Forum menu
Anyway I’m sticking to my claim that the Green Party does not currently attract self-serving careerists, and instead people who overwhelmingly have strong convictions and commitments.
Once the greens get in power as they have in Scotland that changes. Still i guess conviction based but totally lost sight of their core principles chasing gender issues instead. Regardless of how you see the scors GRA its clear the party was used as a vehicle for folk chasing this rather than using their political clout and capital on their core mission.
I’ll mention Hallum 2017 again… and the lessons learned. While it would be lovely and cosy to not have rigorous procedures,…
Oh, I agree that procedures for selecting candidates are rigorous.
The alternative is seats not having a Labour candidate on the ballet paper because time ran out.
The alternative is yet more years of Tory government, which our resident sixth formers would be more than happy with as it allows them to continue in their ideologically pure comfort zone and let’s face it, that’s all that really matters
In a grown up world you could actually do something about it and maybe engage in the democratic process on a more involved level than just constantly whining on the interweb, but where’s the fun in that?
I see the meme bore is ignoring the fact that he was spouting total crap about how Labour selects its candidates.
i must have been having an acid flashback when I witnessed it then, but that’s the gamble you take with doing a lot of class A’s in your younger years. On balance I still reckon it was worth it.
Anyway..:. I’m getting a t shirt printed with ‘Meme Bore’ on it. I’ll post a piccie of me with it on, with a Jeremy Corbyn hat and some gold sparkly hot pants.
Any other requests?
pedantry is pointless. As is this thread, again.
Well you can blame binners for that. A perfectly reasonable question was asked on this UK government thread......who would vote for if there was a general election now.
I said that I would support the Greens because firstly they are lefty social democrats and secondly because for obvious reasons they don't attract self-serving careerists.
My comment was with reference to all three main parties and it very much chimes with public perceptions.
Well that was enough to send binners into a rant and picture-posting frenzy. He clearly saw my comment as a slight against the Labour Party and in fact it turns out that there aren't any self-serving careerists in the Labour Party at all. it's all fake news, or sumfink.
I think we can safely say that millions of voters might beg to differ with binners but apparently if you don't agree with him then you are a "Marvin-the-Paranoid-Android style lefty doom-monger", whatever that is, and I am reliably informed that you should wear a tinfoil hat.
I’m getting a t shirt printed with ‘Meme Bore’ on it. I’ll post a piccie of me with it on, with a Jeremy Corbyn hat and some gold sparkly hot pants
See, you can manage a hint of originality. Well done you.
I said that I would support the Greens because firstly they are lefty social democrats and secondly because for obvious reasons they don’t attract self-serving careerists.
Same here. I no longer support the Labour party and have given up the right to vote in its elections. The Greens came second in my constituency and won the adjacent seat, so I guess plenty of others feel the same way.
May I just add that I am not necessarily a huge fan of the Green Party but I believe that politics is about comprise, being flexible, and being adaptable.
And right now Green candidates are often the best choice, depending on the constituency, to serve the needs of ordinary working people.
And right now Green candidates are often the best choice, depending on the constituency, to serve the needs of ordinary working people
What about the the ordinary working people who want to fly to Lanzarote for their hollybobs? Or quite fancy a Maccy D’s double cheeseburger instead of lentils?
We all got the memo. A sad day. There was a candlelight vigil
Only you haven't have you? Poll after poll shows that Labour support is now at the same level as support for the Tories was under Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak.
And yet despite that not once have you commented on this huge lack of support for Labour. Which is in sharp contrast to when under the previous Labour leader you couldn't stop commenting on Labour's standing in the opinion polls.
I can only assume you are not aware that Labour has hemorrhaged the support of millions. Did you not get the memo?
Wakey wakey and smell the coffee :
Even under Magic Grandad support for Labour was higher than it is now.
It's the fact that Labour think they're on a mission being tough whilst destroying their base and taking the economy with them.
Tough on the vulnerable rather than wealth eh? Liz Kendall needs ejecting into space over her twisted vile household logic.
Just wait until they remove money out of the economy via NI come April. This will be a whole new level of ineptitude.
Also Starmer banking his growth on AI potholes and being a AI superpower has just got pushed under the carpet with Deepseek.
