[Politics] Are Labour going to turn this country around?

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Is Labour going to turn the country around

  • Yes

    Votes: 143 27.0%
  • No

    Votes: 319 60.3%
  • Fence

    Votes: 67 12.7%

  • Total voters
    529


darkwolf666

Well-known member
Nov 8, 2015
8,248
Sittingbourne, Kent
You’ve got to love these sort of stories, whether it be politics, football or whatever. The people in charge make a decision, which gets roundly criticised, with calls for a rethink. Those in charge then do precisely that and get labelled weak for changing their minds.

in this instance Labour got it badly wrong with not applying a taper to the WFA payments and lazily setting the bar too low to align with Pension Credits.

I well remember Thatcher‘s “the lady’s not for turning” speech - and am glad Starmer has the ability to see he was wrong, rather than the dogmatic approach of Thatcher or more lately Johnson and Truss…
 




TomandJerry

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
12,874
https://www.theguardian.com/society...chemical-castration-for-serious-sex-offenders

"Shabana Mahmood, the lord chancellor, is considering mandatory chemical castration for the most serious sex offenders, according to government sources.

The minister’s department is planning to expand a pilot to 20 regions as part of a package of “radical” measures to free thousands of prisoners and ease prison overcrowding in England and Wales."
 


rippleman

Well-known member
Oct 18, 2011
5,242
https://www.theguardian.com/society...chemical-castration-for-serious-sex-offenders

"Shabana Mahmood, the lord chancellor, is considering mandatory chemical castration for the most serious sex offenders, according to government sources.

The minister’s department is planning to expand a pilot to 20 regions as part of a package of “radical” measures to free thousands of prisoners and ease prison overcrowding in England and Wales."
Is chemical castration reversible? Just asking for when it is discovered in 20 / 30 years time that the castrated person is, in fact, innocent.

Peter Sullivan - "sex murderer" - 38 years - Innocent

Andrew Malkinson - "rapist" - 17 years - Innocent

Stefan Kiszko - "paedophile murder" - 16 years - Innocent
 




A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
22,924
Deepest, darkest Sussex
I well remember Thatcher‘s “the lady’s not for turning” speech - and am glad Starmer has the ability to see he was wrong, rather than the dogmatic approach of Thatcher or more lately Johnson and Truss…
One of my theories is that that speech has led to more bad policy and decisions than almost anything else in the 40ish years since as PMs have made poor decisions then absolutely refused to change their minds (even when the evidence tells them to do it) because to do so would be seen as “weak”.
 




Bozza

You can change this
Helpful Moderator
Jul 4, 2003
58,903
Back in Sussex
One of my theories is that that speech has led to more bad policy and decisions than almost anything else in the 40ish years since as PMs have made poor decisions then absolutely refused to change their minds (even when the evidence tells them to do it) because to do so would be seen as “weak”.
Indeed, and it's likely happened again here.

I have no doubt the policy was well-intentioned: let's stop giving cash to rich oldies who don't need it, but it was appallingly implemented as it targeted millions of people who were far from rich.

But, as one of the first major policies of the shiny new government, they dug their heels in, wishing to look strong. Starmer told us he was willing to take unpopular decisions.

The right course of action would have been to say "OK, what we were trying to do was stop giving cash to some rich oldies who don't need it, and put that money to better use. But we've listened and we can see that the proposed implementation is too severe and we're going to change that."

The change could either have been to change where the line was drawn and/or taper the benefit or, if time didn't allow for that, leave the universal payment in place for last winter, with a plan to implement a fairer system for winter 2025/26.

As it is, they've taken an absolute battering for 10 months, before making a very spurious claim that the economy has improved sufficiently to allow the policy to be reviewed and relaxed. There's absolutely no indication of any contrition, no holding of hands up with a "You spoke, you're right and we hear you."

They've driven voters into the arms of Reform - god knows what those idiots will do with the councils they now control, and the longer-term impact of Reform's rapid growth is a worrying thought.
 


A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
22,924
Deepest, darkest Sussex


That's going to piss on Farage's escargot
 


TomandJerry

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
12,874
More tax hikes on the way?

"UK government borrowing unexpectedly rose in April on the back of increased public spending, piling pressure on chancellor Rachel Reeves ahead of a high-stakes spending review next month.

Figures published on Thursday by the Office for National Statistics showed that borrowing was £20.2bn in the first month of the new tax year, up from a shortfall of £19.1bn in April 2024."

Quoted from the FT
 




TomandJerry

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
12,874
So inflation has gone upto 3.5% and government borrowing has gone up yet we still need to find an extra £100m a year

"Sir Keir Starmer has signed a long-term deal to hand sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius under which Britain will pay more than £100mn a year to guarantee the future of a joint US-UK air base."
 


darkwolf666

Well-known member
Nov 8, 2015
8,248
Sittingbourne, Kent
More tax hikes on the way?

"UK government borrowing unexpectedly rose in April on the back of increased public spending, piling pressure on chancellor Rachel Reeves ahead of a high-stakes spending review next month.

Figures published on Thursday by the Office for National Statistics showed that borrowing was £20.2bn in the first month of the new tax year, up from a shortfall of £19.1bn in April 2024."

Quoted from the FT
It's alright, they will just take a bit more from the disabled...
 


