Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Apologising for Brexit – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,529
edited 6:22AM in General
Apologising for Brexit – politicalbetting.com

Next week marks 9 years since the EU referendum; most Britons would now support rejoiningCloser relationship without rejoining: 67% supportRejoining: 56%Status quo: 28%Further loosening ties: 18%yougov.co.uk/politics/art…

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,946
    More likely, it would push Reform into the mid-thirties, at the Conservatives’ expense.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,768
    Good morning

    Brexit has happened and a lot has changed but it seems rejoining is not a priority by 44% to 37%

    I voted remain, but just cannot see a path to rejoin that is likely and would the EU even want us back and on what terms

    In today's uncertain world there are many more important causes, though a closer relationship with the EU is sensible

    As far as blaming the conservatives, it seems that an even more anti EU party is dominating the political agenda

    I would just gently say all the parties contributed to the present position as they fought a battle from an extreme Brexit to overturning the result and remain when they should have agreed together a Norway style arrangement
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,945
    Sean_F said:

    More likely, it would push Reform into the mid-thirties, at the Conservatives’ expense.

    That's the tar pit the Conservatives danced their way into.

    They can't back away from Brexit without losing a hefty chunk of support to the Faragists. Besides, who is there on the Conservative front bench (or even the back benches) who can credibly say that Brexit was a mistake? For nearly all of them, it would be the sort of U-turn requiring instant retirement to a remote monastery.

    But by continuing to endorse Brexit in general, and this version in particular, they put a ceiling on their support at "nowhere near enough".

    There's that strange writer chap who said Brexit is like having a baby. If it is, it's in the sense of a weird smell and staining that never quite goes away after the poonami incident. Me? I don't know how to advise the Conservatives, except "don't start from here".
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,142
    edited 6:36AM
    Apropos of nothing, saw the world's tiniest nun - top 5 at least - in London yesterday.

    Was reminded of the great Gene Hunt line "She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot."
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,408

    Apropos of nothing, saw the world's tiniest nun - top 5 at least - in London yesterday.

    Was reminded of the great Gene Hunt line "She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot."

    The greatest nun ever.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujxDA9VsQG4
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,773
    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,408

    "Rejoining" is an empty concept. Tell us the cost - then showing us the polling.

    Anybody think the EU has spent those 9 years learning lessons on implementing democracy? Nah, me neither.

    Rejoining the EU will be the easiest deal in history, the EU need us more than we need them.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,142

    Blaming Brexit - nobody can say in detail for what precisely - is just an aspect of the country is broken meme which is dominating most of the western world.

    Rejoin the EU and within a year two thirds of people would be blaming that for the state of the country.

    With some justification as taxes rise and the immigration numbers soared.

    "This Euro - it's just an excuse to shove prices up. Give me the parnd back!"
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,018
    Apologies are pretty non existent in politics, but if they’re going to have any impact they need a semblance of sincerity.

    Kemi: I’m reely, reely thorry
    Public: why is this lying bastard lying to us?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,142

    "Rejoining" is an empty concept. Tell us the cost - then showing us the polling.

    Anybody think the EU has spent those 9 years learning lessons on implementing democracy? Nah, me neither.

    Rejoining the EU will be the easiest deal in history, the EU need us more than we need them.
    You should put that on the side of a bus...
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,222
    @TheScreamingEagles

    Were you feeling hot and bothered? Needed to start another argument on the same topic?
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,881
    Mystifying to me that there’s anyone who still gives a shit about Brexit.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,945

    "Rejoining" is an empty concept. Tell us the cost - then showing us the polling.

    Anybody think the EU has spent those 9 years learning lessons on implementing democracy? Nah, me neither.

    Rejoining the EU will be the easiest deal in history, the EU need us more than we need them.
    The broad outlines deal would be pretty straightforward- "this is what we do, are you in or out?" The idea that there's some Much Better Deal that Brussels hides under the counter for its special customers is one of the reasons the UK got into this position.

    And why the Conservatives got into the position of cheerleading for something that's unpopular with the public.

    Still, mustn't hang around here. I'm having real trouble finding Independence Day (© Dan Hannan) fireworks in the shops. Must be that they're all sold out.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,018

    @TheScreamingEagles

    Were you feeling hot and bothered? Needed to start another argument on the same topic?

    So far pretty much Brexiteers agreeing Brexit was no big deal and rejoining would be a nightmare, so maybe TSE will get away with it.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,134
    moonshine said:

    Mystifying to me that there’s anyone who still gives a shit about Brexit.

    56% of the population it seems. More than voted for the thing in the first place.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,408
    moonshine said:

    Mystifying to me that there’s anyone who still gives a shit about Brexit.

    As somebody who worked for Vote Leave told me, the UK is now the home to largest pro EU movement in Europe.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,408
    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
  • Eh? Nonsense question framing from YouGov gives:
    Closer relationship without rejoining: 67% support
    Rejoining: 56% support

    The thread today will be dominated with stale arguments. Out to enjoy the sun instead.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,408
    Because the heat has addled my mind why is the plural of Prime Minister not Primes Minster like Attorneys-General?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,134
    That the Conservative Party is in its death throes probably has quite a lot to do with Brexit ultimately. I doubt an apology is going to improve things at this stage.

    More importantly I don't think Starmer's "Brexit red lines" are doing him much good.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,773

    Because the heat has addled my mind why is the plural of Prime Minister not Primes Minster like Attorneys-General?

    Minister and Attorney are the key words while Prime and General are just descriptive.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,881

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    Im waiting for crossover when Reeves borrows more in a month than the £22billion she claimed she had found and needed to do an emergency budget,

    She truly is appalling.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,408

    Eh? Nonsense question framing from YouGov gives:
    Closer relationship without rejoining: 67% support
    Rejoining: 56% support

    The thread today will be dominated with stale arguments. Out to enjoy the sun instead.

    Read the thread, this is the bit I was focussing on, until the Tories can turn this around then it will hinder them.


  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,735

    Eh? Nonsense question framing from YouGov gives:
    Closer relationship without rejoining: 67% support
    Rejoining: 56% support

    The thread today will be dominated with stale arguments. Out to enjoy the sun instead.

    It’s warm already this morning in central London. I am looking forward to heading back toward the sea breezes of home shortly, as is the dog, who doesn’t like this hot weather.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,222

    @TheScreamingEagles

    Were you feeling hot and bothered? Needed to start another argument on the same topic?

    I do not do very well in the heat, I have had about 2 hours sleep in about 15 minute blocks last night.

    You have to be impressed by the opening and also calling Liz Truss the Anglo-Zanzibar war of Prime Ministers.
    Liz Truss deserved everything she got…
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,650
    Morning all.
    No, they shouldnt.
    'Damage from Brexit' is 'ice free Arctic by 2015'
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,650

    Because the heat has addled my mind why is the plural of Prime Minister not Primes Minster like Attorneys-General?

    Ministers Prime
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,018

    Because the heat has addled my mind why is the plural of Prime Minister not Primes Minster like Attorneys-General?

    Adjective-noun, noun-adjective.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,881

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    They are probably the only party with the balls to do it. Lib\Lab\Con will simply wheel out platitudes and let the problem roll on.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,222

    Because the heat has addled my mind why is the plural of Prime Minister not Primes Minster like Attorneys-General?

    Ministers Prime
    Or in the post Trump world

    Amazons Prime
  • JSpringJSpring Posts: 105
    FF43 said:

    moonshine said:

    Mystifying to me that there’s anyone who still gives a shit about Brexit.

    56% of the population it seems. More than voted for the thing in the first place.
    Giving an answer to a more or less binary question in a poll isn't the same thing as 'giving a shit' about it.

