Reform UK going from strength to strength.

[Fullerene]

On 29/06/2024 at 16:49, Wile E Coyote said:

I. for one, am amazed that a racist party is attracting racists.

For a complete failure os a politician who dosen't actually get a lot of votes why does he get so much publicity

The rich and powerful can be attracted to fascism especially when it stands in opposition to workers rights.  Unfortunately for them a lot of fascists are brain dead morons who would give you a head butt if you looked at them the wrong way - or even looked at them at all.

Enter someone who has the street smarts to have the same sentiments but with a cheery smile and a pint of beer in hand.

Yup.  He'll do.

Edited Monday at 20:35 by Fullerene

[Jedi2]

What are Labour going to change..

A more stable economy as they aren't chasing mad tax cuts as Truss did. This will gradually see public debt reduce, while keeping inflation (and therefore prices) lower.

More likelihood of public sector pay rises, (no not 35% as currently demanded by Junior Doctors), but still increases more in line with a (lower) inflation.

Poverty: There will be an uplift in Universal Credit. Despite being far too cautious on it so far I reckon the two child Benefit CAP will be scrapped in this Parliament. Better job creation. A proper Living Wage. Tackling Mental Health and Addictions more seriously.

Genuine pursuit of Green Energy (again, with finances not allowing the 'initial' £28 billion) but still, A reduction in energy bills through better home insulation, less reliance on foreign energy and a switch to more domestically produced sources.

An increase in job security and workers rights, with zero hours and hire and fire finally tackled, amd trade union legislation being strengthened.

 

A more humane and sensible approach to Immigration 

A genuine reduction in NHS Waiting Lists (and a better funded service overall)

A lot more people being able to buy their own home

A better relationship with the EU which will incrementally in this Parliament make rejoining in the future (in some form) more of a possibility 

So, compared to the Tories, improvements in poverty rates, employment, health, housing, education, crime, immigration and energy.

Might not set the pulse racing, and could be later into this Parliament (and a 2nd term needed) but there will be a much needed increase in public service funding to come.

And...no mention of the SNP

 

[strichener]

53 minutes ago, Jedi2 said:

What are Labour going to change..

A more stable economy as they aren't chasing mad tax cuts as Truss did. This will gradually see public debt reduce, while keeping inflation (and therefore prices) lower.

More likelihood of public sector pay rises, (no not 35% as currently demanded by Junior Doctors), but still increases more in line with a (lower) inflation.

Poverty: There will be an uplift in Universal Credit. Despite being far too cautious on it so far I reckon the two child Benefit CAP will be scrapped in this Parliament. Better job creation. A proper Living Wage. Tackling Mental Health and Addictions more seriously.

Genuine pursuit of Green Energy (again, with finances not allowing the 'initial' £28 billion) but still, A reduction in energy bills through better home insulation, less reliance on foreign energy and a switch to more domestically produced sources.

An increase in job security and workers rights, with zero hours and hire and fire finally tackled, amd trade union legislation being strengthened.

 

A more humane and sensible approach to Immigration 

A genuine reduction in NHS Waiting Lists (and a better funded service overall)

A lot more people being able to buy their own home

A better relationship with the EU which will incrementally in this Parliament make rejoining in the future (in some form) more of a possibility 

 

So, compared to the Tories, improvements in poverty rates, employment, health, housing, education, crime, immigration and energy.

Might not set the pulse racing, and could be later into this Parliament (and a 2nd term needed) but there will be a much needed increase in public service funding to come.

And...no mention of the SNP

 

That's a wishlist not a plan.

[btb]

On 29/06/2024 at 16:49, Wile E Coyote said:

I. for one, am amazed that a racist party is attracting racists.

For a complete failure os a politician who dosen't actually get a lot of votes why does he get so much publicity

I say this as a man who hates & fears Farage & whatever he names his grifter party.

He forced the Brexit Referendum and since then the Conservative party ever rightwards pretty much setting the agenda for the forthcoming GE, Starmer's Labour are offering little more than to manage austerity a little better than the Tories in the upcoming GE - Farage may not (yet) have won a parliamentary seat under our FPTP system but he's the UK Politician of the New Millennium so far. 

