters are about to discover the reality of loopy Labour in power.

Hmm would the country had actually survived another 5 years of the Tories thou 🙂

It is staggering to think about what sort of country would put those two up against each other in a presidential race rather in a than a care home. It really is beyond belief.

We have to always remember that these two shouldn’t be lumped together as ‘the same thing’. One of them is clearly old and frail, and has some bother with words and names, but has delivered four years of relatively sensible government to the US.

The other is old and frail, a convicted felon and rapist, twice impeached, who has colluded with America’s enemies, undermined its allies, tried to subvert the outcome of a democratic election, and is currently threatening authoritarian rule.

The only reason Biden is seeking re-election is to stop Trump and protect America. The only reason Trump is standing is to enrich himself and stay out of prison.

You could certainly argue that both are unsuitable for office, but only one of them is a clear danger to the rule of law and the constitution.

The whole thing is a shitshow, and at this point, I don’t think the democrats can field a winning candidate.

Its not centre left.  Its centre right establishment.  Its just a load of folk who are centre right claim to be centre left.  I find the right wing establishment comfy middle class bias very obvious.

Not been on here for a couple of days so rewound a bit. Noticed the above. I know we aren’t allowed personal insults but I find this a pretty insulting, condescending pile of shite from the usual suspect.

The grown-ups are back in the room apparently…

You did check the date that video was posted?

Plus, grown up doesn’t have to mean po-faced and dour…

Do not feed the troll.

Environment agency coastal patrol surely?

These tribute bands with contrived similar but not the same as original names are getting silly.

So far… this chaos with Ed Miliband thing seems pretty calm… take that video… Grant Shapps had 5 different government jobs in under 2 years.

“Here’s some news to cheer up the climate deniers https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jul/11/cumbria-coalmine-was-unlawfully-approved-government-says “

I cant see the problem with mining our own coal, we still need coal, and will be importing it from other Countries for many years, so why not mine it ourselves, keep jobs in our Country, and reduce the carbon footprint by not importing it?
Same with North Sea oil and gas, again it will be used for many years to come, so why not use our own oil and gas?

We will still extract and use oil and gas, what is stopping is exploring and developing new fields¹ which wouldn’t come on line for years… by which point we shouldn’t need it. The coal from the Cumbria² mine would mostly be an export product.

¹ North Sea ² Irish Sea

Should we start a new thread?

~anyway – the pressure is on from parties to the left of labour.

Starmer faces test of Labour discipline after SNP proposes vote on ending two-child benefit cap in king’s speech debate
Keir Starmer faces a possible test to his authority in the Commons next week after the SNP said that it would table an amendment to the king’s speech saying the two-child benefit cap should be abolished.

In a letter to the Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar, the SNP’s leader at Westminster, Stephen Flynn, said that “the moment Keir Starmer stepped into Downing Street, the Tory two-child cap became the Labour party two-child cap”.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jul/15/labour-lisa-nandy-david-lammy-foreign-policy-rishi-sunak-conservatives-uk-politics-live

How can labour defend this?  Its an abhorrent policy and cast children into poverty given how l;ow our benefits are at the best of times.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jul/14/labour-should-scrap-two-child-benefit-cap-sooner-rather-than-later

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/14/the-guardian-view-on-the-two-child-cap-scrap-this-nasty-policy

Should we start a new thread?

Probably.

Prediction: Gov will say that it’ll be dropped, but not in the first budget, and most MPs will get in line.

Personal: Labour should have said during the campaign that it would go immediately.

 Grant Shapps had 5 different government jobs in under 2 years.

Grant Shapps has had at least that number of names, let alone jobs.

just to point out according to the guardian article the cost of eliminating the 2 child benefit cap is less than the aid promised to Ukraine and less than the tax breaks promised to business by Reeves.  Its a tiny sum in terms of the government budget

I think its utterly disgusting that they have not agreed to remove this by now.  Shameful and shows how wedded they are to the cruel tory austerity

Same with North Sea oil and gas, again it will be used for many years to come, so why not use our own oil and gas

Because there isn’t enough gas* and we export 80% of the oil as it is.

That we need to somehow keep granting new licenses to manage the transition is up there with “we need to put up water bills to pay for sewage treatment” as things shareholders say that are clearly just rubbish and in their own self interest.

*INEOS Grangemouth import from North America, Milfoird Haven imports from Qatar IIRC, if there was enough gas we wouldn’t have had the trouble we’ve had the last few years.

Shameful and shows how wedded they are to the cruel tory austerity

Yes I can imagine how the entire Labour front bench are cackling with glee about carrying on with a universally condemned policy started by Osbourne. I can think of no other reason they’d do this.

What other reason is there for NOT removing the cap?  Its not financial.

Yes I can imagine how the entire Labour front bench are cackling with glee about carrying on with a universally condemned policy started by Osbourne. I can think of no other reason they’d do this.

If that doesn’t work try accusing TJ of trolling.

BTW just out of interest why do you think that the Tories maintained this policy which you claim was “universally condemned”?

