[Politics] Starmer v Sunak *** Official Match Thread ***

[portslade seagull]

The proportion of managers in the nhs is lower than other industries though isn’t it? Which roles would you get rid of manager for? Maybe we should have heart surgeons running appointments or the midwives doing facilities? The head nurse sorting the IT. Hospitals are multi million pound organisations so you need people with skills to run them efficiently. Let clinicians do their jobs.

Similar in schools where a good IT bod could save a trust hundreds of thousands.

Lower to what When my brother in law was the South East trusts area procurement manager on £700 a day he was appalled at the doubling up of management levels. It was like 6 management/backroom staff to every nurse. Changing the NHS is like trying to stop a super tanker.
He was tasked with making potential savings of 25m over two years which the trust management said would be reallocated to hiring more nurses. He managed 15m but was harassed every step of the way by departmental managers who wanted to keep their own private suppliers. Suprisingly the money never went towards any nurses but back to the departmental manager's.
He walked out in disgust but was chased by other NHS trusts but never looked back.

 

[kevo]

They don’t, which is why successive governments have encouraged people to save and pay into their own pensions. There is no retirement date as such, just ages where the State pension commences. For some people the £221? pw state pension is a nice top up. For others it’s all they’ll get.

I wish they'd made company pensions mandatory much earlier. Made a huge mistake by not opting in to mine when it was optional. The worst thing about it was they had a stupid rule where you could only join as a new starter at the company. After you'd been there a month or whatever, you weren't allowed to join the scheme! So you were unable to change your mind further down the line.

 

[Jim in the West]

Just don't think its the Starmer style to be that combative, some say timid some say respectful

It is crazy that we seem to place so much importance on these TV debates which actually tell us NOTHING about how good someone will be at governing the country. In fact, it's worse than that - because people get excited by someone who seems glossy and bombastic, at the expense of someone who is considered and thoughtful. I know which type I would prefer, and it's not a decision informed by an hour's worth of 45 second sound bites.

 

[Jim in the West]

Lower to what When my brother in law was the South East trusts area procurement manager on £700 a day he was appalled at the doubling up of management levels. It was like 6 management/backroom staff to every nurse. Changing the NHS is like trying to stop a super tanker.
He was tasked with making potential savings of 25m over two years which the trust management said would be reallocated to hiring more nurses. He managed 15m but was harassed every step of the way by departmental managers who wanted to keep their own private suppliers. Suprisingly the money never went towards any nurses but back to the departmental manager's.
He walked out in disgust but was chased by other NHS trusts but never looked back.

I had 4 years as a Non Exec at an NHS Trust. Management costs were around 5% - 6% of total staff costs. Cutting back on management/admin was ALWAYS a false economy, as you ended up with clinical staff doing loads of paperwork instead of being able to deal with patients.

 

[timbha]

I wish they'd made company pensions mandatory much earlier. Made a huge mistake by not opting in to mine when it was optional. The worst thing about it was they had a stupid rule where you could only join as a new starter at the company. After you'd been there a month or whatever, you weren't allowed to join the scheme! So you were unable to change your mind further down the line.

When opting in and out were introduced there was a lot of suspicion causing people to opt out. Not being allowed to change your mind was pretty tough.

 

[nicko31]

It is crazy that we seem to place so much importance on these TV debates which actually tell us NOTHING about how good someone will be at governing the country. In fact, it's worse than that - because people get excited by someone who seems glossy and bombastic, at the expense of someone who is considered and thoughtful. I know which type I would prefer, and it's not a decision informed by an hour's worth of 45 second sound bites.

The good section of the public are obsessed with the cult of personality, we've had enough of the Farage's and Johnson's of this world. We want solid governance without endless lies

 

[rippleman]

Think they are talking about the State Pension and basically saying that the single persons tax allowance (the amount they can earn before paying tax) will always be the same or higher than the state pension, however if the two are the same you will pay tax on any other income whether it be from other pensions or earnings.