A pox on Cameron & Corbyn for their complacency in 2016!

[GordonS]

6 hours ago, coprolite said:

I think Labour can take credit for the non dom thing, even though the Tories put it through. They only did that to steal it from Labour. 

Expecting changes to capital gains tax, particularly on private equity manager carried interest. Not a massive fund raiser, but a significant step towards some limited fairness. 

 

Limited re-introduction of employment protection. Scope and extent tbc. 

The hollowed out husk of an aspiration for an environmental industrial / energy policy. 

I agree with @Jedi2 that it's better than the Tories.

It's thin gruel though. 

Not nearly enough to make it worth ignoring the toxic xenophobia and small state neoliberalism. 

"Better than the 2024 Tories" is the lowest bar ever set for anything.

I don't think they'll make any meaningful reform to employment law. They'll get rid of fire and rehire but there will be easy ways around whatever they do and they won't make redundancy more difficult in general. We'll see soon enough.

[Leith Green]

8 hours ago, strichener said:

That's a wishlist not a plan.

......and its certainly not Labours plan.

[Wee Bully]

11 hours ago, Jedi2 said:

What are Labour going to change..

A more stable economy as they aren't chasing mad tax cuts as Truss did. This will gradually see public debt reduce, while keeping inflation (and therefore prices) lower.

More likelihood of public sector pay rises, (no not 35% as currently demanded by Junior Doctors), but still increases more in line with a (lower) inflation.

Poverty: There will be an uplift in Universal Credit. Despite being far too cautious on it so far I reckon the two child Benefit CAP will be scrapped in this Parliament. Better job creation. A proper Living Wage. Tackling Mental Health and Addictions more seriously.

Genuine pursuit of Green Energy (again, with finances not allowing the 'initial' £28 billion) but still, A reduction in energy bills through better home insulation, less reliance on foreign energy and a switch to more domestically produced sources.

An increase in job security and workers rights, with zero hours and hire and fire finally tackled, amd trade union legislation being strengthened.

 

A more humane and sensible approach to Immigration 

A genuine reduction in NHS Waiting Lists (and a better funded service overall)

A lot more people being able to buy their own home

A better relationship with the EU which will incrementally in this Parliament make rejoining in the future (in some form) more of a possibility 

So, compared to the Tories, improvements in poverty rates, employment, health, housing, education, crime, immigration and energy.

Might not set the pulse racing, and could be later into this Parliament (and a 2nd term needed) but there will be a much needed increase in public service funding to come.

And...no mention of the SNP

 

This is surely a parody. 

[Leith Green]

But, aye ,Nigel it's all the vetting company's fault........

 

 

[Oceanlineayr]

4 hours ago, Wee Bully said:

This is surely a parody. 

Parody is usually somewhat funny.

That list is a bit sad as with the potentially huge majority they will get Labour could try and change something. Not that Starmer would want to. 

Edited Tuesday at 12:58 by Oceanlineayr

[SandyCromarty]

15 hours ago, Jedi2 said:

What are Labour going to change..

A more stable economy as they aren't chasing mad tax cuts as Truss did. This will gradually see public debt reduce, while keeping inflation (and therefore prices) lower.

More likelihood of public sector pay rises, (no not 35% as currently demanded by Junior Doctors), but still increases more in line with a (lower) inflation.

Poverty: There will be an uplift in Universal Credit. Despite being far too cautious on it so far I reckon the two child Benefit CAP will be scrapped in this Parliament. Better job creation. A proper Living Wage. Tackling Mental Health and Addictions more seriously.

Genuine pursuit of Green Energy (again, with finances not allowing the 'initial' £28 billion) but still, A reduction in energy bills through better home insulation, less reliance on foreign energy and a switch to more domestically produced sources.

An increase in job security and workers rights, with zero hours and hire and fire finally tackled, amd trade union legislation being strengthened.

 

A more humane and sensible approach to Immigration 

A genuine reduction in NHS Waiting Lists (and a better funded service overall)

A lot more people being able to buy their own home

A better relationship with the EU which will incrementally in this Parliament make rejoining in the future (in some form) more of a possibility 

So, compared to the Tories, improvements in poverty rates, employment, health, housing, education, crime, immigration and energy.