    The telling thing might be that support for Brexit has declined more or less in conjunction with its decline as a big political issue. If Starmer (say) made a speech today advocating re-entry then there would almost certainly be a swing back towards staying out in polls such as these.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,610

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    It really won't. Under whatever government it happens we will be looking at massive increases in tax and massive cuts in spending. All of us will be significantly poorer but inevitably those dependent upon the State will be the worse hit.

    We can ameliorate this to some extent by acting now but everything Reeves does makes it worse. These ridiculous arguments about whether she can make her ridiculous targets make those realigning the deck chairs on the Titanic look both purposeful and useful.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,945

    Eh? Nonsense question framing from YouGov gives:
    Closer relationship without rejoining: 67% support
    Rejoining: 56% support

    The thread today will be dominated with stale arguments. Out to enjoy the sun instead.

    Read the thread, this is the bit I was focussing on, until the Tories can turn this around then it will hinder them.


    And that's why it's worth thinking this through, especially if Brexit isn't going to be reversed any time soon.

    Normally, political mistakes get reversed. The Poll Tax lasted three years. Labour's original WFA plan lasted less than a year. Brexit, whatever its backers might wish, is seen as a mistake by the public. But it's not going anywhere for now. The way that spills into the wider political game is likely to be odd.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,881

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    They are probably the only party with the balls to do it. Lib\Lab\Con will simply wheel out platitudes and let the problem roll on.
    Oh please, Reform's plans will outdo Rachel Reeves, have you seen their unfunded plans?
    By the time we get to an election they will have corrected that, They have learned from the major parties that you can spout any old bollocks when in opposition to claim a headline. And indeed why should they put a costed plan in place ? Labour didnt they just ducked the issue in the election and now we are all paying the price. It;s quite clear Labour hadnt a clue what to do when in power. their big play was Reeves would be the first female CoE and that gave her some kind of super powers to make our problems go away.

    How's that working out ?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,716
    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    Yes, fine, but how would you reduce the deficit and borrowing?

    I imagine we'll hear the same old mantras of "supply side reform", "50% haircut for public sector pensions", "tax cuts and spending cuts" from the usual suspects but was any of that on offer last July? Is any of that on offer now? You won't hear it from Labour, Reform, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats or Greens - is there some other political movement advocating a return to a blanced budget? How would they achieve it?

    "Putting your hands over your ears and humming", as you put it, isn't fair. Plenty of people see the problem but, as with the "small boats", no one has come up with an easy, popular and cheap solution - if there were one, we'd have done it by now.

    So it comes back to who has to feel the pain - which group can you demonise enough so everyone will say "yeah, let them suffer" - public sector workers, pensioners, others on welfare, the wealthy, property owners, Scottish lawyers, children - where would you like to start?

    No, the usual whingeing every month about the borrowing numbers belies the fact of how we got here and the fact previous Governments allowed us to reach this point. I know what I would do but when I've proposed it, I've had a barrage of abuse from those who already feel "overtaxed" and complain "they" can't pay any more but someone else could and should.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,018
    Revelation of the morning, IDS is a biker (or a motorcyclist as he put it). Will the quiet man be buying a set of noisy pipes for his ride?



  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,610

    Because the heat has addled my mind why is the plural of Prime Minister not Primes Minster like Attorneys-General?

    Because "Prime" is a descriptor and Attorney is a principal, I suppose.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,881
    stodge said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    Yes, fine, but how would you reduce the deficit and borrowing?

    I imagine we'll hear the same old mantras of "supply side reform", "50% haircut for public sector pensions", "tax cuts and spending cuts" from the usual suspects but was any of that on offer last July? Is any of that on offer now? You won't hear it from Labour, Reform, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats or Greens - is there some other political movement advocating a return to a blanced budget? How would they achieve it?

    "Putting your hands over your ears and humming", as you put it, isn't fair. Plenty of people see the problem but, as with the "small boats", no one has come up with an easy, popular and cheap solution - if there were one, we'd have done it by now.

    So it comes back to who has to feel the pain - which group can you demonise enough so everyone will say "yeah, let them suffer" - public sector workers, pensioners, others on welfare, the wealthy, property owners, Scottish lawyers, children - where would you like to start?

    No, the usual whingeing every month about the borrowing numbers belies the fact of how we got here and the fact previous Governments allowed us to reach this point. I know what I would do but when I've proposed it, I've had a barrage of abuse from those who already feel "overtaxed" and complain "they" can't pay any more but someone else could and should.
    Or just stop spending.

    Take all the money of Ed Miliband and well immediately be 28 billion better off, There's lots of things we can do but our politicians lack the resolve to take their sacred cows off to the abbatoir.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,018

    Revelation of the morning, IDS is a biker (or a motorcyclist as he put it). Will the quiet man be buying a set of noisy pipes for his ride?



    Born to be mild...
    Not Evel Knievel, just evil.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,142

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    They are probably the only party with the balls to do it. Lib\Lab\Con will simply wheel out platitudes and let the problem roll on.
    Oh please, Reform's plans will outdo Rachel Reeves, have you seen their unfunded plans?
    By the time we get to an election they will have corrected that, They have learned from the major parties that you can spout any old bollocks when in opposition to claim a headline. And indeed why should they put a costed plan in place ? Labour didnt they just ducked the issue in the election and now we are all paying the price. It;s quite clear Labour hadnt a clue what to do when in power. their big play was Reeves would be the first female CoE and that gave her some kind of super powers to make our problems go away.

    How's that working out ?
    "Governing - how hard can it be?"
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,292

    Apropos of nothing, saw the world's tiniest nun - top 5 at least - in London yesterday.

    Was reminded of the great Gene Hunt line "She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot."

    I was walking through town a few weeks ago and saw this absolutely beautiful Japanese nun sitting by a fountain. I was in the middle of thinking it was a terrible waste of such a face when I realised on getting closer that she was actually just wearing a thick white hair band holding back her long black hair and a black dress.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,610
    stodge said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    Yes, fine, but how would you reduce the deficit and borrowing?

    I imagine we'll hear the same old mantras of "supply side reform", "50% haircut for public sector pensions", "tax cuts and spending cuts" from the usual suspects but was any of that on offer last July? Is any of that on offer now? You won't hear it from Labour, Reform, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats or Greens - is there some other political movement advocating a return to a blanced budget? How would they achieve it?

    "Putting your hands over your ears and humming", as you put it, isn't fair. Plenty of people see the problem but, as with the "small boats", no one has come up with an easy, popular and cheap solution - if there were one, we'd have done it by now.

    So it comes back to who has to feel the pain - which group can you demonise enough so everyone will say "yeah, let them suffer" - public sector workers, pensioners, others on welfare, the wealthy, property owners, Scottish lawyers, children - where would you like to start?

    No, the usual whingeing every month about the borrowing numbers belies the fact of how we got here and the fact previous Governments allowed us to reach this point. I know what I would do but when I've proposed it, I've had a barrage of abuse from those who already feel "overtaxed" and complain "they" can't pay any more but someone else could and should.
    There are no easy or popular ways to resolve this problem, hence none of the parties being willing to face it.

    We certainly need to increase taxes and by substantial amounts.

    We need to cut the headcount of the public sector by at least 1m, possibly more. Deregulation, and a massive cut back in our regulatory sector, would be where I would start but this would be a massively challenging task that cannot be dealt with adequately in a post like this. It requires at least a decade of the grinding progress that was made in the decade after 2010 and which has since been reversed.

    I think we need to address the chronic unfairness of those who work past 67 because of their inadequate pensions paying so much tax to fund the pensions of those that retire at or even before 60. The differential benefits of public sector pensions have become indefensible.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,773
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    It really won't. Under whatever government it happens we will be looking at massive increases in tax and massive cuts in spending. All of us will be significantly poorer but inevitably those dependent upon the State will be the worse hit.