But there is a problem with this policy.

All State pensioners are equal, but some are more equal than others! Here's the rub, not all State pensioners receive the same rate of State pension. I have a client whose State pension is over £25K PA, and a couple more around the £20K PA mark.

So are ALL State pensioners to receive a Personal Allowance of £25K PA. Or is the idea that all State pensioners will get a Personal Allowance equivalent to their State pension?

He hasn't thought this through has he?

 

[kevo]

When opting in and out were introduced there was a lot of suspicion causing people to opt out. Not being allowed to change your mind was pretty tough.

Exactly. I'd previously worked for MGN/Mirror Group - part of Maxwell's organisation, and I remember going to the presentation about joining their pension scheme. I decided against it, which was the right decision as everyone subsequently lost their pension savings. So when I moved to my new company I was extremely wary. But my decision not to opt in has cost me a huge sum of money.

 

[Berty23]

Lower to what When my brother in law was the South East trusts area procurement manager on £700 a day he was appalled at the doubling up of management levels. It was like 6 management/backroom staff to every nurse. Changing the NHS is like trying to stop a super tanker.
He was tasked with making potential savings of 25m over two years which the trust management said would be reallocated to hiring more nurses. He managed 15m but was harassed every step of the way by departmental managers who wanted to keep their own private suppliers. Suprisingly the money never went towards any nurses but back to the departmental manager's.
He walked out in disgust but was chased by other NHS trusts but never looked back.

This is a good article on it. Makes reference to the point you make. But overall half the oecd average for managers. It is not as simple as get more managers. It is more complex.

How bad does it need to get?

Understanding the NHS Crisis

samf.substack.com

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Now the dust has settled I'm starting to feel like Starmer had a plan. Just like with Johnson he lets his opposition lie and hang themselves, then let the court of public opinion be the judge.

Initially Sunak scored 51% in poll as coming out on top, but if you ran that again today it would be a lower

Lying spolit public school boy who interrupts a lot sums it up

It’s certainly a long game if this was the plan. And a risky one considering how bad he was at getting his own policies across.

 

[beorhthelm]

But there is a problem with this policy.

All State pensioners are equal, but some are more equal than others! Here's the rub, not all State pensioners receive the same rate of State pension. I have a client whose State pension is over £25K PA, and a couple more around the £20K PA mark.

So are ALL State pensioners to receive a Personal Allowance of £25K PA. Or is the idea that all State pensioners will get a Personal Allowance equivalent to their State pension?

He hasn't thought this through has he?

reckon you're counting SERPs or whatever the secondary add on state pension gets called. not the basic state pension being refered to.

 

[A mex eyecan]

But there is a problem with this policy.

All State pensioners are equal, but some are more equal than others! Here's the rub, not all State pensioners receive the same rate of State pension. I have a client whose State pension is over £25K PA, and a couple more around the £20K PA mark.

So are ALL State pensioners to receive a Personal Allowance of £25K PA. Or is the idea that all State pensioners will get a Personal Allowance equivalent to their State pension?

He hasn't thought this through has he?

probably i’ll thought out, like most things.
Unless of course they are planning it to be fixed at whatever the standard(ish) state pension …

 

[dwayne]

Again, no.

We now KNOW they made up the numbers, because its been proven they came from Tory HQ and not the Treasury. That has now been established as FACT. That removes any lingering vestige of "assumption".

I think the point is ... They estimated the numbers. If labour are up in arms about it they should properly cost it out (which they won't) .... And how have labour not got a manifesto one month before the election.

Both parties are pitiful

 

[dwayne]

I agree that we were left wondering how exactly these things are going to be paid for. Yet despite neither of them giving any explanation, the Conservatives were somehow worse. Why is it that Labour are scrutinized over how things will be paid for, yet that never seems to apply the Tories? Last night, Labour said they'd add VAT to private school fees and wouldn't rule out pensions being taxed. They also said they'd tax non-doms properly as they need to start paying their way, and there'd be an tax on energy firms.

