But you said he had a credible plan to address Britain's economic problems.
Westminster Politics 2024-2029
- Thread starter Pexbo
- Start date
But you said he had a credible plan to address Britain's economic problems.
Yes, it's a drop in the ocean really, maybe he will have to come back for another go at the sector later on, maybe when other things he is having to deal with are/or become less pressing.
On the other hand, it may turn out for the private education sector that it has 'dodged a bullet' on this, after all paying VAT, (which they should have been doing anyway) is not the worst thing that could happen. Now that Starmer has had his obligatory 'swing' at the sector and satisfied the left-wing anti-private education members of his party, he will have other 'fish to fry' and may leave the sector alone.... for a while... it cannot be his biggest worry now, can it?
Jonathan Reynolds (not) brilliant plan for growth (buried in the Brexit thread.https://www.theguardian.com/comment...rucial-to-the-rebuilding-of-the-country-cptpp
Add to the Tory nonsensical freeports plan Labour will continue.
The non-existent nationalisation of railways, GB fantasy energy. Creating hundreds of thousand of imaginary jobs for non-existent workers.
Call asylum seekers and refugees illegal immigrants and stoking the fire while not offering safe routes - and so many other things.
Pretty safe bet that Starmer will not be PM by the next election and will probably be known as the worst Labour PM in history.
They had one chance, and blew it.
Add to the Tory nonsensical freeports plan Labour will continue.
The non-existent nationalisation of railways, GB fantasy energy. Creating hundreds of thousand of imaginary jobs for non-existent workers.
Call asylum seekers and refugees illegal immigrants and stoking the fire while not offering safe routes - and so many other things.
Pretty safe bet that Starmer will not be PM by the next election and will probably be known as the worst Labour PM in history.
They had one chance, and blew it.
Last edited:
Agreed. Also entirely predictable, it's not like the Labour front bench have been hiding anything. They're honestly terrible.
Its not beleivable, it is complete and utter bullshit.
The reason everything is broken is austerity. NHS, crumbling towns, potholes, hell even the lack of youth services is proven to contibute to higher crime rates. All of it because of austerity.
And starmer's big answer. More austerity.
Here's the thing, not only will it make things worse, that is the entire purpose of it. Austerity is not going to fix anything, it cannot fix anything. It is designed to do one thing, funnel state money to rich asset holders. It cannot, ever, fix our issues.
Not only is starmer condemning the country to another lost decade of falling living standards, the entire media, who know what he is doing, nod along like pavlov's dog because at this point, no one can say it is all deliberate, because everyone with a national voice has been part of pretending it wasn't since 2010.
Read my lips, no austerity under Labour.
Bottom of the barrel stuff
Deeply unserious political class
Bottom of the barrel stuff
Isn't Stammer supposed to be the prescription that fixes the problem? Or is he just there to tell everyone things are shit in case anyone hasn't noticed?
Bottom of the barrel stuff
Thank goodness he hasn't built a career on critiquing those who use patriotism as an excuse for avoiding scrutiny for their actions, otherwise that may be a touch hypocritical.
I expect it's going to be wrapped up in legal and political challenges and slowly get wound back after a few years worth of kids have their educations fecked up. Anything to avoid having to address the real issue of the minority of disruptive kids and their feral parents who have been enabled and coddled for at least couple of decades now. Send a few more million their way and hope they wake up one morning and decide not be scumbags anymore.
But yes, headline policy to appease the hard left and move onto the other things holding Wayne and Waynetta back from greatness.
I take it you've never set foot in a state school
This is just flat out nasty if I’m honest, and monumentally out of touch.
He always impresses me with how little charisma and gravitas he has. Even during the debate when he was asked the football question, he managed to come across as someone who doesn't watch football. A guy who is in a five a side team and supports Arsenal sounded like he had no idea what the sport was.
I'm not saying I want a fun PM, but it would be great to have something in between Boris "wibble wibble wobble gaffaw" Johnson and Kier Starmer, a damp wooly dog bed that wished upon a star to become a real boy.
When you’re boring you’re supposed to at least have some substance, which he lacks.
Haven’t we been in austerity since 2007? Surely someone in government needs to look at the spending to understand where all the money is going. They can’t keep increasing tax as that will end up with riots at some stage.
Feels like the concept of capitalism is starting to break. All the major countries are in massive exponential debt. This debt is never going to be paid back. At the time of Covid, given every country in the world was affected, the debt being created by the pandemic should have been written off worldwide. Instead we are left in a situation where most governments are very close to collapsing. Unless you have natural resources to sell it’s impossible for governments to turn it around.