    We can ameliorate this to some extent by acting now but everything Reeves does makes it worse. These ridiculous arguments about whether she can make her ridiculous targets make those realigning the deck chairs on the Titanic look both purposeful and useful.
    I wonder what the impositions will be.

    +2% basic income tax
    +5% top rate income tax
    +20% council tax plus extra council tax bands
    +10p fuel duty

    End of the triple lock on pensions
    End of pensions credits
    End of WFA
    Rapid increase in state retirement age to 70
    20% reduction in invalidity benefits

    Immediate conversion of future public sector pension schemes from DB to DC
    10% reduction in current DB payments over £50k pa
    10% reduction in public sector pay above £100k pa

    Don't know how much all that would save but I doubt it would be enough.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,142

    Revelation of the morning, IDS is a biker (or a motorcyclist as he put it). Will the quiet man be buying a set of noisy pipes for his ride?



    Born to be mild...
    Not Evel Knievel, just evil.
    I actually think "born to be riled" suits him better.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,945

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    They are probably the only party with the balls to do it. Lib\Lab\Con will simply wheel out platitudes and let the problem roll on.
    Oh please, Reform's plans will outdo Rachel Reeves, have you seen their unfunded plans?
    By the time we get to an election they will have corrected that, They have learned from the major parties that you can spout any old bollocks when in opposition to claim a headline. And indeed why should they put a costed plan in place ? Labour didnt they just ducked the issue in the election and now we are all paying the price. It;s quite clear Labour hadnt a clue what to do when in power. their big play was Reeves would be the first female CoE and that gave her some kind of super powers to make our problems go away.

    How's that working out ?
    "Governing - how hard can it be?"
    Best ask the party who put a columnist and comedian with fairly minimal ministerial experience into Number Ten.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,401

    "Rejoining" is an empty concept. Tell us the cost - then show us the polling.

    Anybody think the EU has spent those 9 years learning lessons on implementing democracy? Nah, me neither.

    Been a jolly 9 years for UK on the other hand, hello IMF my old friend, we will need baled out yet again.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,018
    boulay said:

    Apropos of nothing, saw the world's tiniest nun - top 5 at least - in London yesterday.

    Was reminded of the great Gene Hunt line "She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot."

    I was walking through town a few weeks ago and saw this absolutely beautiful Japanese nun sitting by a fountain. I was in the middle of thinking it was a terrible waste of such a face when I realised on getting closer that she was actually just wearing a thick white hair band holding back her long black hair and a black dress.

    So you chatted her up obvs.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 38,917
    Did none of these people read Dan's article?

    It’s 24 June, 2025, and Britain is marking its annual Independence Day celebration. As the fireworks stream through the summer sky, still not quite dark, we wonder why it took us so long to leave. The years that followed the 2016 referendum didn’t just reinvigorate our economy, our democracy and our liberty. They improved relations with our neighbours.

    The United Kingdom is now the region’s foremost knowledge-based economy. We lead the world in biotech, law, education, the audio-visual sector, financial services and software. New industries, from 3D printing to driverless cars, have sprung up around the country. Older industries, too, have revived as energy prices have fallen back to global levels: steel, cement, paper, plastics and ceramics producers have become competitive again.

    The EU, meanwhile, continues to turn inwards, clinging to its dream of political amalgamation as the euro and migration crises worsen. Its population is ageing, its share of world GDP shrinking and its peoples protesting. “We have the most comprehensive workers’ rights in the world”, complains Jean-Claude Juncker, who has recently begun in his second term as President of the European Federation, “but we have fewer and fewer workers”.

    The last thing most EU leaders wanted, once the shock had worn off, was a protracted argument with the United Kingdom which, on the day it left, became their single biggest market. Terms were agreed easily enough. Britain withdrew from the EU’s political structures and institutions, but kept its tariff-free arrangements in place. The rights of EU nationals living in the UK were confirmed, and various reciprocal deals on healthcare and the like remained. For the sake of administrative convenience, Brexit took effect formally on 1 July 2019, to coincide with the mandates of a new European Parliament and Commission.


  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 30,455

    @TheScreamingEagles

    Were you feeling hot and bothered? Needed to start another argument on the same topic?

    I do not do very well in the heat, I have had about 2 hours sleep in about 15 minute blocks last night.

    You have to be impressed by the opening and also calling Liz Truss the Anglo-Zanzibar war of Prime Ministers.
    A terrible analogy sir.

    The Sultan didn't fire his own cannons into his own palace.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,401

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    Im waiting for crossover when Reeves borrows more in a month than the £22billion she claimed she had found and needed to do an emergency budget,

    She truly is appalling.
    You will not have long to wait Alan
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,946

    Sean_F said:

    More likely, it would push Reform into the mid-thirties, at the Conservatives’ expense.

    That's the tar pit the Conservatives danced their way into.

    They can't back away from Brexit without losing a hefty chunk of support to the Faragists. Besides, who is there on the Conservative front bench (or even the back benches) who can credibly say that Brexit was a mistake? For nearly all of them, it would be the sort of U-turn requiring instant retirement to a remote monastery.

    But by continuing to endorse Brexit in general, and this version in particular, they put a ceiling on their support at "nowhere near enough".

    There's that strange writer chap who said Brexit is like having a baby. If it is, it's in the sense of a weird smell and staining that never quite goes away after the poonami incident. Me? I don't know how to advise the Conservatives, except "don't start from here".
    Sure, an apology would be insincere, and it would be seen as insincere.

    The wider problem is this, and it’s one that applies in many Western democracies. You can no longer keep, within the same party, voters who favour free movement of people and capital, and voters who favour borders and traditions.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,716
    As for Brexit, I'm tempted to take the Chou-en-Lai approach to the French Revolution though that has apparently, like so many good apocrypha, been debunked.

    It's fascinating to see those desperately defending our decision to leave the European Union to the point it's become totemic, a symbol of the triumph of democracy, literally, the people's will.

    Cards on the table, I voted to leave as well. Why? Simply because our relationship, as it had become, with the EU, was unsustainable for both sides. We were half hearted, obstructive, rebate-obsessed, whingeing, complaining members standing often on the sidelines, often in a minority of one. They were implacable in their desire for greater political and financial integration.

    Whether Cameron generally believed after his unexpected (and I suspect unwanted) 2015 election win (aided and abetted by Nick Clegg, Ed Miliband and Alex Salmond), he could persuade the EU to accept a form of semi-detached membership for the UK I don't know, but the fact it came down to an IN/OUT vote rather than a ratification of a redefined membership is as much down to the EU leaders at the time as it was Cameron's negotiation skills.

    Nine years on and for most people most of the time nothing has changed - we all have nice new passports and those who wanted to retire to Spain and Portugal now have a much harder though not impossible task but generally the EU is as invisible now we are out of it as we were when we were in it.

    That's perhaps the tragedy and the irony - as OGH repeatedly showed, it didn't really matter to most people but it was whipped into a symbolic issue of sovereignty and identity by a well-organised campaign to which those seeking to defend the status quo had no real response. It became in the end a cry of frustration and anger from many who didn't usually participate in the democratic process yet has leaving the EU resolved that frustration and anger?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,018
    stodge said:

    As for Brexit, I'm tempted to take the Chou-en-Lai approach to the French Revolution though that has apparently, like so many good apocrypha, been debunked.

    It's fascinating to see those desperately defending our decision to leave the European Union to the point it's become totemic, a symbol of the triumph of democracy, literally, the people's will.

    Cards on the table, I voted to leave as well. Why? Simply because our relationship, as it had become, with the EU, was unsustainable for both sides. We were half hearted, obstructive, rebate-obsessed, whingeing, complaining members standing often on the sidelines, often in a minority of one. They were implacable in their desire for greater political and financial integration.

