[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Very few people are disagreeing with you that the Tories need to go. But supporting party politics is like being a huge Visa fan instead of Mastercard. You’re getting the same thing, branded differently, with paid employees who just want to benefit themselves and their own ambition. Like any other job.

I realised years and years ago that party politics is a mugs game. The more partisan people are the less they actually know about politics.

“One shifts from left to right. Politics is the art of the possible”.

Indeed, it is.

In my lifetime I have never seen a party so determined to pursue the impossible as the tories, under 'call me Dave' and afterwards.

Sunak sounded very good on PMQT today. Till he re-inflated the Rwanda gambit. Then I started to wonder if he has a brain at all. That said....the Rwanda gambit was and is a diversion. The rest of his plan is OK....albeit 'we will have all this sorted in 18 months' was a bit f***ing lame. Sounded to me like he realizes he is so far up shit creek (thanks to his predecessors) he dare not promise anything substantial. At least he didn't say 'under Jeremy Corbyn...' like he usually does

They have to, and will surely, go.....

Labour will have to reboot 'competent government', last seen at the end of Mr Tony's second term.... not holding my breath, but firmly supporting labour. In a desert, only a fool eschews unproven water.

 

[clapham_gull]

Well thats bollocks.

It's clearly more complicated than that, but Governments run out of steam and ideas and get replaced by another. There is also usually some unexpected background nonsense that damages them on the way out.

Blair was probably right. If you want to get stuff done you need to get it done early because it's downhill from there. Not in a Liz Truss way obviously....

 

[Nobby]

You haven't answered the question.

As I said earlier, Tories are corrupt and look after their friends. Not defending them at all but they had 2 uncontrollable situations.
What have your party ( you are clearly a Labour supporter) said that they will do to resolve the energy and cost of living crisis? It's so much easier in opposition.

Could I just possibly ask what the feck you are getting involved for? Are you not one of these Johnny Foreigner types we have been warned about by those French guys Farage and and the other short arsed French guy - what was his name - ah yes Francois.
Bloody foreigners. Wish they would all butt out of British politics

 

[jcdenton08]

Indeed, it is.

In my lifetime I have never seen a party so determined to pursue the impossible as the tories, under 'call me Dave' and afterwards.

Sunak sounded very good on PMQT today. Till he re-inflated the Rwanda gambit. Then I started to wonder if he has a brain at all. That said....the Rwanda gambit was and is a diversion. The rest of his plan is OK....albeit 'we will have all this sorted in 18 months' was a bit f***ing lame. Sounded to me like he realizes he is so far up shit creek (thanks to his predecessors) he dare not promise anything substantial. At least he didn't say 'under Jeremy Corbyn...' like he usually does

They have to, and will surely, go.....

Labour will have to reboot 'competent government', last seen at the end of Mr Tony's second term.... not holding my breath, but firmly supporting labour. In a desert, only a fool eschews unproven water.

I want the Tories out just like most people (according to the polls), and a strong united opposition is essential when that happens.

My point was more that after Labour have come in, hopefully steadied the ship, enacted the moderate changes they can actually realistically get through the chambers (no magical thinking stuff, basically), then in 10 years time they’ll be the “shambolic government” and the Tories will get back in. And sorry for the run-on sentence.

But yes, now, in the immediate term, we need a new Labour government.

And when Labour eventually come to the end of their run, as the Tories have done (realistically a few years ago), we’ll need a conservative government.

It’s the entire basis of our democratic system.

 

[beorhthelm]

A nationalised energy company is probably a vote winner, irrespective of what that means in detail.

depends on the bill. we need to see the cost of buy back and the onward investment. a while back McDonnell wrapped it up in a £250bn fund, we never got details.

this is the pragmatic assessment: do we want to have private funding, pay maybe 3-4% out in profits to shareholders, or have public funding, pay 3-4% interest to bond holders. i dont think either side will present it in those terms.

 

[clapham_gull]

depends on the bill. we need to see the cost of buy back and the onward investment. a while back McDonnell wrapped it up in a £250bn fund, we never got details.

this is the pragmatic assessment: do we want to have private funding, pay maybe 3-4% out in profits to shareholders, or have public funding, pay 3-4% interest to bond holders. i dont think either side will present it in those terms.

irrespective of what that means in detail.