Feels like the concept of capitalism is starting to break. All the major countries are in massive exponential debt. This debt is never going to be paid back. At the time of Covid, given every country in the world was affected, the debt being created by the pandemic should have been written off worldwide. Instead we are left in a situation where most governments are very close to collapsing. Unless you have natural resources to sell it’s impossible for governments to turn it around.
The issue seems to be Brexit now. Anything that reduces your growth by double digit percentage numbers is bound to result in a smaller budgets. As no-one in power seems to be able to say the word out loud they just end up talking about black holes and budget reductions without ever saying why.
To be fair, debt hasn't been paid back in over a century now. They just wait long enough for inflation to make it meaningless, the issue is that debt is growing against GDP rather than staying the same so you're right that something has to give eventually.
Not since i last attended one as a child, no. That school has been through every grammar, state, academy, foundation name you can think of but still the problem remains the same.
It is now as it was then but worse, far too much is done to pander to the minority of children who are disruptive, undisciplined and make it their mission to make it harder for everybody else who wants to learn. Much of that comes from parents whose immediate response to criticism of their little darling is to blame the teachers/school/government/private schools. Nothing at all will ever change as long as society pussy foots around those people. They have been given endless carrots and maybe it's time to offer them a stick, or cast them off and move forward for the good of the 99.9% of children.
The biggest benefit of private schools is not the facilities, the money or the quality of teaching. It's the non existence of problem children. Grammar schools achieve much the same result by having entrance exams and the best state schools do it by interested parents hoovering up property in the catchment zones and forcing the bad families out. Labour could do something to address it holistically but their idea so far is placate them even further by tabling rules to make it harder to remove those kids.
So you went to a state school and it didn't ruin your life? I guess you had some issues with disruptive kids holding you back? There was quite a few at my school, but they used to just get told to leave the room if they were disruptive and the lesson then carried on as normal.
Well, someone's choking on the milk of human kidness!
I doubt you'd ever be ready for a real conversation about the so-called 'real issues'.
Rachel Reeves to extend support fund to help poorest households
Chancellor understood to be looking at fifth extension of scheme to support people at risk of destitution
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...s-extend-support-fund-help-poorest-households
This shows some level of common sense.
Also The Guardian is running this interview:
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...-didnt-need-to-spend-28bn-on-green-investment
Rhian-Mari Thomas, the head of the Green Finance Institute, told Rachel Reeves the private sector could help offset state funding
At the start of this year, among the snowy Swiss slopes of the Davos business get-together, Rhian-Mari Thomas was ready to make an elevator pitch to the UK’s future chancellor, Rachel Reeves.
The chief executive of the Green Finance Institute (GFI) – a government-backed body that helps create and promote pro-environment financial products in the UK – had grown increasingly concerned about Labour’s £28bn green investment pledge.
The party should not have even considered using that much taxpayer cash, Thomas argued. Instead, it should engage with private investors who were already keen to pour money into big green projects. “I was very frustrated,” Thomas recalls, “and I said as much.”
“People who work in the City are not stupid people. And if they can see an opportunity to make profitable, risk-adjusted returns for their organisations … they will do those trades all day.
So you’ve got to ask yourself, why is that not happening? And it’s a very lazy narrative to say it’s not happening because these people are evil.”
---
So that's why that happened, I suppose.
‘I was frustrated’: The woman who told Labour it didn’t need to spend £28bn on green investment
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...-didnt-need-to-spend-28bn-on-green-investment
Rhian-Mari Thomas, the head of the Green Finance Institute, told Rachel Reeves the private sector could help offset state funding
At the start of this year, among the snowy Swiss slopes of the Davos business get-together, Rhian-Mari Thomas was ready to make an elevator pitch to the UK’s future chancellor, Rachel Reeves.
The chief executive of the Green Finance Institute (GFI) – a government-backed body that helps create and promote pro-environment financial products in the UK – had grown increasingly concerned about Labour’s £28bn green investment pledge.
The party should not have even considered using that much taxpayer cash, Thomas argued. Instead, it should engage with private investors who were already keen to pour money into big green projects. “I was very frustrated,” Thomas recalls, “and I said as much.”
“People who work in the City are not stupid people. And if they can see an opportunity to make profitable, risk-adjusted returns for their organisations … they will do those trades all day.
So you’ve got to ask yourself, why is that not happening? And it’s a very lazy narrative to say it’s not happening because these people are evil.”
---
So that's why that happened, I suppose.
Listening to labour MPs on the radio squirming whilst defending the coming ramping up of austerity. Clearly not even allowed to acknowledge that proper wealth taxes would be a much fairer way of funding public services. We've replaced one lot of unprincipled chancers with a bunch of lilly livered hypocrites.
Someone needs to read Anas Sarwar's lips.
Liz Truss considered scrapping all NHS cancer treatment after crashing economy, ‘Truss at 10’ book claims
“The author says Mr Rees-Mogg urged Ms Truss to abolish inheritance tax, replace all tax rates with a 20p flat rate, and organise a stunt to promote nuclear power.
He writes that the then cabinet minister told Ms Truss: “We should get a nuclear submarine to dock at Liverpool and plug it into the grid. That would show it is safe.” Sir Anthony says cabinet secretary Simon Case dismissed the idea as a “non-starter”, adding that “the subs are needed in operations”.”
How is she still allowed to be seen outside?
“The author says Mr Rees-Mogg urged Ms Truss to abolish inheritance tax, replace all tax rates with a 20p flat rate, and organise a stunt to promote nuclear power.
He writes that the then cabinet minister told Ms Truss: “We should get a nuclear submarine to dock at Liverpool and plug it into the grid. That would show it is safe.” Sir Anthony says cabinet secretary Simon Case dismissed the idea as a “non-starter”, adding that “the subs are needed in operations”.”
How is she still allowed to be seen outside?
Starmer gives off late Soviet Union leader vibes. A dull and bitter technocratic.
Depressingly I think for the most pro Starmer people(Which isn’t that many) it this.
Well I certainly wish the news media had used this appropriate level of scrutiny over previous governments for the last 14yrs, perhaps we wouldn't be in quite such a fecking mess!
Perhaps letters to Cameron and Osbourne circa 2013 asking why my dad had to wait 18 months for an anurysm clipping because of the NHS beds they cut? Or why my neighbour's shop keeps getting broken into because they know the police can't investigate properly due to the cuts?
(FYI: I think this is a massive misstep, and a cruel first target. It's right that they're challenged on it).
I’m sorry to hear that about your dad. The wait time on the NHS are insane. I had wait around 9 months to get what was 20 minute basic operating.
The fact Osbourne hasn’t been ran out of the country but instead has a political podcast says a lot about the media in Britain. Sadly I don’t think the pressure Labour are facing now will make much different. The government are likely going to push through these cuts regardless of the negative backlash.
It's basically bribery but obviously not called that (they are 'donors') , and in any other government field it's not allowed, the whole donor system needs to be regulated more thoroughly as at the moment politicians are just bought off by the rich.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...08b036ea3f3f97#block-66cef8f38f08b036ea3f3f97
So ridiculous. Starmer sh!ts the bed everytime someone mentions the B word.
"Once in a generation" treaty. For what?
Clueless.
Keir Starmer announces new 'once in a generation' UK-Germany treaty
So ridiculous. Starmer sh!ts the bed everytime someone mentions the B word.
"Once in a generation" treaty. For what?
Clueless.
This is the type of thing that the government should legislate against. Apply a maximum percentage that they can raise prices by during peak, high-demand times.
Same for travel agents / holiday companies.
Well the German Leader doesn't think it is ridiculous. And with due respect, I will bow to their knowledge on this as leaders of the 2 largest economies in Europe.
As you will have read it covers a great deal more than trade.
Edit.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg3pxz4334o
It doesn't cover anything worthwhile and certainly doesn't cover trade at all.
It's just a diplomatic exercise where Starmer thinks the EU are upset with the UK and he wants to build bridges which don't need to be built. There's no animosity from the EU side. The UK left , good luck! Scholz was just being polite.
How can he say it's 'a once in a generation' treaty. Less than four years ago the UK had unfettered access to the EU including Germany and so did the people.
Sorry but Starmer is a complete idiot and as I've said many times he has no idea at all about the EU (or anything else it seems). He's been exactly the same since I first came across him 8 years ago.
Last edited:
Starmer has to 'set his face like flint' and push on, or waste this (once in a lifetime) 170 seat majority and thereby dam the Labour Party as a champion for ordinary folk....forever.
the germans cant engage in anything meaningful with the UK when it comes to the most important thing which is trade, outside of their EU arrangements. The biggest impact of brexit has been on trade. ergo, its just starmer grandstanding without having the balls to actually fix things. so just starmer being starmer.