|
|
Post by patman post on May 18, 2024 13:19:10 GMT
Keir Starmer has unveiled the first steps that will be taken by a Labour government.
The six statements inevitably drew comparisons with Tony Blair’s 1997 pledge card. Is that bad? After all, Blair became PM of a Labour government that had only two leaders during its long period in power.
Starmer set out the missions for an incoming Labour government:
Deliver economic stability Cut NHS waiting times Launch a new border security command Set up Great British Energy Crack down on antisocial behaviour Recruit 6,500 teachers
They're broad aims and attract accusations of no detail. But I reckon they could be good enough to oust the current government and give the country back hope, while the Tories reform themselves into real caring One Nation Conservatives...
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
Member is Online
|
Post by Steve on May 20, 2024 18:41:02 GMT
Not a bad list
|
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on May 22, 2024 6:42:33 GMT
It does seem to be more in touch with the concerns of working families than the other lot prattling on about rainbow lanyards.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 22, 2024 6:59:57 GMT
I would like to see some detail, at the moment they are just a list of what the polls say most concern them.
|
|
|
|
Post by AvonCalling on May 22, 2024 13:04:56 GMT
Given that we are one of the most densely populated countries in europe and that to mis June last year migran was in excess (net migration) 600k. It's frustrating to see it being ignored as an issue. Not sure this isn't high on voters lists if concerns IMO illegal immigration is side show.
|
|
RedRum
Full Member
"Smaller in number are we, but larger in mind.”
Posts: 245
|
Post by RedRum on May 26, 2024 11:40:43 GMT
Given Starmer's propensity to lie, we will have to wait and see.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2024 13:21:34 GMT
It's a rather small list. Even if they succeed in fulfilling it all splendidly, it is nowhere near enough to bring the transformative improvements necessary.
Other things that need urgent attention include solving the housing crisis. If they don't feel capable of achieving that, then they could at least promise to reduce the scale of the problem by some stated and achievable metric.
Ending chronic employment and housing insecurity should have been there.
Building more social housing too.
Housing is in fact the biggie, which feeds into so many of our other economic woes. The cost of housing and rents is a major component of the cost of living crisis removing ever more money from workers with all sorts of negative knock on effects. It also seriously hinders productive investment by making investment in housing a sure fire bet to those with money to spare.
I was speaking only last week to an ambitious youngster who plans to work hard for a few years, get the money together to start investing in property and become a landlord living off his tenants. It is not the first time I have heard such things from ambitious and hard working young people, merely the latest.
What is notable is that the route to wealth, whilst always acknowledging the need for hard work in the early stages, is less and less frequently seen to be setting up and growing a successful business, and more and more investing in property to get rich off the backs of more productive workers. They aspire much less to build a successful business and much more into becoming a property tycoon. So the distortions borne of our housing crisis is not merely diverting investment income away from productive enterprises into bricks and mortar, it is also distorting the ambitions of many of our more ambitious young people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2024 13:47:21 GMT
Given Starmer's propensity to lie, we will have to wait and see. Indeed. I was in the Labour party when he was lying to us to get us to elect him leader. It was blatantly obvious to intelligent people in the party that all his pledges to us were lies, simply because they were such obvious anathema to all those surrounding him and backing him. All the New Labour types in the party knew it too which is precisely why they backed him. Intelligent social democrats and democratic socialists were of course not taken in at all because it was so obvious, and we never backed him. Sadly, there was a middle ground group who believed what he was telling them with his pledges, of socialism without Corbyn under a new more electable leader and they fell for it. These fools saw him surrounded by all those New Labour people up to and including Blair himself, whom they ought to have known would have no truck with it. But they fell for it anyway. And delivered the votes necessary to give Starmer the leadership, choosing to believe what ought to have been obvious lies. In internal debates we warned them about this, that as soon as he got the position he would start rowing back on his pledges and would end up abandoning most if not all of them. And we have been vindicated in our scepticism. A few of those gullible fools have since said that if they had known what he was going to do they would never have voted for him. I have little sympathy for them. Because it was always obvious to start with and being too thick to see it does not exonerate them for what they did. As for Starmer's supporters trying to explain that he had to abandon all his pledges because of changed circumstances, as you can imagine that cuts little ice with those of us who knew they were lies in the first place and that he didn't mean them to start with. Two lessons for the wider public in this. Firstly, whilst intelligent people can support either side in a contest for intelligent reasons, it can all too easily end up being the gullible fools and thickoes who actually decide the outcome. And secondly, if he can lie to win a leadership election he is equally capable of lying to win a general election. For which reason I find the man most unconvincing. Because even if he started promising the earth, how could I know that he was not again lying to get elected? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2024 14:01:17 GMT
Given that we are one of the most densely populated countries in europe and that to mis June last year migran was in excess (net migration) 600k. It's frustrating to see it being ignored as an issue. Not sure this isn't high on voters lists if concerns IMO illegal immigration is side show. Indeed. Legal migration is far higher than illegal migration. But they are attempting to import Tory supporters by making an above average income a necessary requirement for most to come here. Similar policies discriminate against our own people. For example, if I as a born and bred Briton were to fall in love with and marry a foreign national, I could not even bring my own wife into this country because my income would be deemed too low. Yet my boss wouldn't have this problem. Guess which of us is more likely to vote Tory? |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 26, 2024 14:17:26 GMT