It's just one terrible reactionary idea after another instead of just fixing the stuff that needs fixing.
At the very least with the Tories we got money off our energy bill. This current party can't even begin to figure that out as part of something government could do to improve their standing.
What were Labour up to before the years before the General Election - cos it sure as hell it wasn't figuring a plan out.
Why on earth don't they concentrate on fundamentals instead of driving butchered economic policy from the Tories?
Growth really ain't hard if they want it to happen. Just do the opposite of the Tories. They sat on almost no growth for years.
And here we are. Fiscal rules wrecking the lives of many.
Big stimulus you absolute numpties.
Exactly what Biden was up during his pro-growth years. Have a bigger deficit and get the investment correct.
+1 for all that from @rone ^^
The (seeming) lack of any kind of plan, any sort of "right, first 3 months, first 6 months..." stuff is bewildering.
Now banging on again about Heathrow expansion, something that will be catastrophic for the environment and do sod all for growth anyway. For that sort of money you could build HS2 in full and probably a lot of NPR and had orders of magnitude more growth as well as being a net positive for the environment.
It’s no wonder the RW media is able to successfully portray non-tories as a disorganised, fractious rabble
I didn't realize that all non Tories were supposed to be organized and on the same side. When did this coalition happen?
Irony overload.
Feel free to point them out.
...AI superpower has just got pushed under the carpet with Deepseek.
Why? Deepseek is open-source and can therefore be developed
The aims of this Government are often good ones, their execution and communication is usually appalling
Interesting poll that. Shows that among the under 50's Labour is still by far the most popular choice, and while a CON-REF coalition or coalescence would approach that sort of support, a LAB-LIB coalition would smash that out of the park.
And as i said previously but seems to have gone uncommented, that's on a steady drip of negative headlines. When there is a lot to welcome - I'm surprised that the left leaners on here are not all over increased legal aid support for renters or funding to tackle homelessness for example - I wonder what the polls would say if they were being fed a stream of positive things.
I said I wasn't going to get sucked in and I'm trying not to, but I posted some articles last night for balance, I'll refrain from commenting further but would be interested to see what others think of those.
Labour are an absolute sh1t show and always have been.
I don't understand why we have such a poor cailbre and weak politicians. I don't understand why politicians are financially illiterate either.
There is literally nobody to vote for who would be beneficial to this country. How utterly sad the landscape and future is of this once great land.
Well, I deal with what's in front of me and in my area all of the funding I have was committed by the previous government and to date all I have from this lot is warm words. I've just started HR consultations about redundancies which is a far cry from the £28bn we were promised just a couple of years ago. Still, gotta get that runway built.
Meanwhile we have the most RW Labour PM in history and a rudderless government that has wasted its political capital on fights with farmers and pensioners. The naivety and lack of vision is breathtaking, and they should thank their lucky stars that the Tories are a mess.
Did I miss some sort of Damascene conversion?
No not at all, I have always believed that. Well ever since as a young lad I joined the communist party and the first thing they did was to force me to go out and canvas for the Labour Party.
In fact after many years I eventually dropped out of the CP precisely because I felt that I could no longer comply with party discipline and vote and canvas for the Labour Party under Tony Blair, and instead felt that the LibDems were the only viable social democratic party.
I continued to support the LibDems, I even canvassed for them, until Nick Clegg became their leader and they abandoned social democracy in favour of neoliberalism. At that point I saw the Green Party as the only viable social democratic party in London. Obviously there was a brief period under the previous leader when the Labour Party temporarily returned to social democracy.
I am not and never have been a social democrat, but I do however see social democracy as a vital vehicle for improving the lives of ordinary working people.Which is why I believe that politics is about compromise, flexibility, and adaptability.
Jonv.
All good but what paucity of vision. What low standards. How timid.
They have the power to do so much more. Thats my main frustration.
they should thank their lucky stars that the Tories are a mess.
I don't see why, it makes no significant difference, with the combined Tory-Reform vote at or nearing 50% unless there is a dramatic change in Labour's fortunate they will be out of office at the next general election.
Obviously things can still turnaround as the next general election is still a long way away but we are told that all the great things that Labour are currently doing in government isn't getting through to people, so it's not looking great for them.
All good but what paucity of vision. What low standards. How timid.
They have the power to do so much more. Thats my main frustration.
Is my concern. I understood not falling into a RW press trap before the election, but the lack of vision set out o far with this majority is a wasted opportunity, if not just to counter the negative news agenda.
Interesting poll that. Shows that among the under 50’s Labour is still by far the most popular choice,
Well if I have got my arithmetic correct from what I can see that poll puts under 50s support for Labour at 34.5%
But to give it context it puts combined Tory-Reform support among the under 50s at 30%
Whilst it puts support for the Greens among the under at 15.5%
And it puts the under 50 support for the LibDems at 14%
Hardly more than a third of under 50s supporting Labour is not exactly fantastic, Labour got 32% of the vote in the 2019 general election, which was considered a catastrophic disaster.
Anyway playing with numbers is fun however it isn't just the under 50s who vote in elections.
All good but what paucity of vision. What low standards. How timid.
That was evident from way before the election. The whole "vision" thing seemed to be "we're not as shit as the Tories".
Not exactly aspirational stuff. 🙄
Well if I have got my arithmetic correct from what I can see that poll puts under 50s support for Labour at 34.5%
But to give it context it puts combined Tory-Reform support among the under 50s at 30%
You haven't..... even though it makes the position worse important to note you haven't considered that there are a lot more in the 25-49 age group than 18-24. Without checking proper facts, if you assume an equal spread then 24-49 is 25 years, 18-24 is 6 so about an 80:20 weighting.
Apply that to the relative scores and it would be more like 33.5% LAB vs 34% CON-REF. Add in the older vote and yes, I think by that measure then a CON-REF alliance would be a distinct possibility.
OTOH, faced with that (and also not knowing whether Trump is going to inspire or disgust intent over here) if there was a 'risk' of a RW coalition I suspect the 'centrists' could also coalesce, in which case the LAB-LIB share would approach 50% in that age group, and 30-35 in the older.
All good but what paucity of vision. What low standards. How timid.
They have the power to do so much more. Thats my main frustration.
I could engage with something like that, hell, I'm also inclined to agee. Rather than a constant 'everything is shit' narrative.
Well, I deal with what’s in front of me and in my area all of the funding I have was committed by the previous government and to date all I have from this lot is warm words. I’ve just started HR consultations about redundancies which is a far cry from the £28bn we were promised just a couple of years ago.
£28bn - do you mind expanding on that further? I don't know who you work for but recall some Gov related sector, maybe a RI - but I can't imagine anyone being promised that much.
That was evident from way before the election. The whole “vision” thing seemed to be “we’re not as shit as the Tories”.
Not exactly aspirational stuff.
Yeah I know but when you're in a hole stop digging and all that.
you haven’t considered that there are a lot more in the 25-49 age group than 18-24.
This is very true, I hadn't.** I guess if you play around with figures for long enough you can eventually come with evidence that Labour are not in fact doing that badly in the opinion polls after all.
Or alternatively you could just accept the straightforward evidence provided by pollsters which is that the combined support for the Tory-Reform Axis is double that of Labour.
I guess it depends on whether you want to bury your head in the sand or not?
Edit ** Tbh I hadn't even realised that there are a lot more in the 25-49 age group than in the 18-24 age group.
In accusing me of 'playing around with figures to eventually come with evidence that Labour are not in fact doing that badly' you seem to have overlooked that I've actually pointed out that CON-REF are better off and LAB are doing worse than in your assessment.
guess it depends on whether you want to bury your head in the sand or not?
Not disputing what the polls say, or even whether the question is manipulative (it isn't) but I'll ponder again the effect of the steady drip of negative press on those opinions and if a more balanced reporting of all the good stuff that isn't being covered would result in a different outcome to the question.
As I said yesterday - 'group of people being constantly told everything is shit think everything is shit'
you seem to have overlooked that I’ve actually pointed out that CON-REF are better off and LAB are doing worse than in your assessment.
Yes I was aware of that. My point is that the only thing that counts is how voters vote on election day, everything else might be interesting but ultimately irrelevant chatter.
Ask binners, he is a huge believer that election results are the only thing that actually matter. Although weirdly he doesn't seem too worried about the next general election. I remember a time when he was utterly obsessed with the issue.
group of people being constantly told everything is shit think everything is shit
Hey who'd have thought fixing material conditions might result in everyone thinking things aren't shit?
