[Politics] Are Labour going to turn this country around?

The Clamp · 2024-12-24T12:08:34+0000

Wallace said:
How very democratic of you.

The first referendum was not democratic.

Rdodge30 · 2024-12-24T12:18:53+0000

Moshe Gariani said:
Keir Starmer and his team are delivering EXACTLY what I expected and hoped for from them.

Harry Wilson's tackle said:
I have very little to say about what Labour have done so far other than it seems OK

The taxation on business is a huge mistake and will bring disastrous consequences for the economy and ironically for the working people Labour claim to be protecting.

I can only see it as either old fashioned left wing spite or better intentioned targeting of the wealthy businesses with out a care for the massive collateral damage inflicted on small businesses.

Either way it’s piss poor politics.

Rdodge30 · 2024-12-24T12:19:28+0000

The Clamp said:
The first referendum was not democratic

How so ?

rippleman · 2024-12-24T12:25:25+0000

Harry Wilson's tackle said:
I am definitely in the same camp as you. I see a dull workmanlike left of centre government taking the tough decisions quickly, without much if any thought about their own PR and spin (relabled by their opponents as making decisions with bad 'optics').

Except they aren't. They are proposing ideas quickly and then entering into lengthy "consulation periods". The new Employment Rights Bill...kicked into 2026 "at the earliest". Consultation on phasing out fossil fuel vehicles by 2030 is another one.

The government has difficult decisions to make. We all know that. So make the difficult decisions. Stop dithering and fannying about.

The Clamp · 2024-12-24T12:27:33+0000

Rdodge30 said:
How so ?

Far too slim a margin for such a seismic decision. Totally undemocratic.

However, on the subject of the EU, it should never have gone to the public vote. That was a huge mistake. One which we should not repeat.

There should be no referendum on our return to the EU. It just needs to happen.

Thankfully, Starmer is doing this by stealth.

No point consulting the same thickos that voted Leave. He understands this.

Tubby Mondays · 2024-12-24T12:30:13+0000

Rdodge30 said:
The taxation on business is a huge mistake and will bring disastrous consequences for the economy and ironically for the working people Labour claim to be protecting.

I can only see it as either old fashioned left wing spite or better intentioned targeting of the wealthy businesses with out a care for the massive collateral damage inflicted on small businesses.

Either way it’s piss poor politics.

Exactly what people said would happen with the introduction of the minimum wage.

did it happen?

chip · 2024-12-24T12:34:04+0000

FT are wishing the LP a happy Christmas today:

UK’s listed builders on track to build fewest new houses in a decade

Vistry shares drop after it issues third profit warning as others suffer from falling sales

www.ft.com

‘Waste of time’: how Keir Starmer fumbled his first months of power

Plunging poll ratings have sapped morale as UK Labour government crawls towards Christmas break

www.ft.com

The simple secret behind the UK’s best performing council pension fund

Banker driving Kensington and Chelsea’s stellar returns explains why he fears the chancellor’s ‘megafunds’

www.ft.com

Brexit hit to UK trade less than predicted, says study

Larger companies have adapted to red tape at the border, according to London School of Economics research

www.ft.com

Hugo Rune · 2024-12-24T12:38:05+0000

The Clamp said:
Far too slim a margin for such a seismic decision. Totally undemocratic.

However, on the subject of the EU, it should never have gone to the public vote. That was a huge mistake. One which we should not repeat.

There should be no referendum on our return to the EU. It just needs to happen.

Thankfully, Starmer is doing this by stealth.

No point consulting the same thickos that voted Leave. He understands this.

What annoys me about elections and referendum is that (like in the US), parties or sides can say what they want. They have a license to lie. The only challenge normally comes from the opposite side. This is orchestrated by the media who in the main, are pumping out stories that will bring them income, not stories that might be for the benefit of the people.

If you were a company stating the sort of BS we see at election/referendum time, you’d be silenced by trading standards. If you were an individual talking that BS about another, libel laws would put an end to your lies.

But politicians have free rein. Hence Trump apparently ending the war in Ukraine in 24hrs etc.

Rdodge30 · 2024-12-24T12:38:54+0000

The Clamp said:
Far too slim a margin for such a seismic decision. Totally undemocratic.

