- Jul 27, 2024
- 769
The obvious point I was making was that there will be major issues to come re industrial action, particularly in the public sector and with the traditionally militant unions- transport etc.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] The Labour Government
- Thread starter Super Steve Earle
- Start date
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Peace breaks out on the railways as RMT members accept pay offer
RMT members back one-year rise of 4.5% at Network Rail and increases at train operators of 4.75% for the last year and 4.5% for 2024/25
www.standard.co.uk
- Jul 27, 2024
- 769
Yes, that’s (partly) what started the line of discussion. Apparently nothing proposed or agreed re productivity, future efficiencies etc. Let’s see how this pans out.Peace breaks out on the railways as RMT members accept pay offer
RMT members back one-year rise of 4.5% at Network Rail and increases at train operators of 4.75% for the last year and 4.5% for 2024/25
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
The pay settlement is exactly the same as the previous government but without the punitive cuts to ticket office staff, as the public made it clear they still want ticket offices, especially disabled people.
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
Surely if people are asking for an increase to try and CATCH UP on their lagging salaries, then asking them to do more to earn that pay rise defeats the whole point.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
I'll take it that you don't like trade unions. You'll also find that in recent years at least the most unionised sectors have had the worse pay deals -- resulting in real-terms pay cuts -- ever since austerity. These unions haven't been remotely militant, despite what they've been subjected to. Levels of industrial action have been heightened somewhat in the past few years, but is miniscule in comparison with decades ago. About the only exception to this is the rail workers.
armchairclubber
Well-known member
The above is all extremely misleading and disingenuous. Just what you would expect from a Labour Activist who puts his party before striving for International Peace
As has been declared on this thread we are not now held by the standards of Rishi Sunak and the Tories (or Biden for that matter) and comparisons are not helpful. Any attempt to do so is simply to deflect and mislead. (I'm sure the poster knows better than his above bullet points)
The above statements are presented as if this Labour Government are abiding by the ICJ advisory ruling which is far from the truth. These above statements are presented by someone who holds Biden as authority for International law and peace. The same Biden that invites Netenyahu to America, the White House and Congress and continues to give full support arming Israeli aggression.
To give further perspective
ICJP relieved at Labour government’s decision not to intervene in International Criminal Court arrest warrants - ICJP
London, 26th July 2024 – The International Centre of Justice for Palestinians […]
www.icjpalestine.com
Excerpts from the above:
"The UK has strongly supported the ICC in the past and it should continue to support it as an international institution, without seeking to delegitimise it, if it supports an international rules-based order.
Earlier this month, ICJP wrote to the Foreign Secretary highlighting key foreign policy priorities for the new Labour government, including full support of the ICC. British foreign policy must uphold international law and remain free from US influence. Rather, British foreign policy should be set by the elected representatives who represent their respective offices.
Whilst it is a relief that the Labour government will not be intervening in the ICC, the lack of clear and decisive leadership is alarming. Respecting and upholding international law is imperative and a strict minimum. UK leadership must take initiative by immediately halting arms transfers to Israel as well as immediate and unilateral recognition of Palestine, proving their true commitment to a ceasefire and a fruitful peace process.
Legal Officer Zaki Sarraf said:
“Respecting the jurisdiction and independence of the ICC is the least the Labour government can do to demonstrate a genuine commitment to justice and accountability. They must now avoid further undermining their credibility and uphold international law.
The double U-turn on the ICC arrest warrants was farcical—it called the integrity of the government into question and delayed the issuance of any potential arrest warrants. Anything less than supporting the ICC and upholding international law by immediately halting arms sales to Israel would signify the UK’s continued complicity in Israeli war crimes in Gaza."
The UN has recently urged all States to comply with the ICJ Advisory Opinion.
TL; DR
The UK Labour Government does not respect the ICJ.
It does not currently recognise the State of Palestine. Neither does it have a full arms embargo with Israel.
David Lammy made pledges that Labour would abide by and respect International Law once in office. He has been hypocritical enough to say that other nations should do so in full.
Labour and their activists are doing their best to undermine the ICJ Advisory Opinion on how to bring peace to the Middle East.
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
I don't know Zeberdi, and I may well be doing him a disservice......but can he achieve international peace?
armchairclubber
Well-known member
I don't know, but we can all strive for International Peace.
Including Miss World circa 1975.
- Oct 20, 2022
- 7,210
Don’t be ridiculous.
Your extremely anti-Israel rhetoric and polarised views about the Palestinian Question that you have been posting ad nauseam, on every possible thread since last October hardly gives you any kind of moral authority to decide who has ‘international peace’ at the forefront of their POV. This obsession you seem to have with Starmer and Labour Party supporters being ‘responsible for genocide’ (yes you have actually said that) while he was in opposition belies your naivity about how international geo-politics actually works. Your personal abuse about mine and others support for Labour in a private messages and on multiple threads makes your POV rather irrational afaic.