Might not set the pulse racing, and could be later into this Parliament (and a 2nd term needed) but there will be a much needed increase in public service funding to come.

And...no mention of the SNP

 

None of the above will happen.

Because;

The IFS stated on 16 April: "Current policy plans imply real-terms cuts to public investment of 2.6% per year over the next parliament. Avoiding those would require increasing spending by £18bn in 2029–30.

It goes on: "Spending on public services is set to grow by 1% per year in real terms over the next parliament, under current government policy. But ‘protecting’ the NHS, schools, childcare and defence budgets will mean that most departments will face real-terms cuts averaging 3% per year. To avoid those would require around £20bn of extra spending in 2029–30."

So the only claim by Labour I've heard to combat the above is by taxing non doms, nonsense they will disappear like snow off a dyke.

And can you really imagine private investors will be queuing up to invest in Labours new British Energy company, any rich investors will be gone just as the Shells and BP will f**k off when Labour raise windfall taxes.

Bear in mind that the Labour partys main finances come from the unions and there's no way major manufacturing companies will be comfortable with Labour because of that, there will always be suspicion between the two.

I've lived through it all before.

Murdochs print media will give them a honeymoon, as he did with Blair, then he will come after them.

[Cheese]

Nice try Daily Mail, but I still won't be voting Reform.

[welshbairn]

1 hour ago, Cheese said:

Nice try Daily Mail, but I still won't be voting Reform.

The Tory press and mainstream broadcasters are terrified of a Tory wipe out, Farage used to be their pet fash, just talking commonsense and the hero of brexit. 

[Jedi2]

1 hour ago, SandyCromarty said:

None of the above will happen.

Because;

The IFS stated on 16 April: "Current policy plans imply real-terms cuts to public investment of 2.6% per year over the next parliament. Avoiding those would require increasing spending by £18bn in 2029–30.

It goes on: "Spending on public services is set to grow by 1% per year in real terms over the next parliament, under current government policy. But ‘protecting’ the NHS, schools, childcare and defence budgets will mean that most departments will face real-terms cuts averaging 3% per year. To avoid those would require around £20bn of extra spending in 2029–30."

So the only claim by Labour I've heard to combat the above is by taxing non doms, nonsense they will disappear like snow off a dyke.

And can you really imagine private investors will be queuing up to invest in Labours new British Energy company, any rich investors will be gone just as the Shells and BP will f**k off when Labour raise windfall taxes.

Bear in mind that the Labour partys main finances come from the unions and there's no way major manufacturing companies will be comfortable with Labour because of that, there will always be suspicion between the two.

I've lived through it all before.

Murdochs print media will give them a honeymoon, as he did with Blair, then he will come after them.

You need to keep up with the IFS old bean: From 20th June (bit of an update on 'April' and 25 mind into the Interview for the IFS spokesperson:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m002080n

Where he points out that 'potential' cuts to unprotected budgets 'could' be between £6 and £16 billion, not the £18 billion the SNP lied about. There is also an admission that these figures are based on a one year projection not the 5 year term. In other news..the economy is also growing more quickly than expected

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6p2r9xzde4o.amp

Up by 0.7% in the first quarter according to the ONS, which will lead to both inflation remaining lower and the B of E being able to cut interest rates now, which in turn means the UK govt can borrow more than expected, and again in turn, that 'cuts' to unprotected budgets would be lower as a result.

The IFS spokesperson in the Radio Scotland interview, (he was on for a whole 8 minutes) did also points out that the SNP's plans for Independence would lead to a decade of cuts to public services without significant tax hikes.

So, Labour plans not 'just' reliant upon Windfall taxes on oil and gas, but, in a growing economy, more space now for borrowing (as well as VAT on private schools, taxes on property developers profits, increase in Capital Gains tax, and, with more people in employment (unemployment currently falling) more comes in from income tax and NI.

'None of the above'. It would be quite something for any party to spend 5 years implementing 'none' of their Manifesto.

