Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] The Labour Government
- Thread starter Super Steve Earle
- Start date
dsr-burnley
Well-known member
- Aug 15, 2014
- 2,903
Miliband's primary aim is to get the UK figures down to net zero. If we stop making steel with gas fired power and instead import from China who use coal fired power, then the world is worse off but the UK figures look better.
TomandJerry
Well-known member
- Oct 1, 2013
- 12,462
Rachel Reeves will make additional welfare cuts in her spring statement on Wednesday after the Office for Budget Responsibility rejected her estimate of savings from the changes announced last week.
The chancellor hoped to shift the focus from the benefits cuts, which appalled some Labour backbenchers, to promising to “secure Britain’s future” with a £2.2bn increase to defence spending.
But it is understood final estimates from the OBR suggested the changes announced by Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, which included tightening the criteria for the personal independence payment (Pip), would not save the £5bn needed to meet Reeves’s self-imposed fiscal rules.
The chancellor is expected to announce an additional £500m in benefits cuts to make up part of the £1.6bn shortfall, first reported by the Times – with the rest of the gap filled by spending cuts elsewhere.
The chancellor hoped to shift the focus from the benefits cuts, which appalled some Labour backbenchers, to promising to “secure Britain’s future” with a £2.2bn increase to defence spending.
But it is understood final estimates from the OBR suggested the changes announced by Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, which included tightening the criteria for the personal independence payment (Pip), would not save the £5bn needed to meet Reeves’s self-imposed fiscal rules.
The chancellor is expected to announce an additional £500m in benefits cuts to make up part of the £1.6bn shortfall, first reported by the Times – with the rest of the gap filled by spending cuts elsewhere.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
Presumably you can demonstrate this bizarre statement. Note that you share this, and all of the other fringe elements pile in.
pb21
Well-known member
- Apr 23, 2010
- 6,978
I actually know this to be categorically wrong.
lol we've just made a deal with China to make the stuff and ruled out shipping in turbines etc made by slaves
He doesn't care how we get there
Last edited:
Machiavelli
Well-known member
You can lol all you like. You've just stated that Miliband (not Milliband) has "ruled out shipping in turbines etc made by slaves".
Which would suggest that he does care how we get there
My typo
But if you are happy with the government refusing to put in protections....maybe they are the right kind of slaves so don't matter
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ye-to-slavery-over-solar-panels-made-in-china
The Clamp
Well-known member
Totally lost faith in Labour now.
They increase financial pressure for;
OAP’s
Small businesses
Disabled people
People on benefits
Social services
People who regard food as an essential.
A 2% tax on those with assets over £10m would bring in about £22bn.
Do that and leave the rest of us alone.
****s.
They increase financial pressure for;
OAP’s
Small businesses
Disabled people
People on benefits
Social services
People who regard food as an essential.
A 2% tax on those with assets over £10m would bring in about £22bn.
Do that and leave the rest of us alone.
****s.
The Clamp
Well-known member
PIP however, does need looking at.
In a previous role, I saw over and over again people with substance misuse problems (drug addiction) being awarded thousands of pounds in back payments.
Their key workers and advocates would do all the paperwork and make all the calls.
They would sometimes get it in the form of a pre paid credit card.
When they had reached their cash withdrawal limit they would buy TV’s and other goods and swap them for heroin, crack, and alcohol.
That’s not acceptable and needs to be got back under control.
In a previous role, I saw over and over again people with substance misuse problems (drug addiction) being awarded thousands of pounds in back payments.
Their key workers and advocates would do all the paperwork and make all the calls.
They would sometimes get it in the form of a pre paid credit card.
When they had reached their cash withdrawal limit they would buy TV’s and other goods and swap them for heroin, crack, and alcohol.
That’s not acceptable and needs to be got back under control.
pocketseagull
Well-known member
- Dec 29, 2014
- 1,484
I'd rather the state subsidise the substance abuse than have addicts commit even more crime to feed their habits. I'd think it's cheaper too. The sensible solution would be for heroin/crack on the NHS, keeping addicts close to services to quit when desired.
The Clamp
Well-known member
There’s probably better ways to “subsidise” substance misuse than dropping £9k into a heroin addict’s back account
But there is definitely a discussion to be had around the NHS prescription idea.
The Clamp
Well-known member
Do you know what heroin addicts do when they have unlimited access to heroin?
Clue;
They don’t take it in moderation.
Clue;
They don’t take it in moderation.
pocketseagull
Well-known member
- Dec 29, 2014
- 1,484
See the second sentence of my post but no Government has the guts to go back to the 'British System' of drug treatment.There’s probably better ways to “subsidise” substance misuse than dropping £9k into a heroin addict’s back account
pocketseagull
Well-known member
- Dec 29, 2014
- 1,484
Sounds like a good argument for trying to massively reduce the illicit trade in exchange for a managed prescription approach.
The Clamp
Well-known member
Yes. It does. Exactly.
Also a good argument for not dumping thousands of pounds into addicts’ current accounts.
The Clamp
Well-known member
See the second part of my answer
We are advocating for the same thing.
But the point being made was that some benefits need to be examined and possibly modified. PIP is one of them. In my professional opinion.
The Shadow chancellor is incredibly boring, with awful diction.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Raquel from Accounts taking a bit of a beating today.
The Clamp
Well-known member
So everything is going to get more expensive?
Cheers.
****s
Cheers.
****s