[Politics] The General Election Thread

[DavidinSouthampton]

The accepted narrative on public finances appear to me to be that Labour are expected to cost everything to the penny, whereas the Tories aren't. So much so, that they find money for all sorts of shocking wastes of money - a billion to bribe the DUP here, tens of millions to raise awareness of the Brexit deadline that wasnt happening there. How the hell are these things missed before they are elected? And why aren't they held to account in future elections?

Let's be even handed on this - Neill found ONE thing that wasn't costed in their manifesto (those women's pensions) and he was mercilessly chased for an answer. Where do you start with the Conservative manifesto, which has all the financial gravitas and detail of a church parish bulletin leaflet?

Unfair to Church Parish bulletin leaflets.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Once the Tories sell our NHS we will be able to start looking back on the pre Johnson era as the good old days while sitting in a waiting room waiting for the quotation for selling a kidney to pay for the wife's medication

Nearly every election Labour reels out the 'Save our NHS' line claiming a Tory government will privatise it, the fact it happens so often tells you how accurate truthful that claim was/is.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Nearly every election Labour reels out the 'Save our NHS' line claiming a Tory government will privatise it, the fact it happens so often tells you how accurate truthful that claim was/is.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-claims-secret-documents-prove-nhs-up-for-sale-to-donald-trump_uk_5dde3a5ce4b0913e6f762eae

 

[A1X]

The accepted narrative on public finances appear to me to be that Labour are expected to cost everything to the penny, whereas the Tories aren't. So much so, that they find money for all sorts of shocking wastes of money - a billion to bribe the DUP here, tens of millions to raise awareness of the Brexit deadline that wasnt happening there. How the hell are these things missed before they are elected? And why aren't they held to account in future elections?

Let's be even handed on this - Neill found ONE thing that wasn't costed in their manifesto (those women's pensions) and he was mercilessly chased for an answer. Where do you start with the Conservative manifesto, which has all the financial gravitas and detail of a church parish bulletin leaflet?

It's all part of the bullshit narrative peddled by the right that Labour caused the financial crisis, unfortunately. Anyone who really understands this stuff knows it's bollocks, but you'll never convince the hard-of-thinking.

 

[A1X]

Nearly every election Labour reels out the 'Save our NHS' line claiming a Tory government will privatise it, the fact it happens so often tells you how accurate truthful that claim was/is.

Labour haven't previously been able to produce a document agreed by a Tory minister and the US Government which outlines how they're planning on carving it up though, have they?

 

[Chicken Run]

Labour haven't previously been able to produce a document agreed by a Tory minister and the US Government which outlines how they're planning on carving it up though, have they?

I don’t think the document you talk of does either.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Labour haven't previously been able to produce a document agreed by a Tory minister and the US Government which outlines how they're planning on carving it up though, have they?

They still haven't. Trade talks have not started yet. All this document details is what the US want, almost like it is a starting point for discussions.

 

[ROKERITE]

Labour haven't previously been able to produce a document agreed by a Tory minister and the US Government which outlines how they're planning on carving it up though, have they?

No and as far as I can gather they haven't done so now. Allowing US firms access to our markets might mean cheaper medicines, etc will be available for purchase thus reducing costs. Hardly carving up The NHS.

 

[Surrey Phil]

There’s more muck spreading on this thread than on your average farm or by the MP’s themselves! I’ll be glad when the whole charade is done in a few weeks time!

 

[Blue3]

So far, only one NHS hospital has ever been privatised and that was by Labour. It was the Tories who nationalised it again.

It’s a funny old world, isn’t it?

Depends upon the definition of privatisation many elements of the NHS are now in the hands of private companies through outsourcing and having worked in the NHS for over 34 years I have seen this first hand some have since been taken back in house while others have changed companies several times.

I personally know of some horror stories that I could tell you about relating to NHS Outsourcing which was not helped especially in the early years by the fact negotiating such contracts was not somthing the NHS had any experience of, it was overnight a completly new world and more oftern than not the NHS was completely stitched up one well documented example was PFI where private finance built hospitals then rented the space back to the NHS knowing that the NHS is forever changing as new treatments become available then when building alterations were required the PFI company would charge exorbitant amounts to undertake these using Tax payers monies

 

[dazzer6666]

Changing tack slightly for a minute, watched Victoria Derbyshire question SNP's Alison Thewliss on TV this morning......................squirmingly bad responses from the politician. Was talking about NHS problems when Vic reminded her that her own Govt took over devolved responsibility for NHS Scotland 12 years ago, then questioned her on education figures showing a large % of Scottish kids leave school without being able to read.

'I don't recognise those figures'

'They're produced by your Government'

etc.

She'll be in WJK's office for a bollocking by now, for sure.

 

[Blue3]

Nearly every election Labour reels out the 'Save our NHS' line claiming a Tory government will privatise it, the fact it happens so often tells you how accurate truthful that claim was/is.