Were the Tories also cackling with glee?

It’s performative cruelty designed specifically to appeal to mouth-breather “red wall” voters who may otherwise support rebrexkip, or, worse even than that, the tories. It makes no sense from an economic, humanitarian, or social perspective.

Just over a week in power and they’ve not solved child poverty yet, Kier Starmer is to blame for all of it!

Argee – this a is a very simple step to take.

According to argee’s hilarious sarcastic comment Starmer needs much more time to reverse a Tory policy

I suspect they’ll stick to what they said just a few weeks ago, when trying to get elected… no reversal straight after the election if they were to be elected… but that they want to reverse it as soon as “possible”. And by that they were talking in the scope of avoiding day to day spending increases in year one. In my opinion, they absolutely should have made an exception for this, but they didn’t. So they won’t ’till they’ve had some time in government and can say that stability has enabled the removal of (or at least a staging of) the multi child cap. It has to go. But I don’t think they’ll get rid of it this year, not without some unexpected good news to explain away the extra immediate costs.

If they can’t even do the easy, right stuff to do, then I may have been right in my doubts that they will do much at all.

I fully expect this first year they will do what they said they would do. Which is limited and contained, compared to all the things “we” would like them to be doing everywhere all at once. They pressure to change this multi child cap crap will be great though, and it’s pushing at an open door really… it’ll happen before the end of next year I would expect… but not before. I could be wrong.

According to argee’s hilarious sarcastic comment Starmer needs much more time to reverse a Tory policy

Why do you state Starmer, rather than the government, they are just over a week in office, working out where they stand and formulating plans, yet people think they should just fire out some quick hits, where there may not have been any real assessment of the impacts, such as where to find the reported £3.6. billion a year to pay for this change?

Kelvin – so continuing with this senseless deliberately cruel tory austerity policy then?

such as where to find the reported £3.6. billion a year to pay for this change?

Perhaps the same place as the money to Ukraine has been found or the money for tax giveaways to businesses?

Perhaps the same place as the money to Ukraine has been found or the money for tax giveaways to businesses?

How much has Labour provided for this since being in power, can you be more prescriptive so that the rest of us can understand where you believe these funds are to provide nearly £4 billion extra per year, every year?

Finally, £1.7bn is a tiny sum in the context of a £2.7tn economy, and there are plenty of ways the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, could find it without any difficulty. As the tax expert Richard Murphy has shown, taxing capital gains at the same rate as income would net the Treasury £12bn a year, while restricting tax relief on pensions to the basic rate of income tax would raise a further £14.5bn. Removing the losses the Bank of England makes on its gilt holdings from the way the government’s debt rule is calculated would raise an estimated £20bn, according to the consultancy Oxford Economics.

From the Grauniad.

Or plenty of other places – its a tiny sum.  tiny % on corporation tax or a tiny bit on income tax or a little bit more money printed or a tinsy winsey wealth tax

its not a financial decision its a political one

Why do you state Starmer, rather than the government, they are just over a week in office, working out where they stand and formulating plans, yet people think they should just fire out some quick hits, where there may not have been any real assessment of the impacts, such as where to find the reported £3.6. billion a year to pay for this change?

How about an easy one, tax CEO pay?

https://www.raconteur.net/leadership/the-big-debate-are-ceos-paid-too-much#:~:text=CEO%20pay%20at%20FTSE%20companies,their%202008%20value%20until%202028.

or

CEO pay slightly declined in 2022: But it has soared 1,209.2% since 1978 compared with a 15.3% rise in typical workers’ pay

Go after corporate profits as well

Why do you state Starmer, rather than the government

Mostly I guess because the buck stops with the Prime Minister. When the previous government was in power it was common to refer to Rishi Sunak when discussing government policies.

It is assumed in British politics that the leaders of the two main parties have the final say on their party’s policies.

Personally I would much prefer less power being concentrated in the hands of one person but that appears to be a minority point of view.

Not a minority of one though Ernie, and I would note that the better times I remember for this country have always had strong teams in government.
The remaining Tories were very poor, no strength across the team (for all sorts of clear reasons)

Personally I would much prefer less power being concentrated in the hands of one person but that appears to be a minority point of view.

You’ll be happy to hear that Starmer has said that we’re going to see a return of ‘proper cabinet government’ under him after years of power being hoarded by a centralised cabal around the PM, and also intends to devolve more power to the regions then, surely?

You’ll be happy to hear that Starmer has said that…..

Yup, definitely. And I’ll be ecstatic if it turns out to be true. What’s not to like?

So binners – how do you justify keeping the tory 2 child benefit cap?  🙂

I will also bet no new powers for Scotland – in fact I expect a clawback particularly over the NHS

how do you justify keeping the tory 2 child benefit cap?

I hope/reckoning that’ll be history very soon, already a lot of rumbling from the back benches. It should have been history before the GE frankly. It’s objectively wrong.

Oh stop bloody whining FFS!!! They’ve only been in power a week and you’re expecting them to undo 14 years of deriliction 😉