[Politics] Labour Party meltdown incoming.......

[Zeberdi]

Misunderstanding… I was answering how could Starmer be removed

But I really do think it is 20% of parliamentary Labour Party needed to start the process

Oops - sorry. Read your post completely the wrong way.

Yes, a candidate needs the backing of 20% of Labour MPs to initiate a leadership challenge.

It’s not going to happen though for reasons I posted above and Labour has a long history of standing by their embattled leaders until they lose a general election unlike the Tories who unceremoniously dump their leaders as soon as they become an electoral liability.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

What they said was that they would not increase NIC, and they said it both verbally and in their manifesto. The sentence in the manifesto was "Labour will not increase taxes on working people, which is why we will not increase National Insurance, the basic, higher, or additional rates of Income Tax, or VAT."

What they now claim is that the part of the sentence "we will not increase National Insurance" meant "we will not increase Employees' National Insurance", and if only we had read the hidden subtext in the small print we would have understood that Employer's National Insurance does not count as National Insurance.

As for farming, here's the proof.

DEFRA secretary Steve Reed admits he U-turned on farm inheritance tax

The secretary of state in charge of rural affairs, Steve Reed, has admitted he has changed his stance on farm inheritance tax because of the "£22bn black hole left by the Tories". When he was shadow DEFRA secretary, Mr Reed told two farmers' conferences a year ago Labour had no plans to change...

uk.news.yahoo.com

Ok.

Thanks for explaining.

In my opinion there was no lie on NI for employers as their statement was for working people and I knew what that meant. My payslip.

I can see how the farmers issue was a u turn on what was said.....but that was a year prior and not in the election.

I still think the statement "they lied to us on the election" is weak at best.

As I said before, I understand not liking the policies, but I can't see a lie from a manifesto/election campaign promise.

 

[Bodian]

You're clutching at straws now.

In what way?

I'm an accountant. I know what NIC is. It might not occur to you that Employer's National Insurance is National Insurance, but it does to me. If they wanted to be clear that they only referred to Employer's National Insurance, they could have been,. Using the excuse that it was hidden in the small print does not qualify as honesty.

It's in the same sentence / paragraph as an explanatory comment. It literally couldn't have been clearer.

 

[cunning fergus]

Ok.

Thanks for explaining.

In my opinion there was no lie on NI for employers as their statement was for working people and I knew what that meant. My payslip.

I can see how the farmers issue was a u turn on what was said.....but that was a year prior and not in the election.

I still think the statement "they lied to us on the election" is weak at best.

As I said before, I understand not liking the policies, but I can't see a lie from a manifesto/election campaign promise.

When Starmer entered No 10 he said his administration was going to tread lightly on peoples lives, that is not how it’s turning out.

Whether or not there was a 22bn black hole, the cure is far worse than the illness, and it didn’t need to be this way. The budget which had the longest drum roll in history and put the economy on hold for months, includes policy changes that will have a direct and heavy affect on peoples lives.

The winter fuel issue for pensioners is the one that gets the headlines but personally the NI contributions for employers is the most damaging. Companies will pass this on to staff through reduction of salary/bonus increases and it will have a chilling affect on recruitment, and that limits growth and investment. Reeves is a fool.

At the same time Starmer’s administration is lavishing money on asylum related matters, another 70m for their legal aid quietly announced as well as the expansion of hotels, Ukraine, and thanks to COPA more taxpayer funding to poor countries experiencing drought etc. These may be popular with someone but all of this generosity is at odds with the winter fuel etc.

His administration is going to introduce additional bans on vapes and tobacco possibly a ban of smoking outside pubs. This week the Supreme Court is to determine the definition of a woman. Yes really.

Starmer’s problem is that his one strong suit was trust, and whilst the public never warmed to him he was seen as boring but trustworthy. He burned through that thanks to his shenanigans with Lord Alli. It was his Gordon Brown bigoted woman moment. There’s worse to come as well, the trial of the Southport murderer and Manchester airport attackers is continually kicked down the road. He’s a busted flush.