Trouble is Labour are nowhere near that.
We have a headwind of both macro/micro economics being dire - and no amount of runway solutions are going to fix that.
I love how Reeves comes out with a whole load of reset energy and offers nothing of overall positive consequence to society.
Why does everyone moan about bad press for Labour - they walked into it with their absolutely awful late budget, WFA, 2cBC ignorance and free-loading attitute at a time when the country was rock-bottom. The mind boggles how stupid Starmer and Reeves are.
Labour MP Barry Gardiner tells @politicshome.bsky.social he thinks Chancellor Rachel Reeves is "an environmental illiterate" Multiple other Labour figures – including London mayor Sadiq Khan – have come out against the govt's plans for a third runway at Heathrow
Something else she's illiterate at?
I'm not sure whether the runway will even make it out of the gate so to speak - certainly not under a one term Labour government. Haven't really got a dog in this fight but would say there are million others things they could do quicker and would have a greater impact on more lives.
The mind boggles how stupid Starmer and Reeves are.
I don't think they "stupid" as such, I just think they're stuck in an economic groupthink dating back to the 80's, fixated on an an intangible measurement of "growth" in blunt economic terms rather than a much wider and more holistic understanding of the phrase and, in their absolute desperation for even the slightest % rise in GDP, they're prepared to ride roughshod over environmental concerns and worker rights, hang on to whichever band wagon happens to be driving past (AI for example) and ignore the massive Brexit-shaped elephant in the room.
What is stupid about it is they're looking at ridiculously long-term things like an airport expansion, something which cannot be done in this parliamentary time, and ignoring loads of quick win options which would actually benefit people in a short space of time and show the country that they're serious about creating growth and wealth and opportunities.
ignoring loads of quick win options which would actually benefit people in a short space of time and show the country that they’re serious about creating growth and wealth and opportunities.
cough. Customs union. cough.
Pretty sure the impact on GDP would be greater and quicker than a 3rd runway...
prepared to ride roughshod over ..... worker rights
Please explain, that's not what I'm taking from the worker rights bill? I know it's got to do consultation and development still before it's law but looks pretty pro-worker to me?
Please explain, that’s not what I’m taking from the worker rights bill? I know it’s got to do consultation and development still before it’s law but looks pretty pro-worker to me?
@theotherjonv : apologies, I meant to take that out when I edited it, I'd basically referred back to the wrong thread on Bluesky. My mistake because you're correct, the workers right thing is actually quite positive.
Never mind all that nonsense Ernestol
You mean all that opinion polls nonsense? Yeah you're right of course binners, I am sure that everything will be just fine. Why worry about Keir Starmer making Labour as unpopular as Liz Truss made the Tories? The important thing is that, like Liz Truss was, Starmer is busy making unpopular decisions, as any responsible government would
It turns out that opinion polls only actually mattered when Magic Grandad was leader, now with Keir Starmer in charge such trivialities are of no importance.
You’re obsessed with opinion polls.
It’s four and a half years to the next election. that’s like watching a footy match and if someone scores in the first ten minutes saying ‘well that’s that done and dusted then’ and not bothering to watch the rest
Ask any Spurs fan how that tends to work out 😀
Its far too early to tell how Wes Streeting will do against Chris Philp in the 2029 election
Ambitious pair, huh? And nakedly so. Both probably have too much of an eye on the media and wider public rather than their MPs and members though… I don’t see them getting hold of the reins in either party. They may successfully make themselves the journalists’ favourites in the next few years… but that’s not enough.
You’re obsessed with opinion polls.
Well you were definitely obsessed with opinion polls when Magic Grandad was Labour leader!
And in 2016 when the centrists tried to mount a coup, which you supported, because of poor opinion polls (they were better than they are now) we were still potentially 4 years away from a general election.
It was only because the centrists redoubled their efforts to sabotage the Labour leader that the Tories seized the moment and called an early general election, although it backfired and they lost their majority.
Still, I am sure that it is fine to just ignore the opinion polls..... after all what is the worse that can happen - Nigel Farage as Prime Minister in a coalition with Kemi Badenoch as his deputy?
in 2016 when the centrists tried to mount a coup
Is it 2025 yet?