I have seen the gradual erosion of the NHS first hand over the past 34 years the only time it improved significantly during that time was the during the Labour Blaire first term when real investment went in, the past ten years has seen a real decline in funding year on year, I was with a Trust finance director when he received a letter from the the Department of health to announce that Government had just anounced that an extra £1 million was going into his budget earmarked for mental health, the very next letter he opened gave instructions that his Trust needed to make savings of £1 million to support the mental health budget

 

[peterward]

Conveniently forgetting Corbyn and his policies have nothing to do with Blair.

Of course they do, when Corbyn stands there and says "a conservative government wants to sell the NHS" (without any proof) and the crowd chant back "Not for sale"..... I think it does rather conveniently forget it was the Labour party and a Labour PM that actually sold in part (as a matter of FACT) our NHS to private service providers.

I'm in total agreement the NHS shouldn't be sold out to private companies, but Corbyns baseless mud slinging ignores actual reality of which party really did that.

 

[theonlymikey]

In what way is it baseless ? When the baseline for negotiations is EVERYTHING is included until explicitly agreed it isn't?

What about restrictions on climate change included on the document. Selling the planet's future in order to cosy up to trumps bum cheeks.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Steve in Japan]

The accepted narrative on public finances appear to me to be that Labour are expected to cost everything to the penny, whereas the Tories aren't. So much so, that they find money for all sorts of shocking wastes of money - a billion to bribe the DUP here, tens of millions to raise awareness of the Brexit deadline that wasnt happening there. How the hell are these things missed before they are elected? And why aren't they held to account in future elections?

Let's be even handed on this - Neill found ONE thing that wasn't costed in their manifesto (those women's pensions) and he was mercilessly chased for an answer. Where do you start with the Conservative manifesto, which has all the financial gravitas and detail of a church parish bulletin leaflet?

Fair enough. But if you are the Party that is promising to increase day to day spending by £80bn per annum (10% increase), and increase investment spending by £55bn (double), you should expect a lot of scrutiny I think. And it's one thing making sure it's all costed, its another convincing people you can raise the tax revenue you need in the manner you indicate. And then the WASPI thing on top of that.

 

[peterward]

Sorry, maybe it's just me, but I don't really understand what point you're trying to make. Especially in relation to the quoted post.

Fair enough, the quoted post was referring to baseless mud flingng allegations that our NHS is about to be sold to the USA, something the document in Corbyns hand doesn't say, (America probing our position and our side saying the NHS is off the table doesn't constitute anything). This for a negotiation that has not begun and is not even possible whilst we're in the EU and which has been openly refuted both publically and in the manifesto of the accused Tory party. And I'm no Johnson fab.

"The NHS will be sold off by the Tory party to private companies" is obviously an election strategy, albeit a baseless, bull$hit one at this stage, rolled out in desperation the day after the Andrew Neil car crash, when the simple fact is, it was a Labour government that actually did the very thing the Tory party are being accused, without substance of plotting. Selling off the NHS.

I wouldn't expect a tribal Labour supporter to grasp such simple facts.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Changing tack slightly for a minute, watched Victoria Derbyshire question SNP's Alison Thewliss on TV this morning......................squirmingly bad responses from the politician. Was talking about NHS problems when Vic reminded her that her own Govt took over devolved responsibility for NHS Scotland 12 years ago, then questioned her on education figures showing a large % of Scottish kids leave school without being able to read.

'I don't recognise those figures'

'They're produced by your Government'

etc.

She'll be in WJK's office for a bollocking by now, for sure.

Yes, awful.

Reminded me of Rebecca Wrong-Daily with her grasp of facts and figures.

 

[Is it PotG?]

Fair enough. But if you are the Party that is promising to increase day to day spending by £80bn per annum (10% increase), and increase investment spending by £55bn (double), you should expect a lot of scrutiny I think. And it's one thing making sure it's all costed, its another convincing people you can raise the tax revenue you need in the manner you indicate. And then the WASPI thing on top of that.

Absolutely. The gap between theoretical costing (in the instance where it has been done) and realistic income from this theoretical source is vast.

 

[peterward]

In what way is it baseless ? When the baseline for negotiations is EVERYTHING is included until explicitly agreed it isn't?

What about restrictions on climate change included on the document. Selling the planet's future in order to cosy up to trumps bum cheeks.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

That is the alleged American position and it may well be the American starting position wether Johnson, Corbyn or Swinson walks into number 10, how can any UK party be to blame for what the US will start with.... What any party agrees sure, but it's ludicrous to blame Johnson for trump's ridiculous requests.

Again for context, we will have no say in any trade deal done by the EU. If Johnson agreed to such an outlandish demand they'd rightly be hell to pay, but that is not an official UK position or concession, and I doubt it ever would be. If would be political suicide.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Absolutely. The gap between theoretical costing (in the instance where it has been done) and realistic income from this theoretical source is vast.

As opposed to the gaps in the Tory plans which are entirely unknown, as a. none of it is costed, and b. their future plans are based on implementing Johnson's WA, for which they've undertaken no economic impact assesment...

Party of financial prudence, my ****ing ARSE.