The headline has caught the public mood, just like Brexit. Most voters not actually caring what the detail is. Less so, but probably also with the House of Lords proposal.

 

[Wardy's twin]

Sorry but forget party loyalty.
The Tories have made horrendous mistakes. But the current crisis is mostly due to the cost of the pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
What is Lanours solution to this?

No the problems have been looming for a number of years and under investment in NHS being perhaps the key one , a service vital to all who live in the UK. What we have seen in last few years is worse because the sensible Tories (and there were some) have been forced out which is I find your comment about divisions in the labour party quiteironoc, the Tory party had the same divisions and the most efficient action they have done is to get rid of the dissenters.

 

[Wardy's twin]

depends on the bill. we need to see the cost of buy back and the onward investment. a while back McDonnell wrapped it up in a £250bn fund, we never got details.

this is the pragmatic assessment: do we want to have private funding, pay maybe 3-4% out in profits to shareholders, or have public funding, pay 3-4% interest to bond holders. i dont think either side will present it in those terms.

Surely its more about policy and direction so it wouldn't be about maximising shareholder return it would look to providing cheaper , greener fuel. Profit would not be in the vocabulary of the company , efficiency would be. I suspect there are private companies do things well - learn from them .

 

[beorhthelm]

Surely its more about policy and direction so it wouldn't be about maximising shareholder return it would look to providing cheaper , greener fuel. Profit would not be in the vocabulary of the company , efficiency would be. I suspect there are private companies do things well - learn from them .

it should be about policy and direction. we need an awful lot of energy and fairly fast, costing a lot of money, the policy is simply how we do that. we'll pay as the consumers of that energy. we shouldnt be getting sidelined into who owns the operating company, or obsessed with profit because thats a cost of any investment.

 

[BenGarfield]

I want the Tories out just like most people (according to the polls), and a strong united opposition is essential when that happens.

My point was more that after Labour have come in, hopefully steadied the ship, enacted the moderate changes they can actually realistically get through the chambers (no magical thinking stuff, basically), then in 10 years time they’ll be the “shambolic government” and the Tories will get back in. And sorry for the run-on sentence.

But yes, now, in the immediate term, we need a new Labour government.

And when Labour eventually come to the end of their run, as the Tories have done (realistically a few years ago), we’ll need a conservative government.

It’s the entire basis of our democratic system.

Indeed, Tweedledum and Tweedledee, no essential differences in their neo-liberal mindset.

 

[clapham_gull]

Indeed, Tweedledum and Tweedledee, no essential differences in their neo-liberal mindset.

This is one of the more bizarre aspects of modern politics when "supporters" use negative descriptions of the other lot to describe those in their own party with more middle of the road views.

For every "Starmer is a Tory", you'll find a "Sunak is a socialist".

If Starmer has betrayed his working class roots, it's worth throwing in Corbyn never had them in the first place. I think many on the left are actually deeply uncomfortable with prospect of power and would rather remain in opposition in perpetual student union mode.

 

[dsr-burnley]

No the problems have been looming for a number of years and under investment in NHS being perhaps the key one , a service vital to all who live in the UK. What we have seen in last few years is worse because the sensible Tories (and there were some) have been forced out which is I find your comment about divisions in the labour party quiteironoc, the Tory party had the same divisions and the most efficient action they have done is to get rid of the dissenters.

Underinvestment in the NHS? In the past 10 years, the NHS England budget (and the rest of the UK has seen similar) has increased in real terms by 32%, from £115 billion to £152 billion. The extra money hasn't improved the service one jot - it hasn't gone on nurses, it hasn't gone on extra medical staff, it hasn't gone on carrying out more procedures. It has been wasted.

A policy of "we will stand by a drain and pour another £30 billion down it" is not going to make people better. The Tories' problem isn't that they haven't spent the money, it's that they haven't made any sort of effort (at least, not successfully) to see it's been looked after.

