|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 2, 2023 11:52:39 GMT
The Conservative Party have not set out a set of policies for after 2024, neither have the SNP or the Lib Dems. sure sid , so we are looking forward to hearing labours . The thing is can we trust starmer to implement his manifesto promises after his broken pledges record?
On the subject of former party member neal lawson , its shocking watching the treatment being meted out to this long term labour stalwart.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 2, 2023 11:56:44 GMT
The Conservative Party have not set out a set of policies for after 2024, neither have the SNP or the Lib Dems. All we get are indications of what to expect, sometimes we get objectives or goals, sometimes pledges, but the main policy documents of the main political parties are not released until the election. The Labour Party has published 5 Missions ... full details will follow Those missions are Build an NHS fit for the future Secure the highest sustained growth in the G7 Make Britain a clean energy superpower Make Britains streets safe Break down barriers to opportunityIf the Conservative Party tells the British electorate to expect more of the same as what they ( The Conservatives ) have brought us over the last 13 years, then your next Prime Minister will be a Knight of the realm with the same name as the founder of the Labour Party.
POLITICO lists 14 key walkbacks in his three-and-a-bit years as opposition leader
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 2, 2023 12:06:55 GMT
DAN HODGES: The closer Starmer gets to No 10, the more desperate he is to conceal what he'll do if elected
Who is Keir Starmer lying to? Last week it appeared to be hungry school kids.
Over the past few months, a campaign backed by Labour MPs, mayors and unions seemed to be moving their party towards a policy of free school meals for all. It was widely believed that Starmer was supportive, especially after his full-throated backing for footballer Marcus Rashford's activism on the issue during the pandemic.
'The loss of free school meals risks millions of children going hungry, and for some this means missing their only hot meal of the day,' Labour's leader had raged. But then he suddenly snatched the plate away. 'This is not Labour policy and we have no plans to implement it,' a Labour spokesman announced.
It wasn't the only significant announcement of the week. At around the same time Starmer was revealing his plan to take food from the mouths of children, Rachel Reeves was popping up to explain how she intended to stuff gold into the mouths of the global IT giants.
In 2021, Reeves unveiled a proposal to increase the levy paid by tech firms operating in the UK from two per cent to ten per cent – a move that would have raised £3 billion a year. But now she was scrapping it. 'We have no plans to raise digital services tax in government,' said a spokesman.
There are two explanations for this major shift in fiscal and social policy. The first is that it reflects precisely how Keir Starmer and his party intends to govern. Schoolchildren will be left with empty bellies. Foreign tech moguls will be allowed to retain their windfalls. Profits before pre-teen protein.
Or alternatively, this is basically just a smokescreen. Labour's leader is secretly planning to be an old-school redistributor. He is preparing to tax big business and the wealthy, and use the proceeds to pump cash back into crumbling public services. But he doesn't want anyone to know it yet.
According to Labour advisers, we were supposed to be getting a clear solution to this political mystery by now. The strategy was simple. Starmer would introduce himself to the British people. He would demonstrate why the Tories were no longer fit for office. And then he would gradually set out the policies that would define his programme for government.
Yet precisely the opposite is happening. The closer Starmer gets to Downing Street, the more desperate he seems to be to conceal what will actually happen if he's elected. Every week another policy is abandoned or neutered. Nationalisation of mail, energy and water. The ending of NHS outsourcing. Abolition of Universal Credit. The scrapping of tuition fees. Abolition of the Lords.
|
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Jul 2, 2023 12:11:32 GMT
Labour recognises that it needs to win a substantial number of Scottish seats to oust the Tories at the next general election.
According to the Daily Record: Labour predicted to win more than half of Scottish seats in new poll
New analysis by campaign group Best for Britain showed that Labour would win 31 seats in Scotland, with the SNP taking the other 26. Scotland is set to go from 59 seats to 57 after the boundary changes.
The analysis said that the SNP were "bleeding voters" who were undecided over who to vote for, which meant that Labour would pick up dozens of seats.
The survey [by Focaldata] also said that Labour could win 470 seats across the UK, giving them a majority of more than 140. The Conservatives would win only 129.www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/labour-predicted-win-more-half-30177294 |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jul 2, 2023 12:18:49 GMT
DAN HODGES: The closer Starmer gets to No 10, the more desperate he is to conceal what he'll do if elected Who is Keir Starmer lying to? Last week it appeared to be hungry school kids.
