Did you read this bit of the article?
“The Labour leadership is aware we are soft testing various ideas but have asked us to keep it highly confidential so please don’t forward this email.”
Keir Starmer Labour Leader
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
Did you read this bit of the article?
“The Labour leadership is aware we are soft testing various ideas but have asked us to keep it highly confidential so please don’t forward this email.”
Politics is in such a depressing place. I want these Tory bastards out but when the only alternative is a Labour Party who stand for nothing other than ‘fiscal responsibility’ headed by Starmer, Reeves and Streeting I just think what’s the fecking point.
Yep, that isn't collusion though. As a right wing media outlet, the Evening Standard will put a decent spin on it. From other news outlets reporting this story that it's Severn Trent giving the Labour Party a heads up that they're looking at options to ward off nationalisation.
Other water company CEO's have already rejected a meeting so it looks like this is dead in the water already. Nationalisation would be very expensive given the lack of investment for many years, better value for a tax payer would be getting Ofwat to actually do their job and ensure investment is prioritised ahead of shareholder dividends.
Yeah I don’t understand that shout at all. No one is terrified, he’s an incredibly milquetoast nerd. Like saying are you ready to rock and then you bring out Train.
Let alone the left, the idea anyone on the right is ‘terrified’ is laughable…they love him! That’s kinda his whole point, no?
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/labour/2023/01/tories-love-keir-stamer
I’m sorry, but it literally fits the dictionary definition of collusion. The Labour leadership have had talks with water bosses who wish to avoid nationalisation and Labour have asked them to keep it quiet. That is quite clear. The fact that Ed Miliband is on Marr this week fending off the idea that Labour might nationalise the water industry sums It up really. These decisions are not remotely in the public interest.
Nationalisation of water is extremely popular and will always be better value for money in the long term. Any daft ideas about better regulation is naive and exemplifies short term thinking. Which sums up most Government policy over the last couple of decades tbf.
What some people doing realise is, Starmer is going to be as authoritatian as Suella Braverman once he gets a sniff of power. Totally relentless, disproportionate and excessive purging of the Labour party.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...jon-cruddas-condemns-keir-starmers-witch-hunt
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...jon-cruddas-condemns-keir-starmers-witch-hunt
*splash*
What does this even mean?
The next Labour government will withhold all national funding and then tell local authorities you can do what the f**king hell you like, but you collect your own local taxes.
When will this guy be rightly convicted for war crimes and lose his voice in the media?
Tony Blair urges expanded role for private sector as NHS turns 75
Former PM says service needs radical reform, including pointing patients to private healthcare offers
https://www.theguardian.com/society...anded-role-for-private-sector-as-nhs-turns-75
Tony Blair urges expanded role for private sector as NHS turns 75
Former PM says service needs radical reform, including pointing patients to private healthcare offers
https://www.theguardian.com/society...anded-role-for-private-sector-as-nhs-turns-75
Knowing nothing; at face value and with a dose of cynicism it probably means that rich areas get to keep more of their local taxation and have more powers to decide how to spend it.
The Iraq war was a disaster, but you need to reassess your understanding of what a war crime is.
You're right, 650,000 dead civilians is only a disaster, not a war crime.
War crimes have a definition and it isn't 'military conflicts I dislike'. It's something that's also determined in a legitimate international court of law.
Correct.
Blair should be in prison.
True. I mean, who cares if it was an illegal invasion based on Blairs lies.
Is that your lawyerly opinion?
Imagine saying this unironically. feck the planet, economic growth is far more important
The Starmer Party had one hell of a morning.
My real problem with Starmer is I listen to some of his policy pronouncements and like them - but then I immediately wonder how long they will last. Sadly I simply can't believe he will implement any major change.
Imagine taking lessons on the importance of oracy by an Auton given the voicebox of a Cyberman.
Is there a lot of corbynite whining in this thread about him too? Seen it more and more all over Reddit and its pretty fecking annoying, seems more important to pander to marxism than actually win an election.
Labour at a minimum has to bring back the voters that deserted them for the Tories and it’s hardly a secret the working class tend to be economically left but patriotic and centre right socially.
Labour at a minimum has to bring back the voters that deserted them for the Tories and it’s hardly a secret the working class tend to be economically left but patriotic and centre right socially.
I know. I'm one of those bastards who wants a party to actually improve people's lives not just get in and keep things the same.
It's a failing of mine. One day I hope I'll wake up and see the Starmer Party's plans to simply ask banks to stop ripping people off for the political genius that it surely is.
pathological inability to uphold any of his pledges = corbynite whining
Yeah because Labour being in power is more important than the health, wealth, and education of the people they are supposed to represent. It doesn't matter if healthcare is no longer free at point of use, schools are failing our children or banks are profiteering. Labour being in power is more important than all those thing and we are all Corbynites for not accepting that reality.