TomandJerry

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
12,874
It's alright, they will just take a bit more from the disabled...
Not leaving much wiggle room

1000002486.png
 




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
60,293
Faversham
Is chemical castration reversible? Just asking for when it is discovered in 20 / 30 years time that the castrated person is, in fact, innocent.

Peter Sullivan - "sex murderer" - 38 years - Innocent

Andrew Malkinson - "rapist" - 17 years - Innocent

Stefan Kiszko - "paedophile murder" - 16 years - Innocent
Yes it is. And the term is a tabloid concoction.
I listened to the presentation and there is a whole load of changes to process and rubric in there.
The opposition spokesman's response was a disgraceful spluttering rant.
Given his lot are responsible for the prison crisis it was a shameful reaction.
Entirely typical of the Badenough gang.

The bloke brought in to manage the changes is.....a tory, too.
An attempt by HMG to pursue a consensus position,
rather than play petty party politics.

Sometimes it is important to remind one's self that the grown ups are in charge now.
They will make mistakes but there is a well-intentioned direction of travel.
Which contrasts with the Sargasso-like becalmed inertia of the Brexit monsters of recent times.
 


fly high

Well-known member
Aug 25, 2011
2,376
in a house
Is chemical castration reversible? Just asking for when it is discovered in 20 / 30 years time that the castrated person is, in fact, innocent.

Peter Sullivan - "sex murderer" - 38 years - Innocent

Andrew Malkinson - "rapist" - 17 years - Innocent

Stefan Kiszko - "paedophile murder" - 16 years - Innocent
Think this is being talked about because the government is thinking of letting convicted sex offenders out after just a third of their sentence. Assume it would only be given when they are let out.
 


fly high

Well-known member
Aug 25, 2011
2,376
in a house
Indeed, and it's likely happened again here.

I have no doubt the policy was well-intentioned: let's stop giving cash to rich oldies who don't need it, but it was appallingly implemented as it targeted millions of people who were far from rich.

But, as one of the first major policies of the shiny new government, they dug their heels in, wishing to look strong. Starmer told us he was willing to take unpopular decisions.

The right course of action would have been to say "OK, what we were trying to do was stop giving cash to some rich oldies who don't need it, and put that money to better use. But we've listened and we can see that the proposed implementation is too severe and we're going to change that."

The change could either have been to change where the line was drawn and/or taper the benefit or, if time didn't allow for that, leave the universal payment in place for last winter, with a plan to implement a fairer system for winter 2025/26.

As it is, they've taken an absolute battering for 10 months, before making a very spurious claim that the economy has improved sufficiently to allow the policy to be reviewed and relaxed. There's absolutely no indication of any contrition, no holding of hands up with a "You spoke, you're right and we hear you."

They've driven voters into the arms of Reform - god knows what those idiots will do with the councils they now control, and the longer-term impact of Reform's rapid growth is a worrying thought.
Yes they are finally reviewing this shit policy but delaying it until the autumn fiscal review probably means those who desperately need it won't get it for yet another winter.
 




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
60,293
Faversham
Think this is being talked about because the government is thinking of letting convicted sex offenders out after just a third of their sentence. Assume it would only be given when they are let out.
That's what the opposition spokesman claimed when replying to the government statement.
"All" sex offenders will be released after "a third" and because they are already released after a half
that means "they will be released after only a fifth" of their sentence. All of them.
"Child rapists" who are currently "only serving a year" (which would be under his party's watch). He named 3 cases.
The f***ing duplicitous idiot.
That's not what I heard in the government statement.
What was said that for anyone to be released early they will, just as they have to do now, meet conditions.
It is likely that any libido suppressing intervention (or 'chemical castration' as it is so floridly described)
will start while in prison.

The opposition want more people banged up for longer, at no extra cost,
while lowering income tax.
They are demanding what, even in their most craven moments of stupidity, they failed to attempt themselves.
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
60,293
Faversham
Yes they are finally reviewing this shit policy but delaying it until the autumn fiscal review probably means those who desperately need it won't get it for yet another winter.
Yes, they need to get their finger out quickly and do what Martin Lewis has suggested.
I forget the details but it includes upping the threshold to those earning under around £20 something K.
I am hopeful a change will happen sooner than the procrastinatory expectation.
 




Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
31,671
Reforms rise should sort out this current labour shit show, with any hope.
I see that within days of getting elected 5 Reform councillor had to resign because they were either in the armed forces, a civil servant or had posted racist / fascist stuff on their social media.

Let's see how Reform do in actual, real local government first, and whether they can cut the mustard. They're not a real political party yet, you can fit all their Westminster MPs into the back of a taxi, it's just a Farage cult with "back of a fag packet' policies.

If Labour had someone decent like Alistair Campbell running the comms the Reform shortcomings would be public knowledge and a widespread source of ridicule.
 






TomandJerry

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
12,874
And yet, despite your multiple posts on this thread (without sources - as usual) and your repeated claims of simple and pure idiocy, you've managed to miss the top story across all mainstream media :shrug:

I'll stick with trolling :thumbsup:
The source is within the picture of the graph, Yougov.

I've also made multiple posts on the inflation figures and increased government borrowing today, so perhaps you are trolling
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top