However, on the subject of the EU, it should never have gone to the public vote. That was a huge mistake. One which we should not repeat.

There should be no referendum on our return to the EU. It just needs to happen.

Thankfully, Starmer is doing this by stealth.

No point consulting the same thickos that voted Leave. He understands this.

Surely every poll shows that currently to rejoin would win a referendum by a landslide? Thereby creating an absolute mandate

If leaving based on a marginal referendum result was undemocratic then returning without a referendum would be even more so.

dsr-burnley · 2024-12-24T12:39:40+0000

The Clamp said:
Far too slim a margin for such a seismic decision. Totally undemocratic.

However, on the subject of the EU, it should never have gone to the public vote. That was a huge mistake. One which we should not repeat.

There should be no referendum on our return to the EU. It just needs to happen.

Thankfully, Starmer is doing this by stealth.

No point consulting the same thickos that voted Leave. He understands this.

Doesn't that post belong on the "Is democracy under threat?" thread? With this and with Donald Trump, there are IMO too many people who pay lip service to democracy but actually oppose it in principle.

Rdodge30 · 2024-12-24T12:41:59+0000

Tubby Mondays said:
Exactly what people said would happen with the introduction of the minimum wage.

did it happen?

Granted, only time will tell. Personally I think this is far worse.

sussex_guy2k2 · 2024-12-24T12:43:42+0000

Rdodge30 said:
The taxation on business is a huge mistake and will bring disastrous consequences for the economy and ironically for the working people Labour claim to be protecting.

I can only see it as either old fashioned left wing spite or better intentioned targeting of the wealthy businesses with out a care for the massive collateral damage inflicted on small businesses.

Either way it’s piss poor politics.

Out of interest, outside of spite, have you considered why this may be a good policy?

nevergoagain · 2024-12-24T12:48:03+0000

The Clamp said:
Far too slim a margin for such a seismic decision. Totally undemocratic.

However, on the subject of the EU, it should never have gone to the public vote. That was a huge mistake. One which we should not repeat.

There should be no referendum on our return to the EU. It just needs to happen.

Thankfully, Starmer is doing this by stealth.

No point consulting the same thickos that voted Leave. He understands this.

Blimey, that's a hell of a take and a lovely big brush to tar a huge number of people with. Have a day off, it's Xmas eve.

The Clamp · 2024-12-24T12:56:11+0000

Rdodge30 said:
Surely every poll shows that currently to rejoin would win a referendum by a landslide? Thereby creating an absolute mandate

If leaving based on a marginal referendum result was undemocratic then returning without a referendum would be even more so.

As I said. I don’t care about democracy when it comes to rescuing the country from bankruptcy.

Referendums are the last sanctuary of dictators.

Do what needs to be done. No point asking the dumbos again.

The Clamp · 2024-12-24T12:57:09+0000

nevergoagain said:
Blimey, that's a hell of a take and a lovely big brush to tar a huge number of people with. Have a day off, it's Xmas eve.

I’ll decide when and what I post. Thank you so much.

Rdodge30 · 2024-12-24T13:10:07+0000

sussex_guy2k2 said:
Out of interest, outside of spite, have you considered why this may be a good policy?

Well, speaking as the boss that nobody wants to work for

it looks very much like it is aimed at businesses that are making vast profits but will actually affect all the businesses that are not making vast profits.

I said on here many times during all the arguments about language (is employees NI a tax … who are working people etc etc) that it makes no difference and only the policies matter.

However it’s worth considering what mentality it takes to refer to employees as the only working people, automatically assuming that business owners are not working people. There’s a hint of the same old same old class war there isn’t there?

Dropping the threshold for employers NI to include everyone who works 8 hours a week will have a massive effect.

The chancellor who introduced the new policies for taxation on business said that the effects would be either lower profits, increased prices or reduced wage growth for staff. So it would seem to me that the ‘working people’ will be affected massively all be it indirectly.

Are there any economists who have said this will lead to economic growth?