You don’t half have an overactive imagination and more worryingly (for you) far more knowledge than me of the utter twoddle I post on here. I can barely remember what I was blathering on about yesterday, never mind 9 years ago 😀
cough. Customs union. cough.
Pretty sure the impact on GDP would be greater and quicker than a 3rd runway…
According to a lot of big hitters the one thing Starmer has done right is to pretend that Brexit really is quite fantastic.
Astonishing.
Well on a purely selfish note, as a scientist who lives in Milton Keynes
the resurrection of the Oxford- Cambridge Science arc project is great and long overdue, its exactly the kind of infrastructure and industrial projects we should be doing if we want to compete with the rest of the world. The original plans were the cross party work of councilors and MPs across several councils & constituencies.... until it was killed off by Boris Johnson.
as for Brexit, I want to see a move to joining the PEM if not the full customs union, be interesting to see where that goes
Apart from the London airport stuff (sorry, don’t get it) all the plans announced sound good. Burnham was doing the media rounds this morning, welcoming the Old Trafford aims, and using it to talk up transport improvements ongoing and much needed (plenty of “will be trying to persuade the government to” stuff around train links, while bigging up the integrated transport stuff already coming… combined tram&bus tickets etc).
I can barely remember what I was blathering on about yesterday, never mind 9 years ago ?
LOL! That gave me idea.......it was remarkably easy to go to the Corbyn thread and find this little beauty on page 3, it took me less than about 20 seconds :
binners
Full Member
I think it’d be a novelty to actually have a party leader who doesn’t just blindly accept the neo-liberal consensus, like its been passed down from god on tablets of stone, and actually offers an alternative. I’m so frigging bored with them all unquestioningly offering more of the same, with a different coloured tie. It’d just be nice to hear someone voice an alternative.
It seemes to have gone dowwn well north of the border last time out. I’m sure it’d go down equally as well in plenty of other places too
Listened to whatever-his-name-is who’s just been elected Lib Dem leader this morning … “blah blah blah… fiscal responsibiliy….. blah blah blah… hardworking families… blah blah blah… balancing the books….. blah blah blah… fiscal responsibiliy….. blah blah blah… hardworking families… blah blah blah… balancing the books….. blah blah blah… fiscal responsibiliy….. blah blah blah… hardworking families… blah blah blah… balancing the books…………”
Oh just **** off!!!!!
Posted 9 years ago
Reply | Report
Do you remember the days when you were an anti-centrist Corbyn supporter binners??? I certainly do!
So what happened? Oh yeah, the opinion polls.......it was all about the opinion polls! Apparently all that mattered was winning, nothing else mattered at all.
And yet now opinion polls have magically become completely unimportant!
It's a funny ol' game, ain't it?
Is it 2025 yet?
Many people welcomed a more left leaning leader of the Labour Party. I did, and it moved me to actually start considering and voting Labour (and eventually leaflet drop for them, and later join as a member). But he turned out to be an awful leader. And the country is in the hole that it is partly because of that. All eyes on the new government trying to slowly dig us out of it.
Ernesto… I did think Corbyn might make a difference, but quickly realised he was an absolute disaster. It didn’t take long, believe me Comrade, but you know what really did itI
I went to a Momentum meeting
Sweet baby Jesus and the orphans, what a collection of crackpots and weirdos they’d assembled there. I’m often reminded of that evening when I read a few of the regular posters to political threads on here 😀
While we’re having a little trip down memory Lane to 2016…
So what happened
he turned out to be a disappointment and poor leader, unable to deliver on what he promised, in 4 years time well be able to see if starmer can do any better, he's done one thing Corbyn failed to and that was win an election
£28bn – do you mind expanding on that further? I don’t know who you work for but recall some Gov related sector, maybe a RI – but I can’t imagine anyone being promised that much.
"We" as in the country. £28bn per year on green investment, ditched by Starmer around a year ago. I'm surprised Miliband hasn't resigned.
Thank you for clarifying.
Always disappointing to hear of science jobs under threat. Are you reliant on Gov money or can you access other, including private?
