UK Election!

Binners.  In Scotland our government has taken steps to alleviate this.

So whats your defence for labour continuing Tory austerity with this policy?

So whats your defence for labour continuing Tory austerity with this policy?

Why would it be any different to Keir Starmer’s and Rachel Reeve’s defence? Which is that it is unaffordable due to the state of the economy.

It is the standard defence for austerity. In fact it’s the only one isn’t it?

Edit: For clarity this is the state of the UK economy:

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/11/uk-economic-growth-may-2024.html

The broad-based recovery will be welcomed by the newly-elected Labour Party, as Prime Minister Keir Starmer undertakes his first week on the job.

It’s not in todays kings speech but it’s one of those things I can’t see still being in place in 6 months time

As has been stated many times by many people there isn’t a magic wand that Starmer can wave and undo 14 years of idealogical vandalism in 2 weeks

None of the excuses given by the labour right on here stand up. ~why are you defending this piece of tory cruel austerity?

Who has given excuses? Who has defended and what were these defences? I ask because I haven’t seen any…

Although ministers are still refusing to commit now to getting rid of the two-child benefit, because they cannot say yet how they would fund this, it is hard to imagine the government refusing to budge on this for another year given how strongly many Labour MPs feel about this.

That’s how I see it as well. The cap will either be removed, or replaced with a tapering off, next year. But not this year. I’d like it to be ASAP… but they’ll want time in government… and signs of more improvement in the economy and/or government finances (boo hiss… they’re pretending this stuff matters) before making any move.

Hopefully being saved for the budget

It’s short-term pain for long-term gain TJ !

I think I heard that one from David Cameron and Nick Clegg too.

Hopefully being saved for the budget

If that’s stays as March, and isn’t somehow brought forward, the pressure will be on them then to act… I’m sure… but for now it’ll just be “doing what we said we’d do at the election, hope to do more once finances (boo hiss… they’re pretending this stuff matters) improve”. I suspect they’ll be more tax raising measures in that though (boo hiss… they’re pretending this stuff matters), and such day to day spending increases will be resisted for a bit longer to see how those tax changes and clarity over government plans play out. I hope not of course, and they move sooner. But it’s unlikely to happen a few weeks after an election where they said it wouldn’t be happening immediately after an election win.

binners
Full Member
Missed the speech, what are the proposals regarding rental law for tenants, anyone know?

An end to section 21, no-fault evictions, some form of rent control and ‘increased rights for tenents’. I don’t know any more details than that, but I’m a private renter myself, so it’ll be interesting to see the exact proposals @ poopscoop

The Tories clearly had no intention of doing anything other than makes things easier for landlords

Cheers, fingers crossed it doesnt get too watered down.

My lad, his partner and 2 kids moved into another rental yesterday and it’s the first time I’ve seen it in the flash.

Jeez, £1350 a month? Doesnt get you much down here. :(

(Yeah, 80% of MP’s and landlords happening to be Tory in the last admission was never going to end well for renters.)

Oh for gods sake give it a rest. If Starmer got rid of it tomorrow then the usual suspects on here would dig around for another stick to beat him with

In the grand scheme of things, with what’s been announced in 40 new bills today…

I don’t know of a single Labour MP who wants to retain the 2 child limit. But I also think welfare spending will be the single biggest area of potential rebellion for the PLP. The only real argument is when. I’d imagine the leadership sense that the Budget is the right place to do it, and will try to placate MPs by telling them that it’s a fiscal policy and should be decided then, and also wait for the anti-poverty strategy review. Either way the party whips will have a hard time persuading MPs to vote for anything that even whiffs of retaining it.

The only real question is whether it will happen at the pace that the leadership want or that they’re forced to by the PLP. Personally I think they’re knocking at an open door.

But I also think welfare spending will be the single biggest area of potential rebellion for the PLP

Quite possibly. I have no doubt at all that the child benefit cap will be scrapped in time, if for no other reason than because of the intense pressure on Labour to do so.

That intense pressure will be expressed in many ways including of course across social media. What won’t pressurise Labour to scrap the cap will be those who say “for goodness sake shut up they are better than the Tories”

If only there was a way for the government to borrow the money to pay for scrapping the cap straight away rather than waiting for the economy to be fully fired up and roaring?

I have no doubt at all that the child benefit cap will be scrapped in time, if for no other reason than because of the intense pressure in Labour to do so.

It’ll happen.

I don’t know of a single Labour MP who wants to retain the 2 child limit.

Our (now) MP said explicitly at candidate hustings that he’s against it, and predicted that it would be the source of the most anguish within the party in the first year if Labour win. Even if the leadership wanted to keep it beyond next year (and I don’t believe they do) the pressure will build both inside the parliamentary party and the Labour movement as whole, and they’ll have to let it go.

Anyway, so far Labour’s first few weeks in office have been exactly as they said it would be. No real surprises. Good or bad.

Here’s to even better stuff ahead… [ insert an emoji of two beer glasses being knocked together ]

I’m probably going to get shot if my bosses read this as it’s sort of insider info, but one of the main tasks for the Gov right now is the (C)SR.