    Whether Cameron generally believed after his unexpected (and I suspect unwanted) 2015 election win (aided and abetted by Nick Clegg, Ed Miliband and Alex Salmond), he could persuade the EU to accept a form of semi-detached membership for the UK I don't know, but the fact it came down to an IN/OUT vote rather than a ratification of a redefined membership is as much down to the EU leaders at the time as it was Cameron's negotiation skills.

    Nine years on and for most people most of the time nothing has changed - we all have nice new passports and those who wanted to retire to Spain and Portugal now have a much harder though not impossible task but generally the EU is as invisible now we are out of it as we were when we were in it.

    That's perhaps the tragedy and the irony - as OGH repeatedly showed, it didn't really matter to most people but it was whipped into a symbolic issue of sovereignty and identity by a well-organised campaign to which those seeking to defend the status quo had no real response. It became in the end a cry of frustration and anger from many who didn't usually participate in the democratic process yet has leaving the EU resolved that frustration and anger?

    ‘We were half hearted, obstructive, rebate-obsessed, whingeing, complaining’

    Wrong tense.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 38,917
    stodge said:

    It became in the end a cry of frustration and anger from many who didn't usually participate in the democratic process yet has leaving the EU resolved that frustration and anger?

    Ummm, no
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,401
    stodge said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    Yes, fine, but how would you reduce the deficit and borrowing?

    I imagine we'll hear the same old mantras of "supply side reform", "50% haircut for public sector pensions", "tax cuts and spending cuts" from the usual suspects but was any of that on offer last July? Is any of that on offer now? You won't hear it from Labour, Reform, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats or Greens - is there some other political movement advocating a return to a blanced budget? How would they achieve it?

    "Putting your hands over your ears and humming", as you put it, isn't fair. Plenty of people see the problem but, as with the "small boats", no one has come up with an easy, popular and cheap solution - if there were one, we'd have done it by now.

    So it comes back to who has to feel the pain - which group can you demonise enough so everyone will say "yeah, let them suffer" - public sector workers, pensioners, others on welfare, the wealthy, property owners, Scottish lawyers, children - where would you like to start?

    No, the usual whingeing every month about the borrowing numbers belies the fact of how we got here and the fact previous Governments allowed us to reach this point. I know what I would do but when I've proposed it, I've had a barrage of abuse from those who already feel "overtaxed" and complain "they" can't pay any more but someone else could and should.
    It is simple, income tax/vat rises , end the gold plated public service pensions, 10% reduction in all benefits and then frozen for at least 5 years. No pay rises for public service unless self funding.
    Easy peasy just needs some bollocks.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,292

    boulay said:

    Apropos of nothing, saw the world's tiniest nun - top 5 at least - in London yesterday.

    Was reminded of the great Gene Hunt line "She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot."

    I was walking through town a few weeks ago and saw this absolutely beautiful Japanese nun sitting by a fountain. I was in the middle of thinking it was a terrible waste of such a face when I realised on getting closer that she was actually just wearing a thick white hair band holding back her long black hair and a black dress.

    So you chatted her up obvs.
    Tragically not, I didn’t want to ruin her day and anyway I doubt she was drunk enough at 10.45 in the morning to be vaguely receptive to my nonsense.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 1,167
    Scott_xP said:

    Did none of these people read Dan's article?

    It’s 24 June, 2025, and Britain is marking its annual Independence Day celebration. As the fireworks stream through the summer sky, still not quite dark, we wonder why it took us so long to leave. The years that followed the 2016 referendum didn’t just reinvigorate our economy, our democracy and our liberty. They improved relations with our neighbours.

    The United Kingdom is now the region’s foremost knowledge-based economy. We lead the world in biotech, law, education, the audio-visual sector, financial services and software. New industries, from 3D printing to driverless cars, have sprung up around the country. Older industries, too, have revived as energy prices have fallen back to global levels: steel, cement, paper, plastics and ceramics producers have become competitive again.

    The EU, meanwhile, continues to turn inwards, clinging to its dream of political amalgamation as the euro and migration crises worsen. Its population is ageing, its share of world GDP shrinking and its peoples protesting. “We have the most comprehensive workers’ rights in the world”, complains Jean-Claude Juncker, who has recently begun in his second term as President of the European Federation, “but we have fewer and fewer workers”.

    The last thing most EU leaders wanted, once the shock had worn off, was a protracted argument with the United Kingdom which, on the day it left, became their single biggest market. Terms were agreed easily enough. Britain withdrew from the EU’s political structures and institutions, but kept its tariff-free arrangements in place. The rights of EU nationals living in the UK were confirmed, and various reciprocal deals on healthcare and the like remained. For the sake of administrative convenience, Brexit took effect formally on 1 July 2019, to coincide with the mandates of a new European Parliament and Commission.


    The problem is that as recently demonstrated, 31% voting for a single party could be enough for a majority. So the UK will realign gradually and quietly, 2 slow steps forward under sensible govts, drifting backwards or stationary under other govts.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,716

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    It really won't. Under whatever government it happens we will be looking at massive increases in tax and massive cuts in spending. All of us will be significantly poorer but inevitably those dependent upon the State will be the worse hit.

    We can ameliorate this to some extent by acting now but everything Reeves does makes it worse. These ridiculous arguments about whether she can make her ridiculous targets make those realigning the deck chairs on the Titanic look both purposeful and useful.
    I wonder what the impositions will be.

    +2% basic income tax
    +5% top rate income tax
    +20% council tax plus extra council tax bands
    +10p fuel duty

    End of the triple lock on pensions
    End of pensions credits
    End of WFA
    Rapid increase in state retirement age to 70
    20% reduction in invalidity benefits

    Immediate conversion of future public sector pension schemes from DB to DC
    10% reduction in current DB payments over £50k pa
    10% reduction in public sector pay above £100k pa

    Don't know how much all that would save but I doubt it would be enough.
    Oddly enough, I could support most of that.

    I'm a little twitchy about reductions in invalidity benefits but we also need to tackle the social care issue which is bankrupting even well-run councils and needs a more comprehensive national approach.

    On tax I'd have 25p basic and a single top rate of 50p BUT I would restore the thresholds to where they would have been allowing for inflation - in other words, eliminate the iniquitous Conservative "fiscal drag".
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,768
    malcolmg said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    Im waiting for crossover when Reeves borrows more in a month than the £22billion she claimed she had found and needed to do an emergency budget,

    She truly is appalling.
    You will not have long to wait Alan
    It is shocking that Reeves receives increased tax receipts and yet has to borrow 17.7 billion for May, the second highest figure since 1993

    Tax, spend, borrow always happens under Labour and our grandchildren will pay the price

    Hopefully Labour will be out of Office within 4 years
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,401
    DavidL said:

    stodge said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    Yes, fine, but how would you reduce the deficit and borrowing?

    I imagine we'll hear the same old mantras of "supply side reform", "50% haircut for public sector pensions", "tax cuts and spending cuts" from the usual suspects but was any of that on offer last July? Is any of that on offer now? You won't hear it from Labour, Reform, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats or Greens - is there some other political movement advocating a return to a blanced budget? How would they achieve it?

    "Putting your hands over your ears and humming", as you put it, isn't fair. Plenty of people see the problem but, as with the "small boats", no one has come up with an easy, popular and cheap solution - if there were one, we'd have done it by now.

    So it comes back to who has to feel the pain - which group can you demonise enough so everyone will say "yeah, let them suffer" - public sector workers, pensioners, others on welfare, the wealthy, property owners, Scottish lawyers, children - where would you like to start?

    No, the usual whingeing every month about the borrowing numbers belies the fact of how we got here and the fact previous Governments allowed us to reach this point. I know what I would do but when I've proposed it, I've had a barrage of abuse from those who already feel "overtaxed" and complain "they" can't pay any more but someone else could and should.
    There are no easy or popular ways to resolve this problem, hence none of the parties being willing to face it.