Over the past few months, a campaign backed by Labour MPs, mayors and unions seemed to be moving their party towards a policy of free school meals for all. It was widely believed that Starmer was supportive, especially after his full-throated backing for footballer Marcus Rashford's activism on the issue during the pandemic.
'The loss of free school meals risks millions of children going hungry, and for some this means missing their only hot meal of the day,' Labour's leader had raged. But then he suddenly snatched the plate away. 'This is not Labour policy and we have no plans to implement it,' a Labour spokesman announced.
It wasn't the only significant announcement of the week. At around the same time Starmer was revealing his plan to take food from the mouths of children, Rachel Reeves was popping up to explain how she intended to stuff gold into the mouths of the global IT giants.
In 2021, Reeves unveiled a proposal to increase the levy paid by tech firms operating in the UK from two per cent to ten per cent – a move that would have raised £3 billion a year. But now she was scrapping it. 'We have no plans to raise digital services tax in government,' said a spokesman. There are two explanations for this major shift in fiscal and social policy. The first is that it reflects precisely how Keir Starmer and his party intends to govern. Schoolchildren will be left with empty bellies. Foreign tech moguls will be allowed to retain their windfalls. Profits before pre-teen protein.
Or alternatively, this is basically just a smokescreen. Labour's leader is secretly planning to be an old-school redistributor. He is preparing to tax big business and the wealthy, and use the proceeds to pump cash back into crumbling public services. But he doesn't want anyone to know it yet.
According to Labour advisers, we were supposed to be getting a clear solution to this political mystery by now. The strategy was simple. Starmer would introduce himself to the British people. He would demonstrate why the Tories were no longer fit for office. And then he would gradually set out the policies that would define his programme for government.
Yet precisely the opposite is happening. The closer Starmer gets to Downing Street, the more desperate he seems to be to conceal what will actually happen if he's elected. Every week another policy is abandoned or neutered. Nationalisation of mail, energy and water. The ending of NHS outsourcing. Abolition of Universal Credit. The scrapping of tuition fees. Abolition of the Lords. What Starmer will do if elected is, of course, nothing much since he will have no more resources available to him than the Tories currently have. And, if Starmer fails to win a majority (as seems likely), he'll struggle to do anything at all. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jul 2, 2023 12:19:42 GMT
Labour recognises that it needs to win a substantial number of Scottish seats to oust the Tories at the next general election.
According to the Daily Record: Labour predicted to win more than half of Scottish seats in new poll
New analysis by campaign group Best for Britain showed that Labour would win 31 seats in Scotland, with the SNP taking the other 26. Scotland is set to go from 59 seats to 57 after the boundary changes.
The analysis said that the SNP were "bleeding voters" who were undecided over who to vote for, which meant that Labour would pick up dozens of seats.
The survey [by Focaldata] also said that Labour could win 470 seats across the UK, giving them a majority of more than 140. The Conservatives would win only 129.www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/labour-predicted-win-more-half-30177294 Seems unlikely to me, but it would certainly kill off any hope of Scottish independence. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 2, 2023 12:20:42 GMT
Labour recognises that it needs to win a substantial number of Scottish seats to oust the Tories at the next general election.
According to the Daily Record: Labour predicted to win more than half of Scottish seats in new poll
New analysis by campaign group Best for Britain showed that Labour would win 31 seats in Scotland, with the SNP taking the other 26. Scotland is set to go from 59 seats to 57 after the boundary changes.
The analysis said that the SNP were "bleeding voters" who were undecided over who to vote for, which meant that Labour would pick up dozens of seats.
The survey [by Focaldata] also said that Labour could win 470 seats across the UK, giving them a majority of more than 140. The Conservatives would win only 129.www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/labour-predicted-win-more-half-30177294 Not sure of your point pat. That the snp are losing votes is undoubted. Voters are switching off from yousaf and his constant can kicking over another referendum. However , that doesnt necessarily mean they are switching to labour.
Second point is this has been done to death a million times. Only once in modern uk political history has scottish votes made a difference to who becomes the government in westminster. In 2010 , gordon broons labour for exmaple won 41/59 scottish seats and lost the election.