We all want to see the massive corporations pay their fair share, the Amazons of this world are bleeding us dry but because we cannot untangle the legislation in order to force them to pay their fair share we have hit all the low hanging fruit.

portlock seagull · 2024-12-24T13:12:34+0000

Labour have had minutes to put things right. I’m prepared to let them have a few more. People are ridiculously impatient anyway.

nevergoagain · 2024-12-24T13:31:08+0000

The Clamp said:
I’ll decide when and what I post. Thank you so much.

Thanks for letting us know.

Anyway happy christmas politico chums, even the Starm troopers. (pointless emoji omitted).

Jim in the West · 2024-12-24T14:08:15+0000

Bozza said:
I note you don't provide citation for, nor links to, any of these claims.

I doubt anyone on here has spent as much time reading and researching this subject as me, and I've not seen the supposed Age UK report, nor their subsequent distancing themselves from it.

From all of my reading, I suspect the report referenced is the 2012 Centre for Analysis of Special Exclusion (CASE) report for the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC), which covers fuel poverty and excess winter deaths extensively.

I've read the report in its entirety- it's 234 pages long - so makes for great bedtime reading. Have this link as a little early Christmas present:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a796f55e5274a2acd18ccde/4662-getting-measure-fuel-pov-final-hills-rpt.pdf

But, let's go with your version of events, this was another example of opportunistic opposition from Labour, the report was from Age UK and they've since rowed back from the findings.

It would surely be more useful to look to see if Age UK said anything in direct response to the policy as enacted by Labour. Do you agree that would be more appropriate? Allow me...

"There's been a lot of discussion about the Government's decision, but at heart Age UK's critique of their policy is really simple: we just don't think it's fair to remove the payment from the 2.5 million pensioners on low incomes who badly need it, and to do it so quickly this winter, at the same time as energy bills are rising by 10%.

"It is crystal clear that there is insufficient time to make any serious impact on the miserably low take-up of Pension Credit before the cold sets in this autumn, and the Government has brought forward no effective measures to support all those whose tiny occupational pensions take them just above the line to claim. It's true they have agreed to extend the Household Support Fund until April and they deserve some credit for that, but the HSF is an all-age fund that you have to apply for, so we know it will only help a small proportion of all the pensioners who will be in need as a result of their policy change.

"The Government has also tried to suggest that the increase in State Pension for older people next year as a result of the Triple Lock means there's no need to worry about how they will cope now, but that won't help anyone this winter and most pensioners will not benefit to the extent being suggested - either because they are on the old State Pension which attracts less of an increase, or because they don't qualify for a full State Pension in the first place.

"The reality is that driving through this policy as the Government is doing will make millions of poor pensioners poorer still and we are baffled as to why some Ministers are asserting that this is the right thing to do. We and many others are certain that it is not, and that's why we will continue to stand with the pensioners who can't afford to lose their payment and campaign for them to be given more Government support.

"Meanwhile, winter is coming and we fear it will be a deeply challenging one for millions of older people who have previously relied on their Winter Fuel Payment to help pay their energy bills and who have no obvious alternative source of funds on which to draw. As a charity we will do everything we can to help them, but with so many in need and no extra support on offer from the Government at the moment it's looking like an incredibly uphill task."

Source: https://www.ageuk.org.uk/latest-pre...-payment-vote-defeat-in-the-house-of-commons/

But your suggestion to discount historic statements on this, and focus on specific responses to Labour's actual policy, has me wondering if any other organisations in this field feel similarly to Age UK. And you'll never guess what? Many do...

Marie Curie

"For people who claim benefits under the Special Rules for Terminal Illness, this may very well be their last winter and Christmas. We know that energy costs can increase dramatically after a terminal diagnosis, yet the decision to restrict the Winter Fuel Payment only to people receiving means-tested benefits takes no account of this.

"The festive season is meant to be one of warmth, joy, and celebration. No one should have to face their final days worrying about money or whether they can afford to heat their home or even switch on Christmas lights. The government should urgently rethink this decision, and take further steps to support people at the end of life with energy costs, including by introducing a social tariff."