 

[maltaseagull]

Could I just possibly ask what the feck you are getting involved for? Are you not one of these Johnny Foreigner types we have been warned about by those French guys Farage and and the other short arsed French guy - what was his name - ah yes Francois.
Bloody foreigners. Wish they would all butt out of British politics

Nice !
It's of interest to me as I lived in the UK for 50 years and my children and grandchildren still live there.
Not sure if your childish response is racist or old fashioned imperialism.

 

[The Clamp]

Almost thirteen years of disaster upon disaster upon lie upon law breaking upon lying upon scandal and people are still making excuses for them and giving them another chance. Most people wouldn't give their own marriage that many chances!

 

[jcdenton08]

Almost thirteen years of disaster upon disaster upon lie upon law breaking upon lying upon scandal and people are still making excuses for them and giving them another chance. Most people wouldn't give their own marriage that many chances!

And yet people will willingly give Labour another chance after the Iraq war and their own crises and scandals. This is because no political party is perfect and is only as ‘good’ as the employees and policies they put into practice.

Put aside party politics, forget they exist, it will vastly improve your political understanding.

 

[chickens]

To my mind, the main difference between the modern Conservative and modern Labour Party is simply that the Conservative Party in its current form lacks any discernible talent.

Tony Blair may have been personally unlikeable, but he was highly competent. Starmer strikes me as somebody else who’s held significant public office and is capable, if not charismatic.

The modern Conservative Party exists purely as a sort of personal enrichment Ponzi scheme, where donations to it are rewarded with favourable business decisions for the donors organisation(s).

Covid was their worst nightmare because while the Conservatives are excellent at gaining power (they believe they’re born to it) they’re simply incapable of actually running anything and making data led decisions. They view everything as ideological. They had to be forced reluctantly to pragmatism by public health officials.

In a country that is working fine, the Conservative Party for one term or even two (ideally checked by a coalition partner) is not a bad thing, but it takes a long time for effects to filter through to people, and complete inaction over 12 years on almost every important topic bar one, brings us here.

My only hope is that the level of destruction wrought on our country will be remembered this time, and in future elections people remember their ABCs.

Anyone
But
Conservative

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Underinvestment in the NHS? In the past 10 years, the NHS England budget (and the rest of the UK has seen similar) has increased in real terms by 32%, from £115 billion to £152 billion. The extra money hasn't improved the service one jot - it hasn't gone on nurses, it hasn't gone on extra medical staff, it hasn't gone on carrying out more procedures. It has been wasted.

A policy of "we will stand by a drain and pour another £30 billion down it" is not going to make people better. The Tories' problem isn't that they haven't spent the money, it's that they haven't made any sort of effort (at least, not successfully) to see it's been looked after.

The amount the NHS has been ‘given’ includes the millions and millions of pounds on wasted PPE, and still being paid in its storage and destruction.
Overall, it looks good, and the government can say, the budget has gone up, but look below the surface to see the waste, and corruption.

 

[cjd]

Underinvestment in the NHS? In the past 10 years, the NHS England budget (and the rest of the UK has seen similar) has increased in real terms by 32%, from £115 billion to £152 billion. The extra money hasn't improved the service one jot - it hasn't gone on nurses, it hasn't gone on extra medical staff, it hasn't gone on carrying out more procedures. It has been wasted.

A policy of "we will stand by a drain and pour another £30 billion down it" is not going to make people better. The Tories' problem isn't that they haven't spent the money, it's that they haven't made any sort of effort (at least, not successfully) to see it's been looked after.

Are you saying that 10 years ago the NHS cost £115 billion and now they receive £152 billion....? "IF", that is the case, it surely isn't a 32% increase in "real terms", is it...?

 

[Bodian]

It's adjusted to real terms in todays prices

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/nhs-in-a-nutshell/nhs-budget

 

[nicko31]

Are you saying that 10 years ago the NHS cost £115 billion and now they receive £152 billion....? "IF", that is the case, it surely isn't a 32% increase in "real terms", is it...?

Things aren't good, 1 in 9 nurses left the profession in a past year.

We should ask them if they've seen a real term pay increase in the past 12 years. The Tories clapped them, now they're screwing them.