Blair won all three elections in england , without needing scottish seats for victory. So what labour recognises is of course yet more labour party bollocks. What is happening is the independence support is now at its highest in my lifetime , yet that support is detaching itself from the snp...
Final point is the daily record , known in scotland as the daily redcoat , in terms of its pro imperial british labour party propaganda , sells something like 50 000 copies per day. In a country of 5.5 million people , and the fact it wasnt too many years back it was flogging a quarter of a million copies a day , you can see how far it has fallen with the guff it prints such as this.
There are no doubts what so ever labour are high in the polls and looking to win the next election. Long way to go though , and it does look like extremely soft support that could fall away at any second. Be interesting to see who wins.
I think starmer will struggle to match election results with his current hype.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jul 2, 2023 12:22:38 GMT
Labour recognises that it needs to win a substantial number of Scottish seats to oust the Tories at the next general election.
According to the Daily Record: Labour predicted to win more than half of Scottish seats in new poll
New analysis by campaign group Best for Britain showed that Labour would win 31 seats in Scotland, with the SNP taking the other 26. Scotland is set to go from 59 seats to 57 after the boundary changes.
The analysis said that the SNP were "bleeding voters" who were undecided over who to vote for, which meant that Labour would pick up dozens of seats.
The survey [by Focaldata] also said that Labour could win 470 seats across the UK, giving them a majority of more than 140. The Conservatives would win only 129.www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/labour-predicted-win-more-half-30177294 Seems unlikely to me, but it would certainly kill off any hope of Scottish independence.
Yes 47.9%
No 45.0% |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2023 12:25:08 GMT
So if you were Starmer you would stand by anything he has said or promised no matter what? Im criticising starmer for two main reason .
1. breaking pledges , which makes him look unelectable and untrustworthy.
2. The stupidity of making a pledge in the first place that he doesnt know he can keep.
So i wouldnt make a pledge in the first place that i knew i wouldnt or couldnt honour. As would most sensible people. Starmer was doing reasonably well sitting on his hands saying nothing hoping the two party stitch up would let him fall into government if the tories imploded.
He had to spoil it by opening his mouth and making worthless pledges then subsequently dropping them.
He wont turn me off from voting though. I will be out voting to stop labour as normal.
If you make a 'pledge' in good faith at a time when it is accomplishable and circumstances change that make that pledge financially 'risky' would you continue with it or would you 'plough on regardless or would you explain your reasoning and look at different options? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2023 12:26:04 GMT
And what, pray do I want? Everything we don't. You don't want zero homelessness? Seriously? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2023 12:27:39 GMT
How do you know what the public want? That's a true blue Tory mantra. The irony. You may need to listen to the Tories and see how many times they use phrases like 'what the people want' without ever actually asking the people. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2023 12:29:37 GMT
DAN HODGES: The closer Starmer gets to No 10, the more desperate he is to conceal what he'll do if elected Who is Keir Starmer lying to? Last week it appeared to be hungry school kids.
Over the past few months, a campaign backed by Labour MPs, mayors and unions seemed to be moving their party towards a policy of free school meals for all. It was widely believed that Starmer was supportive, especially after his full-throated backing for footballer Marcus Rashford's activism on the issue during the pandemic.
'The loss of free school meals risks millions of children going hungry, and for some this means missing their only hot meal of the day,' Labour's leader had raged. But then he suddenly snatched the plate away. 'This is not Labour policy and we have no plans to implement it,' a Labour spokesman announced.
It wasn't the only significant announcement of the week. At around the same time Starmer was revealing his plan to take food from the mouths of children, Rachel Reeves was popping up to explain how she intended to stuff gold into the mouths of the global IT giants.
In 2021, Reeves unveiled a proposal to increase the levy paid by tech firms operating in the UK from two per cent to ten per cent – a move that would have raised £3 billion a year. But now she was scrapping it. 'We have no plans to raise digital services tax in government,' said a spokesman. There are two explanations for this major shift in fiscal and social policy. The first is that it reflects precisely how Keir Starmer and his party intends to govern. Schoolchildren will be left with empty bellies. Foreign tech moguls will be allowed to retain their windfalls. Profits before pre-teen protein.