It's a rather small list. Even if they succeed in fulfilling it all splendidly, it is nowhere near enough to bring the transformative improvements necessary. Other things that need urgent attention include solving the housing crisis. If they don't feel capable of achieving that, then they could at least promise to reduce the scale of the problem by some stated and achievable metric. Ending chronic employment and housing insecurity should have been there. Building more social housing too. Housing is in fact the biggie, which feeds into so many of our other economic woes. The cost of housing and rents is a major component of the cost of living crisis removing ever more money from workers with all sorts of negative knock on effects. It also seriously hinders productive investment by making investment in housing a sure fire bet to those with money to spare. I was speaking only last week to an ambitious youngster who plans to work hard for a few years, get the money together to start investing in property and become a landlord living off his tenants. It is not the first time I have heard such things from ambitious and hard working young people, merely the latest. What is notable is that the route to wealth, whilst always acknowledging the need for hard work in the early stages, is less and less frequently seen to be setting up and growing a successful business, and more and more investing in property to get rich off the backs of more productive workers. They aspire much less to build a successful business and much more into becoming a property tycoon. So the distortions borne of our housing crisis is not merely diverting investment income away from productive enterprises into bricks and mortar, it is also distorting the ambitions of many of our more ambitious young people. They have mentioned a few times, sorting out planning law to stop so many delays and wasted proposals. That's a start, but I agree its a bit lack lustre. From what I can gather the Tories have not released budgetary plans for the second half of the year, so no one knows what shockers are hiding there. I suspect quite a few as the most they could come up with is conscription and kids forced to work for nothing. |
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
Member is Online
|
Post by Steve on May 26, 2024 18:19:00 GMT
If he promised to end the tyranny of cyclists he'd get my vote and I reckon a fair few million others
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 26, 2024 18:22:37 GMT
If he promised to end the tyranny of cyclists he'd get my vote and I reckon a fair few million others Oh Yes! We spent thousands building them cycle ways and still the Lycra squad ride down the middle of the road. |
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
Member is Online
|
Post by Steve on May 26, 2024 18:24:02 GMT
If he promised to end the tyranny of cyclists he'd get my vote and I reckon a fair few million others Oh Yes! We spent thousands building them cycle ways and still the Lycra squad ride down the middle of the road. And the pavements and sometimes into shops |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on May 26, 2024 20:06:05 GMT
Given Starmer's propensity to lie, we will have to wait and see. Indeed. I was in the Labour party when he was lying to us to get us to elect him leader. It was blatantly obvious to intelligent people in the party that all his pledges to us were lies, simply because they were such obvious anathema to all those surrounding him and backing him. All the New Labour types in the party knew it too which is precisely why they backed him. Intelligent social democrats and democratic socialists were of course not taken in at all because it was so obvious, and we never backed him. Sadly, there was a middle ground group who believed what he was telling them with his pledges, of socialism without Corbyn under a new more electable leader and they fell for it. These fools saw him surrounded by all those New Labour people up to and including Blair himself, whom they ought to have known would have no truck with it. But they fell for it anyway. And delivered the votes necessary to give Starmer the leadership, choosing to believe what ought to have been obvious lies. In internal debates we warned them about this, that as soon as he got the position he would start rowing back on his pledges and would end up abandoning most if not all of them. And we have been vindicated in our scepticism. A few of those gullible fools have since said that if they had known what he was going to do they would never have voted for him. I have little sympathy for them. Because it was always obvious to start with and being too thick to see it does not exonerate them for what they did. As for Starmer's supporters trying to explain that he had to abandon all his pledges because of changed circumstances, as you can imagine that cuts little ice with those of us who knew they were lies in the first place and that he didn't mean them to start with. Two lessons for the wider public in this. Firstly, whilst intelligent people can support either side in a contest for intelligent reasons, it can all too easily end up being the gullible fools and thickoes who actually decide the outcome. And secondly, if he can lie to win a leadership election he is equally capable of lying to win a general election. For which reason I find the man most unconvincing. Because even if he started promising the earth, how could I know that he was not again lying to get elected? I'm not a member of the Labour Party, but I did get a vote as a member of the GMB. I like Starmer as a pro European, but I'm unsure that he has the ability to turn things round too much. Economically there doesn't seem to be much between Labour and the Tories, and given the failure of the economy over the last 14 years that worries me. I don't want more of the same. If we can at least develop some international relations, we'll at least have a gain. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2024 6:34:07 GMT
If he promised to end the tyranny of cyclists he'd get my vote and I reckon a fair few million others Oh Yes! We spent thousands building them cycle ways and still the Lycra squad ride down the middle of the road. Cycling in the road ought to be illegal wherever there is a perfectly good cycle path right beside it. |
|
