Westminster Politics 2024-2029

Why would anyone know or care who he is and want to listen to him in Australia? Weird enough that people would want to here but at least he was our PM.
The King is still our head of state so that, combined with our traditional ties to Britain, means the we watch your politics more than you might imagine. People like BoJo and Trump are also significant figures of fun down here. We might elect idiots like #scottyfrommarketing but at least we don't elect these idiots seems to be the sentiment.

But it isn't about our interest but his desperate attemps to sell his bullshit in book form.
 
The one that had much of its already cripplingly generous pension schemes carved out of the IHT rise to go along with its huge payrises.
Public sector pensions can't be inherited, unlike private ones.
 
Why do they keep up with this racist BS and trying to outflank the right from the right? It doesn’t fecking work.
I know! Why the race to the bottom!

People keep going on about the reform threat and how theyll boss it, but my little theory is Lib Dem’s have scope to absolutely smash the next election and double the amount of seats they have. There’s a whole gap in the centre and left for them to nibble at!
 
What's the prize for winning this race to the bottom again?
Private gig job at the Tony Blair institute when
they get booted out of office.
Why do they keep up with this racist BS and trying to outflank the right from the right? It doesn’t fecking work.
I don’t think they have anything else. Starmer is attempting his third restart today with a speech on crime.
 


Useless Labour.

House builders are having problems shifting them:
On a £200,000 interest only mortgage, moving from a rate of 2 per cent to 5.5 per cent means paying £917 a month instead of £334 a month.

Until they get a grip of the interest rates people aren't buying, that's why the 1.5 millions homes is crazy because its private companies' building them and holding stock of homes isn't the model I'd use.

Where I live it took them 2 years to finish 250 homes.
 
They can be inherited by dependents after death and annuities can be taken out against them.
They aren't inherited by dependents, a dependent kid might get 30% of the monthly income until they turn 18, or a spouse 50% until they die, like some annuities. But if you want to turn a defined benefit pension into an annuity, you would have to transfer it into a defined contribution pension first (which then comes under the IHT rules if you kept it there). Annuities however can't be inherited.
 
Why do they keep up with this racist BS and trying to outflank the right from the right? It doesn’t fecking work.

Because this is who they are. Ignore the colour of the rosette, ignore the promises never kept and look at what they actually do.

Hammer the poor and rant about foreigners.

This is their politics.
 
I do take a bit of pleasure in knowing the best gig he can find is going half way around the world to perform his shtick for the last people that haven't seen it before, and they just don't care anymore.
Most think he is a buffon (although Aussies tend to use a different term) but he is liked for the generous trade deal he gave to us on a plate.
 
Most think he is a buffon (although Aussies tend to use a different term) but he is liked for the generous trade deal he gave to us on a plate.
Certainly. Glad to see they aren't so thankful that they want to turn up to hear him blab about it though, let alone cough up enough to make moving his enormous behind thousands of miles worth it.
 
One of the least surprising outcomes of the year

Revealed: bias found in AI system used to detect UK benefits fraud​


An artificial intelligence system used by the UK government to detect welfare fraud is showing bias according to people’s age, disability, marital status and nationality, the Guardian can reveal.

An internal assessment of a machine-learning programme used to vet thousands of claims for universal credit payments across England found it incorrectly selected people from some groups more than others when recommending whom to investigate for possible fraud.


The admission was made in documents releasedunder the Freedom of Information Act by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). The “statistically significant outcome disparity” emerged in a “fairness analysis” of the automated system for universal credit advances carried out in February this year.

The emergence of the bias comes after the DWP this summer claimed the AI system “does not present any immediate concerns of discrimination, unfair treatment or detrimental impact on customers”.

This assurance came in part because the final decision on whether a person gets a welfare payment is still made by a human, and officials believe the continued use of the system – which is attempting to help cut an estimated £8bn a year lost in fraud and error – is “reasonable and proportionate”.

But no fairness analysis has yet been undertaken in respect of potential bias centring on race, sex, sexual orientation and religion, or pregnancy, maternity and gender reassignment status, the disclosures reveal.

Campaigners responded by accusing the government of a “hurt first, fix later” policy and called on ministers to be more open about which groups were likely to be wrongly suspected by the algorithm of trying to cheat the system.

“It is clear that in a vast majority of cases the DWP did not assess whether their automated processes risked unfairly targeting marginalised groups,” said Caroline Selman, senior research fellow at the Public Law Project, which first obtained the analysis.

“DWP must put an end to this ‘hurt first, fix later’ approach and stop rolling out tools when it is not able to properly understand the risk of harm they represent.”

The acknowledgement of disparities in how the automated system assesses fraud risks is also likely to increase scrutiny of the rapidly expanding government use of AI systems and fuel calls for greater transparency.

By one independent count, there are at least 55 automated tools being used by public authorities in the UK potentially affecting decisions about millions of people, although the government’s own register includes only nine.

Last month, the Guardian revealed that not a single Whitehall department had registered the use of AI systems since the government said it would become mandatory earlier this year.

Records show public bodies have awarded dozens of contracts for AI and algorithmic services. A contract for facial recognition software, worth up to £20m, was put up for grabs last month by a police procurement body set up by the Home Office, reigniting concerns about “mass biometric surveillance”.

Peter Kyle, the secretary of state for science and technology, has previously told the Guardianthat the public sector “hasn’t taken seriously enough the need to be transparent in the way that the government uses algorithms”.

Government departments, including the Home Office and the DWP have, in recent years, been reluctant to disclose more about their use of AI, citing concerns that to do so could allow bad actors to manipulate systems.

It is not clear which age groups are more likely to be wrongly targeted for fraud checks by the algorithm, as the DWP redacted that part of the fairness analysis.

Neither did it reveal whether disabled people are more or less likely to be wrongly singled out for investigation by the algorithm than non-disabled people, or the difference between the way the algorithm treats different nationalities. Officials said this was to prevent fraudsters gaming the system.

A DWP spokesperson said: “Our AI tool does not replace human judgment, and a caseworker will always look at all available information to make a decision. We are taking bold and decisive action to tackle benefit fraud – our fraud and error bill will enable more efficient and effective investigations to identify criminals exploiting the benefits system faster.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society...found-in-ai-system-used-to-detect-uk-benefits
 
Not sure if this is the best thread but for people gonna be mostly affected by the storm your phones might do the loud warning in 5 minutes - cabinet have pushed the warning through to those in the worst affected areas so don't panic.
 
It scared the fecking crap outta me. Thought nuclear war had broken out.
 
GeMBoDhWcAAogG9
 
No surprise whatsoever that centrism is unpopular.
Centrism is inherently difficult to govern. There’s not really any such thing as a centrist policy. It’s about finding a balance between left and right wing policies and landing somewhere in the middle over a period of time. The problem with that is that right wing policies piss off the left, left wing policies piss off the right and the chances you are going to choose policies from either the left or the right which satisfies the majority of the centre is slim to none.
 
The problem with that is that right wing policies piss off the left, left wing policies piss off the right and the chances you are going to choose policies from either the left or the right which satisfies the majority of the centre is slim to none.
Which suits Starmer; he is anything but a 'star turn', but he has a large majority and should just get on with it and ignore voices off, left or right and accept he ain't going to win any personality contest.

Starmer will please nobody, but that is to be expected given the size of task in front of him, especially when he's having to force us all to take some 'nasty medicine'.