Or alternatively, this is basically just a smokescreen. Labour's leader is secretly planning to be an old-school redistributor. He is preparing to tax big business and the wealthy, and use the proceeds to pump cash back into crumbling public services. But he doesn't want anyone to know it yet.
According to Labour advisers, we were supposed to be getting a clear solution to this political mystery by now. The strategy was simple. Starmer would introduce himself to the British people. He would demonstrate why the Tories were no longer fit for office. And then he would gradually set out the policies that would define his programme for government.
Yet precisely the opposite is happening. The closer Starmer gets to Downing Street, the more desperate he seems to be to conceal what will actually happen if he's elected. Every week another policy is abandoned or neutered. Nationalisation of mail, energy and water. The ending of NHS outsourcing. Abolition of Universal Credit. The scrapping of tuition fees. Abolition of the Lords. What Starmer will do if elected is, of course, nothing much since he will have no more resources available to him than the Tories currently have. And, if Starmer fails to win a majority (as seems likely), he'll struggle to do anything at all. They will have a lot more resources than the Tories. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2023 12:34:32 GMT
The Labour Party cannot be two political parties, it can only be one political party with one leader and one set of policies based around the values that the party adheres to.
THE TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF VALUES ARE either Socialist, as under Jeremy Corbyn, or Social Democratic, as under Keir Starmer.
The "Socialist" vision would, or may include unilateral dissarmament, Republicanism, colossal borrowing to fund projects such as renationalisation of utillities, welfare and public services, crushing taxes on business, arms bans to Israel, Saudi Arabia and other countries, reductions in defence spending, negotiations with Argentina on The Falkland Islands.
The "Social Democratic" vision would not include unilateral dissarmament, republicanism, unsustainable borrowing, renationalising utillities whilst there are other spending priorities, impeding busineess or wealth / job creation, reducing defence spending, harming our defence industry or negotiating over The Falkland Islands.
It seems to me that the Social Democratic side of The Labour Party cannot be reconciled with the Orthodox Socialist side, therefore it has to be one or the other.
ALL EVIDENCE points to the more moderate Left of Centre "Social Democratic" side of Labour to be the formula for electoral success.
We only have to look at the electoral performance of Labour when led by the traditional, orthodox, socialists such as Jeremy Corbyn or Michael Foot - Disaterous.
The old fashioned Leftist / Socialists are squealing and complaining, but look at the opinion polls
Its one OR the other, it cannot be both, and Keir Starmer is carrying on the work begun by Neil Kinnock, modernising the party, making it electable, making it appeal to a wide cross section of the electorate, including middle England, incuding dissatisfied Tories.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jul 2, 2023 12:37:49 GMT
They will have a lot more resources than the Tories. Evidence please. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Jul 2, 2023 12:38:11 GMT
The Labour Party cannot be two political parties, it can only be one political party with one leader and one set of policies based around the values that the party adheres to. THE TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF VALUES ARE either Socialist, as under Jeremy Corbyn, or Social Democratic, as under Keir Starmer. The "Socialist" vision would, or may include unilateral dissarmament, Republicanism, colossal borrowing to fund projects such as renationalisation of utillities, welfare and public services, crushing taxes on business, arms bans to Israel, Saudi Arabia and other countries, reductions in defence spending, negotiations with Argentina on The Falkland Islands. The "Social Democratic" vision would not include unilateral dissarmament, republicanism, unsustainable borrowing, renationalising utillities whilst there are other spending priorities, impeding busineess or wealth / job creation, reducing defence spending, harming our defence industry or negotiating over The Falkland Islands. It seems to me that the Social Democratic side of The Labour Party cannot be reconciled with the Orthodox Socialist side, therefore it has to be one or the other. ALL EVIDENCE points to the more moderate Left of Centre "Social Democratic" side of Labour to be the formula for electoral success. We only have to look at the electoral performance of Labour when led by the traditional, orthodox, socialists such as Jeremy Corbyn or Michael Foot - Disaterous. The old fashioned Leftist / Socialists are squealing and complaining, but look at the opinion polls Its one OR the other, it cannot be both, and Keir Starmer is carrying on the work begun by Neil Kinnock, modernising the party, making it electable, making it appeal to a wide cross section of the electorate, including middle England, incuding dissatisfied Tories. This should be referred under the trade descriptions act  |
|