    We certainly need to increase taxes and by substantial amounts.

    We need to cut the headcount of the public sector by at least 1m, possibly more. Deregulation, and a massive cut back in our regulatory sector, would be where I would start but this would be a massively challenging task that cannot be dealt with adequately in a post like this. It requires at least a decade of the grinding progress that was made in the decade after 2010 and which has since been reversed.

    I think we need to address the chronic unfairness of those who work past 67 because of their inadequate pensions paying so much tax to fund the pensions of those that retire at or even before 60. The differential benefits of public sector pensions have become indefensible.
    David, Benefits need cut big time also , allowances and free cars now for almost any imaginary ailment possible. People on pension credits are loaded , they get money flung at them. Perfect example this week, had a relative complaining that they were getting charged 25 pounds a month council tax , their friend was paying less than that, I pay 360 a month for exactly the same services. Why the F*** did I bother working hard just to be robbed to pay every Tom , Dick & Harry's bills.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,142
    stodge said:

    As for Brexit, I'm tempted to take the Chou-en-Lai approach to the French Revolution though that has apparently, like so many good apocrypha, been debunked.

    It's fascinating to see those desperately defending our decision to leave the European Union to the point it's become totemic, a symbol of the triumph of democracy, literally, the people's will.

    Cards on the table, I voted to leave as well. Why? Simply because our relationship, as it had become, with the EU, was unsustainable for both sides. We were half hearted, obstructive, rebate-obsessed, whingeing, complaining members standing often on the sidelines, often in a minority of one. They were implacable in their desire for greater political and financial integration.

    Whether Cameron generally believed after his unexpected (and I suspect unwanted) 2015 election win (aided and abetted by Nick Clegg, Ed Miliband and Alex Salmond), he could persuade the EU to accept a form of semi-detached membership for the UK I don't know, but the fact it came down to an IN/OUT vote rather than a ratification of a redefined membership is as much down to the EU leaders at the time as it was Cameron's negotiation skills.

    Nine years on and for most people most of the time nothing has changed - we all have nice new passports and those who wanted to retire to Spain and Portugal now have a much harder though not impossible task but generally the EU is as invisible now we are out of it as we were when we were in it.

    That's perhaps the tragedy and the irony - as OGH repeatedly showed, it didn't really matter to most people but it was whipped into a symbolic issue of sovereignty and identity by a well-organised campaign to which those seeking to defend the status quo had no real response. It became in the end a cry of frustration and anger from many who didn't usually participate in the democratic process yet has leaving the EU resolved that frustration and anger?

    Did that cry of frustration and anger from many who didn't usually participate in the democratic process get heeded? We have a current PM who tried all the tricks he could not to implement the way that cry of frustration was expressed. Because he knew better than the voters.

    Now it looks like he will be replaced by the guy who ran THOSE posters in the Brexit campaign. Why? Because he has filled that void, coming up with policies that Starmer tries to look like he wants to implement - but just seeming ever more desperate to be relevent.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,292
    Beeb saying that protestors have broken into Brize Norton. They said pro-Palestinians and have done something to planes.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 1,167

    Revelation of the morning, IDS is a biker (or a motorcyclist as he put it). Will the quiet man be buying a set of noisy pipes for his ride?



    Born to be mild...
    How long before he stacks it into the trees in Epping forest?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,102

    Eh? Nonsense question framing from YouGov gives:
    Closer relationship without rejoining: 67% support
    Rejoining: 56% support

    The thread today will be dominated with stale arguments. Out to enjoy the sun instead.

    Read the thread, this is the bit I was focussing on, until the Tories can turn this around then it will hinder them.


    okay, 88% of 61% = 54% of "Britons" blame the Tories
    Big deal
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,142

    stodge said:

    As for Brexit, I'm tempted to take the Chou-en-Lai approach to the French Revolution though that has apparently, like so many good apocrypha, been debunked.

    It's fascinating to see those desperately defending our decision to leave the European Union to the point it's become totemic, a symbol of the triumph of democracy, literally, the people's will.

    Cards on the table, I voted to leave as well. Why? Simply because our relationship, as it had become, with the EU, was unsustainable for both sides. We were half hearted, obstructive, rebate-obsessed, whingeing, complaining members standing often on the sidelines, often in a minority of one. They were implacable in their desire for greater political and financial integration.

    Whether Cameron generally believed after his unexpected (and I suspect unwanted) 2015 election win (aided and abetted by Nick Clegg, Ed Miliband and Alex Salmond), he could persuade the EU to accept a form of semi-detached membership for the UK I don't know, but the fact it came down to an IN/OUT vote rather than a ratification of a redefined membership is as much down to the EU leaders at the time as it was Cameron's negotiation skills.

    Nine years on and for most people most of the time nothing has changed - we all have nice new passports and those who wanted to retire to Spain and Portugal now have a much harder though not impossible task but generally the EU is as invisible now we are out of it as we were when we were in it.

    That's perhaps the tragedy and the irony - as OGH repeatedly showed, it didn't really matter to most people but it was whipped into a symbolic issue of sovereignty and identity by a well-organised campaign to which those seeking to defend the status quo had no real response. It became in the end a cry of frustration and anger from many who didn't usually participate in the democratic process yet has leaving the EU resolved that frustration and anger?

    ‘We were half hearted, obstructive, rebate-obsessed, whingeing, complaining’

    Wrong tense.
    Does anybody think the EU would remotely have any interest in engaging with the UK on rejoining talks when it looks like it is about to elect Farage? Inside the tent pissing in?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,650
    Labour cant even keep our military bases secure, Brize Norton just an open house, planes damaged.
    Maybe they should pay Mauritius to take it and rent it back from them
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 24,814

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    It really won't. Under whatever government it happens we will be looking at massive increases in tax and massive cuts in spending. All of us will be significantly poorer but inevitably those dependent upon the State will be the worse hit.

    We can ameliorate this to some extent by acting now but everything Reeves does makes it worse. These ridiculous arguments about whether she can make her ridiculous targets make those realigning the deck chairs on the Titanic look both purposeful and useful.
    I wonder what the impositions will be.

    +2% basic income tax
    +5% top rate income tax
    +20% council tax plus extra council tax bands
    +10p fuel duty

    End of the triple lock on pensions
    End of pensions credits
    End of WFA
    Rapid increase in state retirement age to 70
    20% reduction in invalidity benefits

    Immediate conversion of future public sector pension schemes from DB to DC
    10% reduction in current DB payments over £50k pa
    10% reduction in public sector pay above £100k pa

    Don't know how much all that would save but I doubt it would be enough.
    Fuel duty would be a stupid and regressive tax to rise.

    Regressive as the poorest pay by far the highest percentage of income on fuel; while the wealthiest not only pay a small percentage of income on fuel, but can avoid the tax altogether if they get an electric vehicle.

    Stupid as its a tax that is getting phased out. It will raise nothing in the future so raising it won't address the budget in the future at all.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 78,410
    I'm enjoying the parade of Brexiteers coming along to explain that the UK public are quite wrong about all this, and that none of it matters anyway.

    They're every bit as complacent and condescending as anything Cameron managed in his failed referendum campaign.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,642
    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    Rejoining the EU is clearly the best way to improve the public finances. There's the cost of the referendum to start with. That'll give the economy a significant boost, plus the politicians devoting their time to the campaign.

    Good morning, everyone.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,768

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    It really won't. Under whatever government it happens we will be looking at massive increases in tax and massive cuts in spending. All of us will be significantly poorer but inevitably those dependent upon the State will be the worse hit.

    We can ameliorate this to some extent by acting now but everything Reeves does makes it worse. These ridiculous arguments about whether she can make her ridiculous targets make those realigning the deck chairs on the Titanic look both purposeful and useful.
    I wonder what the impositions will be.