It's pitiful, yet is also a damn site more than what we got from Sunak.

This is fair. But TBF labour could have asked the question. Starmer was resting on his laurels. As you've previously said, it's best starmer pretty much does nothing to rock the boat. Stand there like a plank of wood and he will still win.

 

[Weststander]

yup, as soon as they go above the £12800. Kings ransom that isn’t it. How the F does anyone expect a person to live on that?

It's a more detailed discussion than that.

- The UK's pension system has also always included mass workplace and private pension schemes. Costing the UK public purse pays a net £48b a year per annum in tax relief to schemes/contributors.
- 11.8m have a defined benefit pension they'll be able to draw on in the future. The value of DB funds is £105b, in addition some public sector DB schemes are unfunded.
- £12,800 is for one person, couples obviously receive more.
- Anyone falling short of £218pw or £333pw as a couple, have the means tested top up Pension Credit. 1.6m households receive Pension Credit. Also assistance paying mortgage interest.
- Instead for non home owners, there's means tested Housing Benefit, another 1.2m pensioner households receive this.
- Other credits for carers, disability, ground rent and service charges.
- In addition means tested reduced council tax.

The argument from the chatterati in recent years is that the UK's 12.6m pensioners have it all their way due to the Triple Lock. Whilst 18 to 40 year old's generally have next to no state help or any hope of affordable housing.

 

[pb21]

...how have labour not got a manifesto one month before the election.

It was only called a couple of weeks ago, the tories don't have one either and it was in their own gift!

 

[Blue3]

Repeating a lie, talikng over your opponent and talking over the host does not "win" you a debate.

However, if your criteria is who is the most forceful and aggressive then Sunak clearly won.

To say Starmer scored NIL is ridiculous. The audience laughed in Rishi's face on at least 2 occasions.

I think in the light of day its become clear that Sunak lied and having been caught out I am hopeful his behaviour will improve

 

[A mex eyecan]

It's a more detailed discussion than that.

- The UK's pension system has also always included mass workplace and private pension schemes. Costing the UK public purse pays a net £48b a year per annum in tax relief to schemes/contributors.
- 11.8m have a defined benefit pension they'll be able to draw on in the future. The value of DB funds is £105b, in addition some public sector DB schemes are unfunded.
- £12,800 is for one person, couples obviously receive more.
- Anyone falling short of £218pw or £333pw as a couple, have the means tested top up Pension Credit. 1.6m households receive Pension Credit. Also assistance paying mortgage interest.
- Instead for non home owners, there's means tested Housing Benefit, another 1.2m pensioner households receive this.
- Other credits for carers, disability, ground rent and service charges.
- In addition means tested reduced council tax.

The argument from the chatterati in recent years is that the UK's 12.6m pensioners have it all their way due to the Triple Lock. Whilst 18 to 40 year old's generally have next to no state help or any hope of affordable housing.

yes I agree it is. Was just highlighting that it’s a very low level at which tax is paid. It can likewise be argued that this level if too low for all, retirees and workers, let alone freeze it for a while longer.

 

[Bodian]

I think the point is ... They estimated the numbers. If labour are up in arms about it they should properly cost it out (which they won't) .... And how have labour not got a manifesto one month before the election.

Both parties are pitiful

Labour have stated over and over that it is fully (properly) costed - so they have done this. It will be published in due course.

As to 'why have labour not got a manifesto one month before the election?' - Can you provide me with a link to the Conservative Party Manifesto please?

 

[A mex eyecan]

Labour have stated over and over that it is fully (properly) costed - so they have done this. It will be published in due course.

As to 'why have labour not got a manifesto one month before the election?' - Can you provide me with a link to the Conservative Party Manifesto please?

has any party got one yet?
Well you could assume Reforms will be out first as they only really have one issue to persue. Something to do with keep harping on about boats I think. Perhaps they want to encourage our fishing industry, that’ll be it