Source: https://www.mariecurie.org.uk/media...el-payment-under-uk-government-changes/385291

Independent Age

“Tying the Winter Fuel Payment to Pension Credit now will see far too many older people fall through the cracks. Pension Credit still has a stubbornly low take up and in addition there is a large group of older people living just above the entitlement’s threshold, sometimes by just a few pounds. People in this situation will now have this vital money taken away from them. That’s why we are heading to Downing Street to urge the UK Government to protect the payment for those in later life living on low incomes.

“With winter around the corner, now is the time to bring older people on a low income back in from the cold.”

Source: https://www.independentage.org/news...-new-research-shows-impact-of-change-on-older

End Fuel Poverty Coallition

“The long term way to reduce the costs to the NHS of people living in cold damp homes is to improve insulation and ventilation of buildings as well as stabilise energy costs by getting the country away from being hooked on volatile gas prices.

“But until the Government fully implements its positive plans in these areas, vulnerable households will continue to need financial support. That’s why the Winter Fuel Payments were so important, the money provided help for older households to stay warm each winter.

“Sadly, now more older people are expected to live in cold damp homes this winter and this puts them at greater risk of ill health, meaning the costs to the NHS will soar.”

National Pensioners Convention

“The loss of the winter fuel allowance for the majority of older people clearly puts them at risk. It is a known fact that older people require warmth and a stable temperature to maintain their health.

“Living in cold, damp homes heightens the risk of strokes, heart disease, respiratory conditions and generally harms the rest of the body.

It therefore follows that the risk of overwhelming the NHS in winter is high and the cost of dealing with the consequences of the Government decision will be felt throughout the NHS and care sectors.”

Independent Age (again)

“Many of the older people on a low income we speak to tell us they were already cutting back on heating before the announcement to means test the winter fuel payment.

“With the reality of now losing hundreds of pounds this winter, many have shared they will be making severe cutbacks including not turning the heating on at all.

“Others have told us they will reduce the amount they eat so they can turn the heating on for a few hours a day.

“It is unacceptable that people in later life are having to make dangerous sacrifices as we approach the colder months, and we are concerned that the demand for NHS services could increase as a result.”

You and I know that I could go on and on and on here. There's a strong and consistent theme from organisations who work in the field of elderly care and poverty. You don't have to read much to find terms such as "cruel", "dangerous" and "brutal".

We've known each other for a long time - close to 30 years now - and I know you're a decent and compassionate sort. I admire the amazing work you have done with charity to help very vulnerable people.

So, given I think I know you reasonably well, are you going to surprise me and say you fully support this policy in its entirety? I'm not interested in the wealthiest c90% of pensionsers losing this benefit. The universality was wrong, and the money can be better spent.

But amongst the poorest 10% losing the benefit, which still numbers c1m people, there are people with meagre incomes, no savings and the WFA provided some respite to allow the heating to be turned on occasionally on the very coldest days. Do you support the removal of the payment from these people?

Hey Bozza, I wasn't trying to claim any greater knowledge than you on this subject - or trying to hide the source for my comments (in fact, I clearly mentioned it in my post - it's the BBC Radio 4 programme "More or Less" from a couple of months ago. [For info, it's the programme that went out on 30th October....it's an interview with the current Head of Research at Age UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0k14s1f - hopefully that link works - the item starts approx 1 minute into the programme].

And to (almost) answer your question, I don't necessarily agree with the changes to eligibility for the WFA. However, I have a huge amount of sympathy for Labour - they have a humungous number of very difficult decisions to make, many of which are the result of the dire financial legacy that the Tories bequeathed to them. My own preference would have been for the government to bring forward the date when the state pension goes up (from 1 April 2025 to 1 Nov 2024) to ensure that pensioners had some extra money over this winter....however, there may have been some reasons why that wasn't possible (or maybe it wasn't even considered).

Wallace · 2024-12-24T14:50:43+0000

The Clamp said:
The first referendum was not democratic.

How was not democratic?
David Cameron called an election and in his party's manifesto he promised an in/out referendum on Britain's membership of the EU.
Both side were given ample time to present their arguments to the general public and the public then cast their votes, a clear majority voted to leave.
What was undemocratic about that process?
Or is just undemocratic because you lost and you still haven't worked out how to untwist your knickers?

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Politics] Are Labour going to turn this country around?

Is Labour going to turn the country around

Yes

No

Fence

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Share this page