Its far too early to tell how Wes Streeting will do against Chris Philp in the 2029 election
Streeting has a 500 vote majority and will be lucky to hold his seat next time round.
poor leader, unable to deliver on what he promised
Corbyn was definitely a poor 'leader' there is no doubt about that, but it was the centrists who made sure that he didn't deliver. Can you name me a party leader who has won a general election whilst his MPs were stabbing him in the back?
What do you believe he promised btw?
he’s done one thing Corbyn failed to and that was win an election
No Starmer never 'won' the general election, the Tories lost it, big time. That is precisely why the polls became dire for Labour immediately after the general election. People voted the Tories out, they didn't vote Labour in, hence the catastrophic lack of support for Labour now.
I think what Starmer has managed to do that Corbyn didn't is to take support for Labour down to about 25%
Can you name me a party leader who has won a general election whilst his MPs were stabbing him in the back?
Good ones get the party to stop stabbing them, or ideally not start stabbing them in the first place. For a while at least.
There’s not really much back-stabby about resigning or refusing to serve in his cabinet while publicly telling everyone it’s because you think he’s absolutely ****ing hopeless, is there?
That's plunging the blade straight through the ribcage
Anyway… constantly deposing leaders or plotting to do so didn’t seem to do the Tory party much harm for the last 14 years. They’re always at it. They’ll be a gang of them planning to unseat Badanoch already. You can put your house on it.
Good ones get the party to stop stabbing them,
I totally agree, Corbyn was definitely a shite leader with his "kinder" politics bollocks. Typical poncey guardian reading jam making bicycle clip wearing tw4t.
Now I definitely wouldn't claim that Keir Starmer is a good leader but look how he doesn't **** about with those who don't tow his forever changing line ...... it's suspension, expulsions, deselections, withdrawal of the whip, whatever it takes to silence his critics.
Although to be fair a big chunk of the PLP are self-serving careerists with no genuine convictions like himself, so he does have that in his favour.
Child poverty is on course to increase in most of the UK by the end of this parliament, with only Scotland bucking the trend, according to analysis by a poverty charity.
And this without Scotland having the economic levers the Westminster government has. Shows how much its a political choice and shows how unambitious.labour are
This is the response to desperate times currently then?
Something that may or may not happen; London centric and with massive opposition to it. In several years if not at all.
And put growth in massive letters (fading just so we understand there won't be growth.)
These people are the most disingenuous misanthropes ever elected under a Labour banner.
Absolute sheer desperation that you can talk about something in present tense that will not affect growth if at all for years.
I would say this is another to add to the catalogue of big Starmer/Reeves fails in not working out what society needs now.
(Labour backing a runway is not actually the same as Labour building it.)
This poster is peak centrism. Let's back but not invest. (Something that even Cameron didn't even want to pull off in the end.)
Anything about this in the manifesto?
Child poverty is on course to increase in most of the UK by the end of this parliament, with only Scotland bucking the trend, according to analysis by a poverty charity.
Another example of negative reporting. No wonder the polls are poor, I'm surprised so many on here seize on these headlines so gleefully, unless there's an ulterior motive.
I have emphasised some points to illustrate what I consider unfair reporting.
Here's a selection of other quotes from the article.
only in Scotland will rates have fallen by 2029 under current economic projections
The government is due to publish a 10-year poverty strategy in the summer.
ministerial taskforce is exploring all levers available across government to give children across the United Kingdom the best start in life,
increasing the living wage, uprating benefits and supporting 700,000 of the poorest families with children by introducing a fair repayment rate on universal credit deductions to help low-income families and make everyone better off
Meanwhile in Scotland -
Setting out her draft Budget at Holyrood, Robison said she would aim to provide funding to the families of the 15,000 affected children in Scotland by April 2026 - a month ahead of the next Scottish election.
It is not yet clear what the mechanism will be to scrap the cap, how it will work, or how much it will cost.
So on one hand plans to review the whole system aren't counted, whereas on the other plans that are not yet in place and have no economic assessment are a done deal?
And?
My point is not on the merits or otherwise of what is or isn't in place, or the plans or aspirations of the various governments. It's on the negative reporting. Do you think the article presents a balanced view? If not, why are you so happy to just repeat it?