    +2% basic income tax
    +5% top rate income tax
    +20% council tax plus extra council tax bands
    +10p fuel duty

    End of the triple lock on pensions
    End of pensions credits
    End of WFA
    Rapid increase in state retirement age to 70
    20% reduction in invalidity benefits

    Immediate conversion of future public sector pension schemes from DB to DC
    10% reduction in current DB payments over £50k pa
    10% reduction in public sector pay above £100k pa

    Don't know how much all that would save but I doubt it would be enough.
    Means testing the NHS and pensions is inevitable alongside most of the above
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,800
    Even that support for a “closer relationship” will be fragile. Just wait for the first unpopular decision on products to be linked to an EU law, or court decision.

    The people who wish to join (there is no “rejoin”) the EU increasingly look like the Referendum Party of 1997 in reverse. Obsessed bores with no sense of reality.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,636
    edited 7:41AM

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    It really won't. Under whatever government it happens we will be looking at massive increases in tax and massive cuts in spending. All of us will be significantly poorer but inevitably those dependent upon the State will be the worse hit.

    We can ameliorate this to some extent by acting now but everything Reeves does makes it worse. These ridiculous arguments about whether she can make her ridiculous targets make those realigning the deck chairs on the Titanic look both purposeful and useful.
    I wonder what the impositions will be.

    +2% basic income tax
    +5% top rate income tax
    +20% council tax plus extra council tax bands
    +10p fuel duty

    End of the triple lock on pensions
    End of pensions credits
    End of WFA
    Rapid increase in state retirement age to 70
    20% reduction in invalidity benefits

    Immediate conversion of future public sector pension schemes from DB to DC
    10% reduction in current DB payments over £50k pa
    10% reduction in public sector pay above £100k pa

    Don't know how much all that would save but I doubt it would be enough.
    Fuel duty would be a stupid and regressive tax to rise.

    Regressive as the poorest pay by far the highest percentage of income on fuel; while the wealthiest not only pay a small percentage of income on fuel, but can avoid the tax altogether if they get an electric vehicle.

    Stupid as its a tax that is getting phased out. It will raise nothing in the future so raising it won't address the budget in the future at all.
    Calling taxes like fuel duty "regressive" is surrendering to a socialist way of viewing the world.

    I think it's progressive, not regressive, to try and get the the workshy and unproductive to pay their fair share of taxes and reward the enterprising and productive, who already pay far more than their fair share.

    The cash should be used to cut the REALLY regressive levies, on employment, income and enterprise.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 78,410

    Because the heat has addled my mind why is the plural of Prime Minister not Primes Minster like Attorneys-General?

    You need only consider which is the noun and which the adjective, in the particular context.

    These examples confuse because 'prime' and 'general' can be either.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,401

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    It really won't. Under whatever government it happens we will be looking at massive increases in tax and massive cuts in spending. All of us will be significantly poorer but inevitably those dependent upon the State will be the worse hit.

    We can ameliorate this to some extent by acting now but everything Reeves does makes it worse. These ridiculous arguments about whether she can make her ridiculous targets make those realigning the deck chairs on the Titanic look both purposeful and useful.
    I wonder what the impositions will be.

    +2% basic income tax
    +5% top rate income tax
    +20% council tax plus extra council tax bands
    +10p fuel duty

    End of the triple lock on pensions
    End of pensions credits
    End of WFA
    Rapid increase in state retirement age to 70
    20% reduction in invalidity benefits

    Immediate conversion of future public sector pension schemes from DB to DC
    10% reduction in current DB payments over £50k pa
    10% reduction in public sector pay above £100k pa

    Don't know how much all that would save but I doubt it would be enough.
    Fuel duty would be a stupid and regressive tax to rise.

    Regressive as the poorest pay by far the highest percentage of income on fuel; while the wealthiest not only pay a small percentage of income on fuel, but can avoid the tax altogether if they get an electric vehicle.

    Stupid as its a tax that is getting phased out. It will raise nothing in the future so raising it won't address the budget in the future at all.
    Usual bollox of economics for dummies from you, if they buy an electtric car they pay a shitload of extra tax on VAT , electricity , etc. How many years to get that back compared to paying extra fuel duty. Especially if they do low mileage. Plus more of the "poor" will not have cars so will pay nothing.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 31,206

    Because the heat has addled my mind why is the plural of Prime Minister not Primes Minster like Attorneys-General?

    Minister and Attorney are the key words while Prime and General are just descriptive.
    Why have the papers taken to writing prime minister rather than Prime Minister?
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,800
    stodge said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    It really won't. Under whatever government it happens we will be looking at massive increases in tax and massive cuts in spending. All of us will be significantly poorer but inevitably those dependent upon the State will be the worse hit.

    We can ameliorate this to some extent by acting now but everything Reeves does makes it worse. These ridiculous arguments about whether she can make her ridiculous targets make those realigning the deck chairs on the Titanic look both purposeful and useful.
    I wonder what the impositions will be.

    +2% basic income tax
    +5% top rate income tax
    +20% council tax plus extra council tax bands
    +10p fuel duty

    End of the triple lock on pensions
    End of pensions credits
    End of WFA
    Rapid increase in state retirement age to 70
    20% reduction in invalidity benefits

    Immediate conversion of future public sector pension schemes from DB to DC
    10% reduction in current DB payments over £50k pa
    10% reduction in public sector pay above £100k pa

    Don't know how much all that would save but I doubt it would be enough.
    Oddly enough, I could support most of that.

    I'm a little twitchy about reductions in invalidity benefits but we also need to tackle the social care issue which is bankrupting even well-run councils and needs a more comprehensive national approach.

    On tax I'd have 25p basic and a single top rate of 50p BUT I would restore the thresholds to where they would have been allowing for inflation - in other words, eliminate the iniquitous Conservative "fiscal drag".
    Nah, we don’t need to do any of that so long as we enthusiastically embrace the Assisted Dying Bill. That should deliver some big savings.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,716

    stodge said:

    As for Brexit, I'm tempted to take the Chou-en-Lai approach to the French Revolution though that has apparently, like so many good apocrypha, been debunked.

    It's fascinating to see those desperately defending our decision to leave the European Union to the point it's become totemic, a symbol of the triumph of democracy, literally, the people's will.

    Cards on the table, I voted to leave as well. Why? Simply because our relationship, as it had become, with the EU, was unsustainable for both sides. We were half hearted, obstructive, rebate-obsessed, whingeing, complaining members standing often on the sidelines, often in a minority of one. They were implacable in their desire for greater political and financial integration.

    Whether Cameron generally believed after his unexpected (and I suspect unwanted) 2015 election win (aided and abetted by Nick Clegg, Ed Miliband and Alex Salmond), he could persuade the EU to accept a form of semi-detached membership for the UK I don't know, but the fact it came down to an IN/OUT vote rather than a ratification of a redefined membership is as much down to the EU leaders at the time as it was Cameron's negotiation skills.

    Nine years on and for most people most of the time nothing has changed - we all have nice new passports and those who wanted to retire to Spain and Portugal now have a much harder though not impossible task but generally the EU is as invisible now we are out of it as we were when we were in it.

    That's perhaps the tragedy and the irony - as OGH repeatedly showed, it didn't really matter to most people but it was whipped into a symbolic issue of sovereignty and identity by a well-organised campaign to which those seeking to defend the status quo had no real response. It became in the end a cry of frustration and anger from many who didn't usually participate in the democratic process yet has leaving the EU resolved that frustration and anger?

    Did that cry of frustration and anger from many who didn't usually participate in the democratic process get heeded? We have a current PM who tried all the tricks he could not to implement the way that cry of frustration was expressed. Because he knew better than the voters.