 

[cunning fergus]

He isn't wrong though. There is no place for gender nonsense in medicine, as people can suffer serious medical implications if they are treated based on how they identify rather than their actual sex.

Medicine is science, you won’t carry out a hysterectomy on a man, a woman won’t get prostate cancer. It’s straightforward.

It’s the law, misguided policy makers and their supporters that are confusing things.

 

[nevergoagain]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpqdg7ygj08o - Labour Sleaze innit, a time management course might be helpful, or maybe just a calendar.

 

[lawros left foot]

Kemi Badenoch at #PMQs: "We had a budget in March this year and tractors were not blockading the streets of Whitehall afterwards."

Another PMQs, another Kemi master class.

 

[Me Atome]

In what way?

It's in the same sentence / paragraph as an explanatory comment. It literally couldn't have been clearer.

Labour had very specifically told the farmers (prior to the issue of their manifesto) that IHT was not to be changed. They had/have every right to change their mind, but they could have, or should have, told the farmers of this. The silence on the matter in their manifesto does not, in this instance, make it all right. So in this case, your reference to the wording of the manifesto is, in my view, clutching at straws to protect a poor action by Reeve.

Regarding the NI increase, in principle I agree with you, but it is quite a strict use of words to say that they didn't rule out increase to Employers' contributions. As others have said, the final cost all comes from the workers in the end.

 

[Jim in the West]

At the same time Starmer’s administration is lavishing money on asylum related matters, another 70m for their legal aid quietly announced as well as the expansion of hotels, Ukraine, and thanks to COPA more taxpayer funding to poor countries experiencing drought etc. These may be popular with someone but all of this generosity is at odds with the winter fuel etc.

The additional legal aid budget is to try to clear the backlog. It will actually save money, as it'll mean that asylum-seekers' claims can be processed much more quickly, and the individuals concerned will either have their claim granted (and be able to seek work, live independently etc - no longer requiring to housed in hotels) OR their claim will be denied and (if they have arrived from a safe country, they can be returned). Having worked as a volunteer case officer last year, I can assure you that the system run under the previous government was truly f*cked, with tens of thousands of asylum-seekers with good claims being unable to apply for asylum. It is virtually impossible to navigate your way through the asylum system if you don't have a specialised lawyer to help you, and when I was working as a case officer it was often impossible to find a single legal aid lawyer in the whole of the UK with any capacity at all to take on new cases. Thankfully the new government seems to be more focussed on solving the problem, rather than deliberately exacerbating it.

 

[lawros left foot]

Luton Vauxhall owners Stellantis issue warning in 2023 that Luton car plant may close because of Brexit.

May 16 2023 (Reuters) - British car plants will close with the loss of thousands of jobs unless the Brexit deal is swiftly renegotiated, Stellantis has warned, as Ford added its voice to the latest warning from the auto industry since Britain left the European Union.

In 2024, the right wing press report that Luton car plant will close because of low EV sales.

It’s as if they aren’t telling the truth, isn’t it.

 

[Me Atome]

Luton Vauxhall owners Stellantis issue warning in 2023 that Luton car plant may close because of Brexit.

May 16 2023 (Reuters) - British car plants will close with the loss of thousands of jobs unless the Brexit deal is swiftly renegotiated, Stellantis has warned, as Ford added its voice to the latest warning from the auto industry since Britain left the European Union.

In 2024, the right wing press report that Luton car plant will close because of low EV sales.

It’s as if they aren’t telling the truth, isn’t it.

What have the left wing press reported?

 

[lawros left foot]

What have the left wing press reported?

There isn’t a left wing press, it doesn’t exist in this country.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

There isn’t a left wing press, it doesn’t exist in this country.

The Morning Star?