Seems perfectly reasonable to me taking data from good sources to make a report from a reputable orgsnisation
If ypu are onbenefits in Scotland and have more than 2 children you are significantly better off than if you lived in England as things stand right now
Labour ard not going to remove the two child cap. Holyrood is looking to further increase benefits
S
Anything about this in the manifesto?
Well, that’s a very fair point. If airport expansion really is a key part of Labour’s plans, why not include it in the manifesto? That’s shifty, to say the least.
Absolute sheer desperation that you can talk about something in present tense that will not affect growth if at all for years.
Short-termism. The UK needs longer term thinking. The idea that you shouldn’t announce plans for long term projects because we don’t have any significant growth right now is just self defeating. The opposite is true.
Labour are incapable of anything but shrinking the economy. Their past record proves it.
The runway i doubt will be completed for 20 years or so, banking growth on that is absurd.
'Growth' aka 'trickle down'.
Seems perfectly reasonable to me taking data from good sources to make a report from a reputable orgsnisation
I'm not talking about the JRF report, I'm talking of the way it has been reported by the Guardian, and no doubt others. And then the way you and others pounce on this unbalanced reporting
The facts are:
UK and Scottish Governments have both indicated intent to tackle (child) poverty by different routes.
Westminster are reviewing multiple areas and will come up with a strategy in the summer. As yet no detail / costing.
Holyrood have announced a commitment to develop the systems to deliver the mitigation of the two-child cap, which will lift 15,000 children out of poverty. As yet no detail / costing on how that will be done.
Yet the Scottish approach is laudable and the Westminster one is unambitious?
Scotland already Has mitigations in place and are looking at more. Labour are committed to retained the two child cap.
What you say is the situation us not the actual situation
The reporting is quite fair given announced policy and the actual facts
You are already significantly better off in scotland if on benefits and have 3 kids. And in future this differnce will increase
Labour are incapable of anything but shrinking the economy. Their past record proves it.
Im not sure thats entirely true
even with financial crisis economy had grown compared to when they came in to power
The runway i doubt will be completed for 20 years or so, banking growth on that is absurd.
its a good job that the runway isnt the only policy announced, there were quite a few new developments and the Ox-Cam science arc is what we need more of, the infrastructure and planning bill in the spring is much more important in terms of improving the fabric of the UK
Spain has built >3000km of HS rail in the time its taken us to build 65km (HS1) and not build 110km (HS2) and at 10x less per km, that highlights something very wrong with how the UK does things. HS rail (among other things) needs to be completed further north too
John v
As you say the westminster plan has no detail at all and remember they are committed to tbe two child cap . Its a review that will not come into place for a while and no commitment to anything
Holyrood while already having the scottish child payment has made a commitment to remove the two child cap completely this year
The two positions are very different. One has already extra payments and a commttment to more. The other has no commitments at all bar the previous refusal to remove the cap
Westminster are reviewing multiple areas and will come up with a strategy in the summer.
You are making out that no decisions have been made and that Labour are busy working out how to tackle child poverty. And according to you they will have answers after they have been in government for a full year.
Well firstly Starmer and his team have had years to come up with a strategy to tackle child poverty - Labour winning the general election came as a surprise to no one.
And secondly your claim that no decisions have been made isn't true - within literally two or three weeks of coming to power the current government decided not to scrap the two child benefit cap, with devastating consequences for child poverty.
In fact the current government are so committed to maintaining this Tory policy that they withdrew the party whip from any MP who voted against their decision.
Rachel Reeves doubles down on refusal to scrap two-child benefit cap
"Scrapping the policy would lift an estimated 300,000 children out of poverty"
There isn't some weird anti-Labour conspiracy involving the Guardian, the Independent, the Child Poverty Action Group, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, and a multitude of other child welfare charity.
If headlines such as "Rachel Reeves doubles down on refusal to scrap two-child benefit cap" are shit for Labour then perhaps blame the government, not the headline writer.....there is no point shooting the messenger.
Westminster are reviewing multiple areas and will come up with a strategy in the summer. As yet no detail / costing.
That's the funniest thing I've read on this thread. If anyone's in any doubt about why Starmer and Labour are up to their necks in shit look no further than this observation.
London centric
Ok let's clear something up. Just because a project is in London, doesn't mean it only benefits London.