At the moment our relations team is frantic, pulling data together for their bosses in the various depts (DSIT, DHSC, DESNZ, etc.) to justify the budgets that they need to deliver the promises and commitments already made and/or identified issues from their (counts) 12 days in office.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/when-run-next-spending-review

Some stuff will be funded, some stuff not, some funded but not at the level asked for, it’s a massive task. The 2-child cap is ‘only’ a few billion but there’s hundreds of ‘only a few million/billion’ asks being made right now.

It’s not performative cruelty or any of the bullshine that the armchair politicians claim it is. It’s the way the process goes, and it’s the way proper grown ups handle being put in charge of the purse strings. DHSC will I’m sure be balancing the asks of their dept by engaging with their partners and this will be on their list somewhere, probably near the top.

Now, you can argue (as Rone does from time to time) that we shouldn’t worry about the cost per se, if it’s needed we can do it. That’s a ‘jury’s out’ issue for me, IANAEconomist. But even if they were to look at increasing the spending beyond what the borrowing rules say they should, they still need to decide what to spend on in a proper way.

The level of discussion from some is so naive.and just smacks of finding reasons to criticise because.

In other, somewhat unbelievable news, Laura Trott kept her seat? Dear god! Who was she standing against? The Tory party has retained its intellectual big guns then? She’ll probably end up as shadow chancellor. If she can put her shoes on the right feet properly in the morning

Laura Trott's car crash as she refuses to accept responsibility for 14 years of Conservative failure on #PoliticsLive pic.twitter.com/e2O0i6nS4O

— Farrukh (@implausibleblog) July 17, 2024

@theotherjonv

Best insight ever. Thanks for taking the risk posting that.

<Thumbs up.>

The 2-child cap is ‘only’ a few billion but there’s hundreds of ‘only a few million/billion’ asks being made right now.

That’s the argument which is always made and it is a fair one.

Politics, and the political choices, is all about priorities and not much else.

The only substantial differences between the Tories, Labour, the LibDems, the Greens, etc etc is priorities. They all have different priorities.

Thanks putting risking getting shot and putting STW first btw,  that’s a proper priority:-)

Thanks putting risking getting shot and putting STW first btw, that’s a proper priority:-)

It’s the STW way, his career is purely secondary to the cause! :D

Best insight ever. Thanks for taking the risk posting that.

Plus one, really appreciated the insight and honesty.

That’s a ‘jury’s out’ issue for me, IANAEconomist.

Me too. The advocates present Modern Monetary Theory as if it is established fact, when as far as I am aware it is not.

We’ve seen the implications of a sterling crisis two years ago, the last thing we want is another avoidable one.

Also can people stop giving Liz Truss links, and keeping her in the conversation, it’s what she wants.

advocates present Modern Monetary Theory as if it is established fact

No economic theory is a fact, whether its Keynesianism, Chicago macroeconomic theory or any derivative of either. The proponents of each will put forward their views with certain caveats/assumptions that make it work. When it doesn’t in practice, they’ll say it’s because certain of the assumptions weren’t put in place by the governments trying to run it.

Also can people stop giving Liz Truss links, and keeping her in the conversation, it’s what she wants.

Oh come on. Her lack of self-awareness is absolutely hilarious in a salad-based way. She’s actually so mental and delusional that she still thinks people care what she thinks, yet every time she posts something, she just opens herself to an absolute deluge of very, very funny abuse, all of which will just go ‘whoosh’ straight over her head

She’s like one of those Japanese soldiers who didn’t know the Second World War was over until the 1980’s. Just sit back and enjoy her making an arse of herself :D

Politics, and the political choices, is all about priorities and not much else.

This. All I’m really saying is that’s there’s a process by which spending decisions get made, and that is in full swing right now. In a grown up government, I hope at least, ‘shouts loudest’ and ‘what will look best on the front pages’ won’t be the highest weighted scoring points. No matter how obvious it looks to the outsider, there’s hundred’s of other ‘no brainers’ as well and unless we really can find the door into the magic money orchard, some of the no brainers won’t get funded.

I want ‘strong and stable’ governments making sensible evidence based decisions. If that upsets some cyclists because they aren’t moving as fast as they’d like, tough.

Me too. The advocates present Modern Monetary Theory as if it is established fact, when as far as I am aware it is not

It’s factual. It’s backed up by a massive body of evidence. And more to the point there is know other description of its type that shows how government spending actually works.

It’s not a economic  theory in the literal sense of word more of a set of descriptions that show how money flows.

What is categorically not fact that a country that issues its own currency needs to borrow it from the private sector.

I mean what do you think is not factual about it?

No economic theory is a fact, whether its Keynesianism,

True but MMT is not exactly that way around.

It sets out to explain how spending works not necessarily politically advocate for it.

It really shouldn’t be difficult to understand – the government spent 330bn from nothing during the pandemic.

That’s fact – it’s on parliamentary record and MMT just explains how it’s done.

All we’re ever saying is the spending is not constrained by lack of money.

All we’re ever saying is the spending is not constrained by lack of money.