 

[Giraffe]

There isn’t a left wing press, it doesn’t exist in this country.

Guardian, Daily Mirror. Arguably The Independent?

 

[Me Atome]

Perhaps if one doesn't like what's reported in the press, just dismiss it as right wing lies.

 

[lawros left foot]

Guardian, Daily Mirror. Arguably The Independent?

All of which are centrist.

 

[lawros left foot]

Perhaps if one doesn't like what's reported in the press, just dismiss it as right wing lies.

Coming round to my way of thinking.

It usually is.

 

[lawros left foot]

The Morning Star?

And that’s about it.

 

[cunning fergus]

Luton Vauxhall owners Stellantis issue warning in 2023 that Luton car plant may close because of Brexit.

May 16 2023 (Reuters) - British car plants will close with the loss of thousands of jobs unless the Brexit deal is swiftly renegotiated, Stellantis has warned, as Ford added its voice to the latest warning from the auto industry since Britain left the European Union.

In 2024, the right wing press report that Luton car plant will close because of low EV sales.

It’s as if they aren’t telling the truth, isn’t it.

Sometimes you need to ignore whether the press is right wing or left wing and simply consider the underlying facts. Here’s how the EU and EIB operate.

EBRD and Turkey’s Ford Otosan charge ahead with electric-vehicle plans

The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) is supporting the production of next generation all-electric and plug-in hybrid variants of Ford Transit vans for the European market

search.app

Asleep at the wheel - Ford cuts jobs in Europe, the EU's bank delivers for Ford in Turkey | Bankwatch

search.app

The EIB financed Northvolt's battery factory, a step that was supposedly going to make the EU independent for electric vehicle production…….

EIB finances Northvolt's battery factory with over $1 billion

The European Investment Bank (EIB) will finance Northvolt's gigafactory in Northern Sweden, with a total lending package to slightly over $1.038 billion (€942.6 million).

search.app

Northvolt's financial collapse deals a blow to Europe's plan to set up its own battery industry to power electric vehicles, stirring a debate about whether it needs…

https://search.app/GWAqmEQobnbqa9BA9

The Tories and Labour (like the good Europeans they are) backed the same net zero horse but the public (here and in the EU) aren’t buying it, hence demand has collapsed, and that that’s why Northvolt and Luton are f*cked. It’s got nothing to do with Brexit.

 

[cunning fergus]

The additional legal aid budget is to try to clear the backlog. It will actually save money, as it'll mean that asylum-seekers' claims can be processed much more quickly, and the individuals concerned will either have their claim granted (and be able to seek work, live independently etc - no longer requiring to housed in hotels) OR their claim will be denied and (if they have arrived from a safe country, they can be returned). Having worked as a volunteer case officer last year, I can assure you that the system run under the previous government was truly f*cked, with tens of thousands of asylum-seekers with good claims being unable to apply for asylum. It is virtually impossible to navigate your way through the asylum system if you don't have a specialised lawyer to help you, and when I was working as a case officer it was often impossible to find a single legal aid lawyer in the whole of the UK with any capacity at all to take on new cases. Thankfully the new government seems to be more focussed on solving the problem, rather than deliberately exacerbating it.

I suspect like most people they don’t care about the technicals, they see chancers landing in Dover by the thousands, and understand that hard pressed taxpayers money is being spent to home, feed and support them.

If taxes were low, the economy powering ahead, property easy to get hold of and life generally ok, these costs maybe tolerated.

But that isn’t the case, we have a 22bn black hole, winter fuel payments being cut on top of all of the other tough decisions Rachel and Keir are having to make to stabilise the economy.

In political terms this means the Labour Party circle cannot be squared with public perception. It’s why the last lot got turned out, and why this lot should understand that dynamic.

Seemingly they don’t and it’s why KS and co are going to be in for a rough ride going forward when the death rate for pensioners goes up and/or we have another dreadful incident from one of these newly arrived Herberts.