 

[Highlandmagar]

25 minutes ago, Jedi2 said:

You need to keep up with the IFS old bean: From 20th June (bit of an update on 'April' and 25 mind into the Interview for the IFS spokesperson:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m002080n

Where he points out that 'potential' cuts to unprotected budgets 'could' be between £6 and £16 billion, not the £18 billion the SNP lied about. There is also an admission that these figures are based on a one year projection not the 5 year term. In other news..the economy is also growing more quickly than expected

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6p2r9xzde4o.amp

Up by 0.7% in the first quarter according to the ONS, which will lead to both inflation remaining lower and the B of E being able to cut interest rates now, which in turn means the UK govt can borrow more than expected, and again in turn, that 'cuts' to unprotected budgets would be lower as a result.

The IFS spokesperson in the Radio Scotland interview, (he was on for a whole 8 minutes) did also points out that the SNP's plans for Independence would lead to a decade of cuts to public services without significant tax hikes.

So, Labour plans not 'just' reliant upon Windfall taxes on oil and gas, but, in a growing economy, more space now for borrowing (as well as VAT on private schools, taxes on property developers profits, increase in Capital Gains tax, and, with more people in employment (unemployment currently falling) more comes in from income tax and NI.

'None of the above'. It would be quite something for any party to spend 5 years implementing 'none' of their Manifesto.

 

You can guarantee that Labour will inmplement  what's not in the manifesto. Make the poor poorer and the rich richer and to privatise the NHS through the back door 

[lichtgilphead]

49 minutes ago, Jedi2 said:

You need to keep up with the IFS old bean: From 20th June (bit of an update on 'April' and 25 mind into the Interview for the IFS spokesperson:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m002080n

Where he points out that 'potential' cuts to unprotected budgets 'could' be between £6 and £16 billion, not the £18 billion the SNP lied about. There is also an admission that these figures are based on a one year projection not the 5 year term. In other news..the economy is also growing more quickly than expected

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6p2r9xzde4o.amp

Up by 0.7% in the first quarter according to the ONS, which will lead to both inflation remaining lower and the B of E being able to cut interest rates now, which in turn means the UK govt can borrow more than expected, and again in turn, that 'cuts' to unprotected budgets would be lower as a result.

The IFS spokesperson in the Radio Scotland interview, (he was on for a whole 8 minutes) did also points out that the SNP's plans for Independence would lead to a decade of cuts to public services without significant tax hikes.

So, Labour plans not 'just' reliant upon Windfall taxes on oil and gas, but, in a growing economy, more space now for borrowing (as well as VAT on private schools, taxes on property developers profits, increase in Capital Gains tax, and, with more people in employment (unemployment currently falling) more comes in from income tax and NI.

'None of the above'. It would be quite something for any party to spend 5 years implementing 'none' of their Manifesto.

 

And yet again, Jedi tells lies about what the IFS spokesman says in the 8 minute interview,

I've previously asked exactly where the IFS spokesman says "that these figures are based on a one year projection not the 5 year term". Jedi hasn't replied. I suspect that it's because the IFS spokesman says no such thing. 

Over to you, Jedi - all you need to do is point out exactly where in the 8 minutes he says this.

 

[The Other Foot]

18 hours ago, btb said:

I say this as a man who hates & fears Farage & whatever he names his grifter party.

He forced the Brexit Referendum and since then the Conservative party ever rightwards pretty much setting the agenda for the forthcoming GE, Starmer's Labour are offering little more than to manage austerity a little better than the Tories in the upcoming GE - Farage may not (yet) have won a parliamentary seat under our FPTP system but he's the UK Politician of the New Millennium so far. 

A pox on Cameron & Corbyn for their complacency in 2016!

I think you’re right. I would never vote for him, but he is a formidable political machine. A smart man, who usually finds himself leading a group of complete morons.
 

Someone like that is usually quite dangerous, but I don’t think he has a real killer instinct. He’s a puppy dog. I don’t fear him in the slightest. I fear people like Thatcher and Blair who have been in power, who have had the chance to use it for good, but have instead fallen very deeply into the shadow. 