I for one couldn't care less about Corbyn, but Starmer is bland and unreliable as feck all the same. And I'm being generous with the adjectives chosen.
All I want is a labour that makes life better for people. Better standard of living, better education, better health service, better human rights laws.
I do not now and never will idolise a politician, but I do hold true is that Labour are supposed to work for the working people of this country not big business.
What does this even mean if you actually think things like the NHS is under threat from this guy then yeah i mean christ you aren't accepting reality what gives you that idea, pro social welfare policies are popular across the aisle. What isn't popular is the anti Britain/Nato/Trident, immigration and cultural issues this is what he is and should be moving away from.
The NHS is dead on it's feet. It needs major investment and renewal if it's going to once again be the envy of the world. Now I know the idea of the NHS is popular but are people willing to put their hands in their pockets to pay for it? The same with schools they need massive investment in infrastructure and personnel. To get both back to where they should be is going to be expensive and you wont see the benefits in a single sitting of parliament. Does he have the balls to raise taxes to make them better?
If he gets a big enough majority, with the right cabinet, he will!
The next Labour government (Starmer or not) needs at least one (maybe two) 'biggy/'standing on the shoulders of Giants' type policies that will maybe, even if its over time, be seen to improve the lives of millions of ordinary folk.... like the Education Act and the NHS Act did, all those years ago.
Otherwise we will all be taking to small boats! (the Tories will have nabbed the big ones).
Tident has a cost of more than fifty billion, knowing government, it will be about three times whatever the estimate is. Isn't the point of NATO that the US has the world's most advanced stockpile of nuclear weapons even though Russia has the largest in sheer quantity? Maybe don't bother with Trident just yet. Consider other things like homelessness, education, housing, healthcare, and basic economic reordering. You can, and UK does, almost, meet the 2% NATO requirement without overhauling an entire nuclear weapons program. It's a complete waste of money for starters because the only scenario in which you can use them involves being nationally obliterated.
They've shelved HS2 which costs roughly what Trident does (at the start, but as per usual, see Track and Trace, we expect a doubling in the actual cost relative to stated, such is the conveyor belt of "feeding" which goes on in public/private transactions: delays are profitable if you aren't in it for the project but have a percentage in the design and aren't liable for the deadline: not all delays, some companies, penalized, clauses, but others, governments have, worldwide, built things and completely rebuilt them half-way through blaming one private company, taxpayer money, and hiring another, taxpayer money: sociologically, it becomes a farce). Anyway, nuclear weapons for an "everyone is dead if we use them" scenario, or highspeed rail, perhaps even a decent rocket/space program, which ticks defense and private industry feeding into superstructural areas of chips, computation, and fusion moving forward. I know where I put my money seeing as 50 billion spent in Scotland (an island off it, pick one) for a UK Space Program, sats, etc., is Union campaign for a Labour government (or even a Tory government) which thus replaces the North Sea Oil issue (as the Scot/Eng divide).
I'll say it again: track and trace cost more than the purchase of Twitter. What did it do again? Where is it now? How is it even possible that government gets away with what is cleary corruption at that scale. An app, just an application, costing more than one of the world's largest user-based social media applications, entirely. And it didn't work, then it did sort of work, and then it just disappeared. Go figure.
Last edited:
Politics is currently a debate between two vaguely different middle management teams.
Track and trace wasn't just an app that cost £37bn. That was setting up all the testing capacity across the whole of the UK for months on end, doing millions of tests, setting up hubs and hiring staff. I'm as anti this Tory govt as it gets but it's one of those lies that got pushed that the cost of T&T was just about an app. It was one part of a whole range of things. Yes corruption was involved and I'm sure further evidence will come out in time, but let's not perpetuate falsehoods like this.
what more need be said? how can you just take that, not you, but rhetorical "you", for granted and then say "let's not perpetuate falsehoods like this [idea of corruption]".
I diagnose it the demise of the traditional ballot, the tension of the "bullet" (protest/re-order), and the liminal, last chance, zone in-between.
Because you are literally saying the app cost more than twitter. That is categorically untrue, two wrongs don't make it right. Yes the govt handed out corrupt contracts for PPE etc, that is a separate thing to test and trace which was largely funded through NHS that was given extra funding to deal with testing capacity. If it was as simple as an app costing £37bn I'm pretty sure a lot more media would've been looking into that and found wrongdoing and corruption. They didn't and haven't.
I like one of the replies to the O'Brien clip: they don't want to be different from the tories, they just want to change places with them.