    Now it looks like he will be replaced by the guy who ran THOSE posters in the Brexit campaign. Why? Because he has filled that void, coming up with policies that Starmer tries to look like he wants to implement - but just seeming ever more desperate to be relevent.
    No, that's a trite response.

    You can put what has happened since July last year at Starmer's door but what about the eight years between the Referendum and that election when the Conservatives were in Government?

    What did the Conservatives do to deal with the frustration and anger? They promised "levelling up" - what happened? Nothing. They borrowed huge amounts leaving the current and future Governments with a legacy of debt and deficit and what did they achieve? Nothing.

    Unless and until the Conservative Party and its supporters start admitting to their complicity in the current state of the country rather than simply blaming Starmer and Reeves, they won't get a hearing and they won't deserve to. Rishi Sunak's mea culpa on the morning of July 5th is the only significant admission of failure and acceptance of responsibility I've heard from any leading Conservative.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 24,897

    Blaming Brexit - nobody can say in detail for what precisely - is just an aspect of the country is broken meme which is dominating most of the western world.

    Rejoin the EU and within a year two thirds of people would be blaming that for the state of the country.

    With some justification as taxes rise and the immigration numbers soared.

    "...and the immigration numbers soared"

    Um, how can I put this...
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 30,455
    .
    malcolmg said:

    stodge said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    Yes, fine, but how would you reduce the deficit and borrowing?

    I imagine we'll hear the same old mantras of "supply side reform", "50% haircut for public sector pensions", "tax cuts and spending cuts" from the usual suspects but was any of that on offer last July? Is any of that on offer now? You won't hear it from Labour, Reform, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats or Greens - is there some other political movement advocating a return to a blanced budget? How would they achieve it?

    "Putting your hands over your ears and humming", as you put it, isn't fair. Plenty of people see the problem but, as with the "small boats", no one has come up with an easy, popular and cheap solution - if there were one, we'd have done it by now.

    So it comes back to who has to feel the pain - which group can you demonise enough so everyone will say "yeah, let them suffer" - public sector workers, pensioners, others on welfare, the wealthy, property owners, Scottish lawyers, children - where would you like to start?

    No, the usual whingeing every month about the borrowing numbers belies the fact of how we got here and the fact previous Governments allowed us to reach this point. I know what I would do but when I've proposed it, I've had a barrage of abuse from those who already feel "overtaxed" and complain "they" can't pay any more but someone else could and should.
    It is simple, income tax/vat rises , end the gold plated public service pensions, 10% reduction in all benefits and then frozen for at least 5 years. No pay rises for public service unless self funding.
    Easy peasy just needs some bollocks.
    None of that addresses the vast costs of doing anything. The problem isn't public sector pensions, its a public sector that spends the GDP of other countries administering itself.

    Go after pensions if you like, but the cut that is needed are the false market structures. We need more doctors and teachers, not more administrators, contracts and competing administrative units.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 15,596

    malcolmg said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    Im waiting for crossover when Reeves borrows more in a month than the £22billion she claimed she had found and needed to do an emergency budget,

    She truly is appalling.
    You will not have long to wait Alan
    It is shocking that Reeves receives increased tax receipts and yet has to borrow 17.7 billion for May, the second highest figure since 1993

    Tax, spend, borrow always happens under Labour and our grandchildren will pay the price

    Hopefully Labour will be out of Office within 4 years
    Record borrowing isn’t per se as shocking as it might seem: borrowing almost always grows in absolute terms year on year. The issue comes if borrowing (or more practically interest payments) increases faster than the economy.

    This month’s debt and tax figures were not actually that bad. But not that good either. Reeves badly needs a BoE base rate cut, and we badly need that Israel-Iran spat to end so the oil price can settle back.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 31,206

    Labour cant even keep our military bases secure, Brize Norton just an open house, planes damaged.
    Maybe they should pay Mauritius to take it and rent it back from them

    Memo to Kemi re PMQs – check if it was your lot or his lot who cut the RAF Regiment and Police.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,134
    edited 7:48AM
    JSpring said:

    FF43 said:

    moonshine said:

    Mystifying to me that there’s anyone who still gives a shit about Brexit.

    56% of the population it seems. More than voted for the thing in the first place.
    Giving an answer to a more or less binary question in a poll isn't the same thing as 'giving a shit' about it.

    The telling thing might be that support for Brexit has declined more or less in conjunction with its decline as a big political issue. If Starmer (say) made a speech today advocating re-entry then there would almost certainly be a swing back towards staying out in polls such as these.
    Fair enough. Nevertheless the firm consensus in the UK is that Brexit was a big mistake. That's a problem because no-one has decided what they are going to do about it.

    Also I wouldn't necessarily assume that there would be a swing back if talk of re-entry became more serious.
  • StereodogStereodog Posts: 1,019
    malcolmg said:

    stodge said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    Yes, fine, but how would you reduce the deficit and borrowing?

    I imagine we'll hear the same old mantras of "supply side reform", "50% haircut for public sector pensions", "tax cuts and spending cuts" from the usual suspects but was any of that on offer last July? Is any of that on offer now? You won't hear it from Labour, Reform, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats or Greens - is there some other political movement advocating a return to a blanced budget? How would they achieve it?

    "Putting your hands over your ears and humming", as you put it, isn't fair. Plenty of people see the problem but, as with the "small boats", no one has come up with an easy, popular and cheap solution - if there were one, we'd have done it by now.

    So it comes back to who has to feel the pain - which group can you demonise enough so everyone will say "yeah, let them suffer" - public sector workers, pensioners, others on welfare, the wealthy, property owners, Scottish lawyers, children - where would you like to start?

    No, the usual whingeing every month about the borrowing numbers belies the fact of how we got here and the fact previous Governments allowed us to reach this point. I know what I would do but when I've proposed it, I've had a barrage of abuse from those who already feel "overtaxed" and complain "they" can't pay any more but someone else could and should.
    It is simple, income tax/vat rises , end the gold plated public service pensions, 10% reduction in all benefits and then frozen for at least 5 years. No pay rises for public service unless self funding.
    Easy peasy just needs some bollocks.
    'gold plated' is one of those political phrases that people always put in front of public sector pensions without thinking about it.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 78,410
    Sadly true.
    Russian attacks regularly transit (for example) Romanian airspace, without hindrance.

    NATO is the sort of self defense organization that would rather mass migrate a thousand airplanes across the atlantic ocean in a giant air refueling conga line to shoot down a single shahed in Jordan rather than shoot down the shahed in its own air space.
    https://x.com/AndrewPerpetua/status/1935841909811167729
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 55,610
    AnneJGP said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    Rejoining the EU is clearly the best way to improve the public finances. There's the cost of the referendum to start with. That'll give the economy a significant boost, plus the politicians devoting their time to the campaign.

    Good morning, everyone.
    I presume you are being sarcastic? Rejoining would cost us something like £40bn a year. Money we simply don't have.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,768
    Stereodog said:

    malcolmg said:

    stodge said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    Yes, fine, but how would you reduce the deficit and borrowing?

    I imagine we'll hear the same old mantras of "supply side reform", "50% haircut for public sector pensions", "tax cuts and spending cuts" from the usual suspects but was any of that on offer last July? Is any of that on offer now? You won't hear it from Labour, Reform, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats or Greens - is there some other political movement advocating a return to a blanced budget? How would they achieve it?

    "Putting your hands over your ears and humming", as you put it, isn't fair. Plenty of people see the problem but, as with the "small boats", no one has come up with an easy, popular and cheap solution - if there were one, we'd have done it by now.

    So it comes back to who has to feel the pain - which group can you demonise enough so everyone will say "yeah, let them suffer" - public sector workers, pensioners, others on welfare, the wealthy, property owners, Scottish lawyers, children - where would you like to start?