No, we are not but when someone posts a video of a pro-Palestinian protest against the Leader of the Opposition from over 9 mnths ago to argue the unpopularity of the current PM now, then comparisons are relevant because Sunak was the Prime Minister at that time - I have posted what this Government has done since being elected, specifically relating to Gaza above. Hardly ‘disingenuous’ or ‘misleading’ to quote current Government policy.
Er last time I checked, Biden was still the President of the United Stars so, again. we are bound to a large extent by the policies and peace-making initiatives in the ME that our largest ally draws up.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,310
How is this a point - "The reason this is a very bad, short-termist idea will become apparent quite soon. I won’t spoil it for you. Just wait and see."
My nan had a saying for situations like this. It was "Shit or get off the pot".
Curious Orange
Punxsatawney Phil
Could I ask a couple of question" on your first point please? I note that it is been carefully crafted to state "......suspended export licences for use in military operations in Gaza."
1) If we are going to continue to allow arms to be sent to Israel how are we going to police their use? How will we know that the arms sold to Israel won't be used in Gaza?
2) Does the pseudo embargo on use of UK arms sales in Gaza not apply to other areas eg West Bank, Lebanon etc or is ok for Israel to just continue to use our arms to slaughter innocents (as long as it's not in Gaza)?
armchairclubber
Well-known member
You still try to deflect. I was replying to your bullet points.
The video was no part of my argument and I could see clearly myself that it was not relevant or appropriate.
Moving on.
Thread ‘hijacked’ by the age old entrenched Middle East camps.
RandyWanger
Je suis rôti de boeuf
didn't they promise to lower household energy bills by £400 if they won or was this written on a red bus?
- Jul 27, 2024
- 769
It’s not hard, is it? But OK, I was being rhetorical, and as you hadn’t realised that, let me spell it out for you, and for the other hard-of-thinking types: It’s very easy to resolve a pay dispute when coming into government. You accede to the wishes of the strikers. This is then declared a 'victory' and/or a good solution all round.
Trouble is, there'll be another pay round next year, by which time the government will have become strangely less euphoric and less generous than they’d felt on taking over. Not only that but others will have taken note of these new pushovers in charge, and will feel emboldened to ask for more. As indeed (before you make the point) many deserve to. I won’t argue against the healthcare providers.
It’s the transport unions who really piss me off because they have repeatedly materially diminished the quality of my life over several years despite being paid substantially more than their equivalents across Europe. Quote me on this next year if you want. The government caving in to the train drivers et al, will come back to bite them on the arse. More importantly, it's the general public (including those healthcare workers trying to get to work) who will, as usual, suffer the consequences most.
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,941
All?
RCN members reject NHS England pay award | News | Royal College of Nursing
Two-thirds of nursing staff who voted said the 5.5% pay award isn’t enough.www.rcn.org.uk
Which is a shame, as we're going to need the nurses more than ever this winter when all those pensioners who can't afford to heat their homes head towards hospitals across the country.
And that's the real story we should all be debating.
A common pattern on this thread, however, is a certain group of people very much not wanting to talk about that - they'd rather brush it away with an ill-informed "rich pensioners won't get WFP, and the poor ones still will" or go mysteriously AWOL - perhaps when they do finally understand what the Government are inflicting on a lot of very vulnerable people.
In fact, it's the same group of people who do also seem quite happy to talk about tickets, free clobber and designer specs. Convenient...
I agree, have agreed all along and made a number of posts on this thread that the real issue is the WFA cut off level and that it is wrong and needs to be changed if poorer pensioners are not going to suffer.
But you then go on about three groups who you believe are trying to take this thread off that topic and conflate them as 'the same people'.
A first group who'd rather brush it away with ill-informed "rich pensioners won't get WFP, and the poor ones still will".
A second group who seem to want to talk endlessly about tickets, free clobber, Sue Gray and designer specs.
A third group that have gone 'AWOL'.
These are three completely different groups and a couple of the 'AWOL' who have pm'd me, and myself to an extent, have put this thread on Ignore because of the second group constantly filling this thread with so much of this crap. The vast majority of people who have posted on this thread have said the cutoff is wrong and want it to be changed and there have been suggestions on how, but it very quickly disappears under pages of the same old crap.
Ironically, a few have given thumbs up to your post, before immediately taking it off into Popbitch, ME, Pay awards, bolleaux for the last 3 pages again.
Maybe start a thread specifically about what should be done re WFA and ensure it's very tightly moderated to kick off people trying to take it off topic.
Last edited:
I can't remember a time where NSC politics threads were a sensible non-partisan debating place. Instead a load of folk saying Whatabout Boris or the leftwing equivalent, on repeat. Sometimes 1,000's of posts by the same people on the same thread, never 'less is more'. It got so bad, The Bear Pit was a welcome relief for the echo chamber merchants looking to harvest likes 24-7.
The number of posters you can learn something from on politics/economy you can count on one hand. @Bozza, @Machiavelli, @Harry Wilson's tackle, @beorhthelm spring to mind.
Nothing has changed.
Last edited: