Probably because he managed to avoid calling them the Trade Onion Conference.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] The Labour Government
- Thread starter Super Steve Earle
- Start date
Dunno about you but I’m a bit f***ing fed up of having to pay to build a new Britain while water companies and energy, and rail companies, and politicians take whatever they f***ing please.
Weststander
Well-known member
There's definitely two or three UK societal parallel universes just now. Ministers, shadow ministers, London lawyers, utilities directors ... are they feeling the financial pain that 10m's have been and are?
For the hoi polloi, the main tangible light at the tunnel can only be significant mortgage rate reductions and for renters a chance to buy something affordable or social housing. This is a long haul.
Macro economically there must be some further hurt to come. How can pubs and restaurants survive when there's so little cash around, for example.
Withdean South Stand
Well-known member
- Mar 2, 2014
- 646
Things take time to change. And it won't be easy. Too many people get greased far too much to give up control. The money being creamed off the rail network and by energy companies (as just a couple of examples) makes it very, very hard to change. A lot of people are going to have to accept making a lot less money to make the changes required - will it ever happen? I hope it will. But it will take a few good men to make it happen.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
More prisons and more pylons, should cheer the NIMBYs up no end.
Weststander
Well-known member
Railways (and I want renationalisation) - don't expect fare cuts, the dividends/salaries taken are trifling as a proportion of railway industry income. It won't help the personal finances of citizens or passengers. But hopefully one day it will end the madness of a load of companies covering the same region, with a raft of tickets.
Water companies - should be in state hands. Some greedy people would see the gravy train end. But cannot see any timeframe for this, other than Thames Water.
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
lol…..sitting down was punishable by being invited to his Box to watch Arsenal
Especially as Angela Rayner has made it clear that she won’t hesitate to use her powers as Housing and Communities Minister to over-ride Local Plans to allow housing development where she feels is best.
London Irish
Well-known member
Utter shitbag. Just an utterly detestable man
Was he feeding them sausages?
chip
Well-known member
I'd prefer mutal ownernship as then we would all have a say in any future sell off.
Water should be owned by us all. I'd go as far as saying that water/waste should be zero charge for domestic usage, it's essential. That said, my pension provider is the main shareholder so I want a good price for it.
Weststander
Well-known member
Zero charge - how would the cost of running the water boards, staff and improved infrastructure be paid for?
- Apr 5, 2014
- 25,840
Is that what he said ? because that he aint.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
armchairclubber
Well-known member
I think we may have our wires crossed.
chip
Well-known member
Through the tax system, the more you earn the more you pay. I get seperate water and waste bills, based on the rateable value of my home. At the moment it's a like a wealth tax levied by private companies (of dubious ownership) who are syphoning out the assets of the business while filling the rivers with shit. I'd rather it just came out at source or council tax, apart from digging wells and tanks I can't change supplier. It could also remove a lot of the admin.
I do realise it's not realistic ... but it does lead me to question who will pay for the new sewers and pipes for all these new houses ... the same way as in the ragged trousered philaphropists I guess.
London Irish
Well-known member
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,359
Right, the Tories were absolutely dogshit and had to go. They were running the country into the ground.
But this… isn’t good either. The leaks, the WFA disaster, the £68,000 per year personal photographer etc… it’s just the opposite of the entire basis of Starmer’s campaign.
His pledge was he is the son the son of a toolmaker (I think I remember him mentioning that) - and everything possible was done to paint him as the opposite to billionaire Sunak.
A modest, self-made public servant. The second he gets actually into power, it’s £2k a week freebies to watch the Arsenal, cutting WFA and telling us constantly how shit our lives are and are going to remain.
We knew he wasn’t Blair, sweeping in with charisma and ambition to make radical change. It was always a case of just getting the Tories out.
But this is really not going well. He needs to reverse WFA and make that the story, not every other cock up. That would be a really good start to turning this around.
But this… isn’t good either. The leaks, the WFA disaster, the £68,000 per year personal photographer etc… it’s just the opposite of the entire basis of Starmer’s campaign.
His pledge was he is the son the son of a toolmaker (I think I remember him mentioning that) - and everything possible was done to paint him as the opposite to billionaire Sunak.
A modest, self-made public servant. The second he gets actually into power, it’s £2k a week freebies to watch the Arsenal, cutting WFA and telling us constantly how shit our lives are and are going to remain.
We knew he wasn’t Blair, sweeping in with charisma and ambition to make radical change. It was always a case of just getting the Tories out.
But this is really not going well. He needs to reverse WFA and make that the story, not every other cock up. That would be a really good start to turning this around.
Ike and Tina Burner
Well-known member
- Mar 22, 2019
- 604
Justice Secretary unveils plan to shut women’s prisons amid overcrowding crisis
‘Around two-thirds did not commit a violent crime yet are sent to prisons desperate for places’
www.independent.co.uk
Justice secretary Shabana Mahmood unveils plan to shut women’s prisons amid overcrowding crisis
"When it came to women in prison Ms Mahmood said it was “too rarely acknowledged” that most women in prison are victims themselves."
If we're going to think like this, does the same not go for male criminals? How many of them have been put onto their paths by ill treatment at some point? Most I would suspect.
Nicola Drinkwater from the charity Women in Prison, said: “[This] announcement from the lord chancellor is long-awaited and finally signals a recognition that women do not belong in prison"
And men do??!! Either they are suggesting that women should receive different types of sentences from men for the same offence or that nobody should go to prison. I suspect it's the former.