    No, the usual whingeing every month about the borrowing numbers belies the fact of how we got here and the fact previous Governments allowed us to reach this point. I know what I would do but when I've proposed it, I've had a barrage of abuse from those who already feel "overtaxed" and complain "they" can't pay any more but someone else could and should.
    It is simple, income tax/vat rises , end the gold plated public service pensions, 10% reduction in all benefits and then frozen for at least 5 years. No pay rises for public service unless self funding.
    Easy peasy just needs some bollocks.
    'gold plated' is one of those political phrases that people always put in front of public sector pensions without thinking about it.
    I think the pensions for many public sector workers are not gold plated [ I know my daughter's isn’t] but it cannot be denied that in the upper earning groups it is a fair criticism
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,800
    Stereodog said:

    malcolmg said:

    stodge said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    Yes, fine, but how would you reduce the deficit and borrowing?

    I imagine we'll hear the same old mantras of "supply side reform", "50% haircut for public sector pensions", "tax cuts and spending cuts" from the usual suspects but was any of that on offer last July? Is any of that on offer now? You won't hear it from Labour, Reform, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats or Greens - is there some other political movement advocating a return to a blanced budget? How would they achieve it?

    "Putting your hands over your ears and humming", as you put it, isn't fair. Plenty of people see the problem but, as with the "small boats", no one has come up with an easy, popular and cheap solution - if there were one, we'd have done it by now.

    So it comes back to who has to feel the pain - which group can you demonise enough so everyone will say "yeah, let them suffer" - public sector workers, pensioners, others on welfare, the wealthy, property owners, Scottish lawyers, children - where would you like to start?

    No, the usual whingeing every month about the borrowing numbers belies the fact of how we got here and the fact previous Governments allowed us to reach this point. I know what I would do but when I've proposed it, I've had a barrage of abuse from those who already feel "overtaxed" and complain "they" can't pay any more but someone else could and should.
    It is simple, income tax/vat rises , end the gold plated public service pensions, 10% reduction in all benefits and then frozen for at least 5 years. No pay rises for public service unless self funding.
    Easy peasy just needs some bollocks.
    'gold plated' is one of those political phrases that people always put in front of public sector pensions without thinking about it.
    I haven’t seen one person ever stop to consider the impact of stopping current contributions on the closure of such a big pension scheme, with so many active pensions and preserved rights.

    It’s the nature of final or average salary schemes - take away current contributions and the employer (in this case all of us) is on the hook for all preserved rights for many years. This costs more, not less.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,800
    Nigelb said:

    Sadly true.
    Russian attacks regularly transit (for example) Romanian airspace, without hindrance.

    NATO is the sort of self defense organization that would rather mass migrate a thousand airplanes across the atlantic ocean in a giant air refueling conga line to shoot down a single shahed in Jordan rather than shoot down the shahed in its own air space.
    https://x.com/AndrewPerpetua/status/1935841909811167729

    On the question of how to deal with Russian aircraft in their airspace, the Turks got it right.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 3,552
    boulay said:

    Beeb saying that protestors have broken into Brize Norton. They said pro-Palestinians and have done something to planes.

    Cui Bono? Putin!
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,642

    .

    malcolmg said:

    stodge said:

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    Yes, fine, but how would you reduce the deficit and borrowing?

    I imagine we'll hear the same old mantras of "supply side reform", "50% haircut for public sector pensions", "tax cuts and spending cuts" from the usual suspects but was any of that on offer last July? Is any of that on offer now? You won't hear it from Labour, Reform, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats or Greens - is there some other political movement advocating a return to a blanced budget? How would they achieve it?

    "Putting your hands over your ears and humming", as you put it, isn't fair. Plenty of people see the problem but, as with the "small boats", no one has come up with an easy, popular and cheap solution - if there were one, we'd have done it by now.

    So it comes back to who has to feel the pain - which group can you demonise enough so everyone will say "yeah, let them suffer" - public sector workers, pensioners, others on welfare, the wealthy, property owners, Scottish lawyers, children - where would you like to start?

    No, the usual whingeing every month about the borrowing numbers belies the fact of how we got here and the fact previous Governments allowed us to reach this point. I know what I would do but when I've proposed it, I've had a barrage of abuse from those who already feel "overtaxed" and complain "they" can't pay any more but someone else could and should.
    It is simple, income tax/vat rises , end the gold plated public service pensions, 10% reduction in all benefits and then frozen for at least 5 years. No pay rises for public service unless self funding.
    Easy peasy just needs some bollocks.
    None of that addresses the vast costs of doing anything. The problem isn't public sector pensions, its a public sector that spends the GDP of other countries administering itself.

    Go after pensions if you like, but the cut that is needed are the false market structures. We need more doctors and teachers, not more administrators, contracts and competing administrative units.
    We have to have the administrators to deal with all the paperwork, even if it is online. In fact online means more of them because it's so much easier to make changes people can't keep up with current requirements.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 31,206

    DavidL said:

    Meanwhile another £17.7bn borrowed to fund the public sector and welfarism:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2025

    And an idiot Labour MP prefers to resign rather than do anything to slow future borrowing increases.

    It says:

    "Borrowing in the financial year to May 2025 was £37.7 billion; this was £1.6 billion more than in the same two-month period of 2024 and the third-highest April to May borrowing since monthly records began, after those of 2020 and 2021."

    And Reeves answer to this was a public spending round that will eventually add another £140bn to current spending. We are heading for a disaster and those who put their hands over their ears and hum are doing those that need protection no good at all in the medium term.
    I am resigned to the fact that we're only going to get our public spending sorted when somebody takes away our national credit card.

    It'll be fun if it happens under a Reform government.
    Arguably the worst thing David Cameron did was talk about the national credit card. If we must use that metaphor, remember also the national mortgage and family silver.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,458

    stodge said:

    As for Brexit, I'm tempted to take the Chou-en-Lai approach to the French Revolution though that has apparently, like so many good apocrypha, been debunked.

    It's fascinating to see those desperately defending our decision to leave the European Union to the point it's become totemic, a symbol of the triumph of democracy, literally, the people's will.

    Cards on the table, I voted to leave as well. Why? Simply because our relationship, as it had become, with the EU, was unsustainable for both sides. We were half hearted, obstructive, rebate-obsessed, whingeing, complaining members standing often on the sidelines, often in a minority of one. They were implacable in their desire for greater political and financial integration.

    Whether Cameron generally believed after his unexpected (and I suspect unwanted) 2015 election win (aided and abetted by Nick Clegg, Ed Miliband and Alex Salmond), he could persuade the EU to accept a form of semi-detached membership for the UK I don't know, but the fact it came down to an IN/OUT vote rather than a ratification of a redefined membership is as much down to the EU leaders at the time as it was Cameron's negotiation skills.

    Nine years on and for most people most of the time nothing has changed - we all have nice new passports and those who wanted to retire to Spain and Portugal now have a much harder though not impossible task but generally the EU is as invisible now we are out of it as we were when we were in it.

    That's perhaps the tragedy and the irony - as OGH repeatedly showed, it didn't really matter to most people but it was whipped into a symbolic issue of sovereignty and identity by a well-organised campaign to which those seeking to defend the status quo had no real response. It became in the end a cry of frustration and anger from many who didn't usually participate in the democratic process yet has leaving the EU resolved that frustration and anger?

    ‘We were half hearted, obstructive, rebate-obsessed, whingeing, complaining’

    Wrong tense.
    Does anybody think the EU would remotely have any interest in engaging with the UK on rejoining talks when it looks like it is about to elect Farage? Inside the tent pissing in?
    It would be like a publican inviting back the drunken hooligan who just smashed up his pub. Why upset the regulars for the sake of a big spending heavy drinker who can't hold his beer.

    That is not necessarily analogous of Sir Nige.
Sign In or Register to comment.