It’s a political sleight of hand that is hidden behind the arguments around MMT … that the government can increase spending as much as it wants with no regards to what is happening economically or with tax levels or the process for controlling that money (it absolutely can) does not mean that the effects will be wholly positive no matter how much they choose to spend and how and when they chose to spend it (that is far from a given). What is happening in the economy, and the balancing of spending, lending and tax revenues over time is all still key to the work of a government and the central bank and the decisions they have to make, MMT does not change that, it just helps explain how it all works.

Holy heck, the King’s speech, where to start? What a…. I give them one term, if that.

Clip of the new ‘business secretary’ posted above, a man who has literally zero experience in business – Zero!
Jonathon Reynolds:
– worked for the council, trained as a solicitor, then just a Labour / Union functionary of various shades.

I’m, nostalgic about a lot of things in the 1970s but not the Big-Brother socialist government, but here we appear to be going again.

In amongst the rail (& bus? is this 1960s czechoslovakia?) privatisation, tax on private schools, there’s another Race Equality Act. How many does that make now? As I understand it Labour claim this is necessary because people are paid differently based on their State racial classification. Really? I’ve been working 4 decades and that’s a new one on me. Does this ring true?

What next? I’ve noticed taller people tend to end up getting promoted to senior positions. Can we have a Helping The Shorties Into Better Positions So There Is An Equal Height Range Across Pay Grades Act?

All this is going to need Big-state policing and micromanaging, and what we all want is an expanded public sector and the bigger tax take that requires.

Twins (even identical) are often observed to grow up with widely differing life outcomes, even though they look the same, same age, same family, almost the same DNA. Can we have an Identical Twin Equality Act as clearly something is going very wrong for those guys.

Its going to be a long five years.

Lots of words there grimep and I was hoping for perhaps an intelligent critique from a right-wing conservative perspective but you seemed to have missed the opportunity to do that.

What the **** are you on about? I am sure there is something highly amusing buried in your comments about people’s height but could you really not manage to make a serious point…… was it really too much to expect?

I’m, nostalgic about a lot of things in the 1970s

Kipper ties, the Black and White Minstrels, the Grunwick Strike…?

I’m, nostalgic about a lot of things in the 1970s

White dog poo? Opel Fruits? Jim’ll’Fix it? Hot pants? Jumpers for goalposts? Wasn’t it…?

Its going to be a long five years.

Let’s hope so, eh? The last 14 have felt like a ****ing eternity!

Chris Philp, the idiots idiot, is presently on Channel 4 news slagging off Labours economic plans,particularly the OBR oversight

He was then reminded that he was one of the most vocal champions of the Lettuces mini-budget, famously without OBR oversight, and that went so spectacularly well that he’s in no position to be criticising anyone

Clown!

Oh for gods sake give it a rest. If Starmer got rid of it tomorrow then the usual suspects on here would dig around for another stick to beat him with

Look it’s fine. You have your position, which is that the child benefit cap isn’t sufficiently important to deal with right now.

Look it’s fine. You have your position, which is that the child benefit cap isn’t sufficiently important to deal with right now.

Never read him say that’s his position, for some reason if you don’t disagree with the government then it’s your opinion as well?

Chris Philp, the idiots idiot

You’re picking low hanging fruit there. Even the Daily Mail thinks he’s a idiot.

The minister for bungling is what they called him:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13353453/Minister-bungling-Chris-Philp.html

But but it is not the first time he has been publicly pilloried for an apparent lack of knowledge.

I don’t know of a single Labour MP who wants to retain the 2 child limit.

I can tell you at least 2. Starmer and Reeves – otherwise it would be gone

Never read him say that’s his position, for some reason if you don’t disagree with the government then it’s your opinion as well?

I don’t think the issue here is that binners isn’t disagreeing with the government, it’s the fact that he got in a right strop because people have dared to criticise Labour for not scrapping the child benefit cap.

If have read everything that binners has written, as you apparently claim to have done, then you must have noticed.

If binners agrees with the criticism concerning the Tory benefit cap being kept then his outbursts make even less sense.

don’t know of a single Labour MP who wants to retain the 2 child limit.

I can tell you at least 2. Starmer and Reeves – otherwise it would be gone

LOL! Brilliant !

All I’m really saying is that’s there’s a process by which spending decisions get made, and that is in full swing right now. In a grown up government, I hope at least, ‘shouts loudest’ and ‘what will look best on the front pages’ won’t be the highest weighted scoring points

Yes – so why is this cheap simple to do policy which will have immdiate positive effects and which is being called for widely not making the cut?

The lack of action on this says a huge amount about how this government will be and sets the tone.  Ending child poverty and hunger is not a labour priority.  Clearly

“and what we all want is an expanded public sector and the bigger tax take that requires.”

Can’t believe you’ve finally posted something I vaguely agree with! :-P

(notwithstanding the perennial STW debate over the financial part of that statement)

@grimep Was that you on Jeremy Vine spouting rubbish from abroad? You are Charlie Mullins AICMFP! (You can send it to the Trussel organisation).