 

In addition - I don’t actually think Farage will win his seat.

[SandyCromarty]

Increasing Windfall taxes will just see the majors move away to more profitable climes,Guyana for example.

The North Sea drilling and production costs are very high compared to other areas but successive British Governments have given good tax breaks on exploration if a company has a oil production platform, an increase on the Windfall tax would wipe out the tax break and then it's adios.

No Government anywhere in the world tells one of the majors how to run their business. FACT.

VAT on school fees would see a massive pupil exodus from private to state schools and the increased cost to us the taxpayer.

They will not achieve taxing the non doms, the rich or companies such as Amazon as they all move their residential status overseas, Labour knows that but they will peddle their manifesto bollocks to please the believers.

Labour runs on pie in the sky ideas, we've seen it all before.

Things is they will win this election by a landslide and then run the country into the ground for five years then disappear for the next ten years or so.

It's the same shite over and over and it's time Scotland broke away from this Westminster pantomime.

[Jedi2]

2 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

And yet again, Jedi tells lies about what the IFS spokesman says in the 8 minute interview,

I've previously asked exactly where the IFS spokesman says "that these figures are based on a one year projection not the 5 year term". Jedi hasn't replied. I suspect that it's because the IFS spokesman says no such thing. 

Over to you, Jedi - all you need to do is point out exactly where in the 8 minutes he says this.

 

That pesky IFS again: Here they are, speaking this time on June 22nd, about not being able to make projections beyond March 2025:

We have already discussed the fact that the lack of department-by-department plans after this year means that we are uncertain about the path of spending on particular public services, and that we are unable to evaluate the 'cost' of committing to a given path of spending

We do not know how total spending will be allocated between public services after next March, and, with a few exceptions, neither manifesto offered much light.

https://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/news/AN_1719049537523141900/uk-party-manifestos-suggest-cuts-likely-in-next-government---ifs.aspx

I know that an extra 2 minutes of the Radio Scotland interview was 'too long' for you to listen to, but still no acknowledgement, weeks later, of the IFS estimate of a decade of public sector cuts under the SNP's plans.

[Jedi2]

21 minutes ago, SandyCromarty said:

Increasing Windfall taxes will just see the majors move away to more profitable climes,Guyana for example.

The North Sea drilling and production costs are very high compared to other areas but successive British Governments have given good tax breaks on exploration if a company has a oil production platform, an increase on the Windfall tax would wipe out the tax break and then it's adios.

No Government anywhere in the world tells one of the majors how to run their business. FACT.

VAT on school fees would see a massive pupil exodus from private to state schools and the increased cost to us the taxpayer.

They will not achieve taxing the non doms, the rich or companies such as Amazon as they all move their residential status overseas, Labour knows that but they will peddle their manifesto bollocks to please the believers.

Labour runs on pie in the sky ideas, we've seen it all before.

Things is they will win this election by a landslide and then run the country into the ground for five years then disappear for the next ten years or so.

It's the same shite over and over and it's time Scotland broke away from this Westminster pantomime.

You mean like when Shell (profit £22 billion) BP (profit £14 billion) and others, fled the UK when Jeremy Hunt slapped a 35% Windfall Tax (an increase of 10% from the previous year),on their profits in January 2023..think they are still here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60295177.amp

Or the whole 5% of kids who go to Private Schools will mostly be leaving? Don't think so. Rather think that they will be more than able to afford an 'increase'. After all, fees of between £20-30K a year already aren't an issue.

Meanwhile it's fine and dandy to slap tax hikes on 'high' earners (by the SNP's definition) on £28,000 a year, but not oil and gas companies, private schools, or property developers.

It's interesting that you mention 'disappearing' for 'ten years or so', a decade in other words, that the SNP plan to use to 'disappear' even moderate functioning of public services in Scotland for.....but its all worth it in the 'long term'. How long it would take to rebuild those public services is anyone's guess.

 

Edited Tuesday at 19:05 by Jedi2

[ICTChris]

Reform candidate in Orkney and Shetland got his finger on the pulse of local issues.

My mum and dad were in Shetland a few weeks back, will check with them if there are “transexuals everywhere”.