And let's be honest, Labour isn't going to win a majority anyway
Why not....The Tories aren't very good, Brexit is still divisive and as we see on here lots of natural Tories appear to have had enough with the policy direction. And if Brexit hadn't, COVID has totally turned over the apple cart.
The thing with FPTP, if you get a swing, you can quickly start gaining large numbers of seats, hence current 80 seat majority.
I think its highly unlikely given historical precedents, but the Tories appear to be giving it the good old British try.
I am very happy to discuss the positives and negatives of the Corbyn era, including the 2017 manifesto which I believe to be great. But I believe 2019 was an objective disaster and anyone trying to bring some idea of success from that election has no business in trying to tell people how Labour wins again.
I'm watching Jamie's School Dinners, the programme from years ago about Jamie Oliver and school food.
It is genuinely disgraceful what we were serving our children at school! And under a Labour Government too!!!! Shocking
Having said that we were having a laugh about a tweet yesterday. Jamie had been going on about the importance of healthy breakfasts and asked someone where they went for breakfast. The reply was "I am not telling you because you would try to get it shut down!"
Probably the best breakfast is none, or just a black coffee*. That breakfast is the most important meal of the day is a myth promoted by cereal manufacturers.
* if that is too radical, an egg or two with no toast or other carbs.
Hear, hear. Good to hear you say that. I've long been of the view that for me, a degenerate glutton, not having breakfast (because the morning is the ONLY time I don't want food - at all other times the fridge and bread bin both wink at me) is the right way to be.
The system needs the right amount and balance of nutrients, it matters not one jot what time of the day it is consumed.
Is eating late not bad for you?
No. Why would it be?
It seems to be one of the many dietary questions there is little consensus on:
And let's be honest, Labour isn't going to win a majority anyway
Why not....The Tories aren't very good, Brexit is still divisive and as we see on here lots of natural Tories appear to have had enough with the policy direction.
Because such a swing is virtually unheard of. I am not living in cloud cuckoo land
Perceptive para in the New Statesman analysis of the announcements yesterday, which relates to Philip's column:
"Politically speaking, Johnson is surely right to believe that mounting NHS waiting times (which were constantly getting longer before the pandemic and are significantly worse now) are a bigger problem for the government today than the social care crisis. But that’s the biggest reason to be dubious about claims that the money for fixing social care is going to come from yesterday’s tax hike: at no point in British political history has money from the NHS been taken back out of it and redirected to elsewhere in the British state, and it seems unlikely, to put it mildly, that we are going to start in three years’ time. So the money for social care will have to come from somewhere else, whether it’s more borrowing, taxes elsewhere, or, the most likely alternative in my view, a big I-can’t-believe-it’s-not-income-tax increase to the health and social care levy."
It's a risk but the slightly depressing thing is that even £13bn is about 9% of "normal" health spending and somewhere under 8% of current spending. Health spending tends to rise by at least 2% a year so we will need to be back to this level in 4-5 years anyway. That is what I suspect we will see, health spending "frozen" at this new increased level for a number of years until the pressure to increase yet again mounts.
We want lots more health care. We need an economy that can afford consistent real term increases in spending to achieve this. The rest of public spending is increasingly details.
And let's be honest, Labour isn't going to win a majority anyway
Why not....The Tories aren't very good, Brexit is still divisive and as we see on here lots of natural Tories appear to have had enough with the policy direction.
Because such a swing is virtually unheard of. I am not living in cloud cuckoo land
And let's be honest, Labour isn't going to win a majority anyway
Why not....The Tories aren't very good, Brexit is still divisive and as we see on here lots of natural Tories appear to have had enough with the policy direction.
Because such a swing is virtually unheard of. I am not living in cloud cuckoo land
People overreact when news happens. You are certainly correct tactically that Labour should be working towards preventing a Tory majority rather than hoping for a Labour one.
'Has Gavin Williamson ever met Marcus Rashford? “We met over Zoom and he seemed incredibly engaged, compassionate and charming". Later Williamson’s team tell me he actually met the rugby player Maro Itoje, not Rashford.'
You do know Blair wouldn't be giving a detailed plan right, just as he did not prior to 1997.
The Labour strategy has his hands all over it.
This isn't 1997.
And the social care issue has been dithered and delayed for ten years since Dilnot. So Labour needs an answer today.
As the Guardian is reporting this morning one of the reasons there will not be a big rebellion on the tory side is that Labour has no alternative plan.
No one needs to sell their house as it can be deferred until they cease to need care at end of life iirc.
I believe this is wrong - and if it is wrong Johnson is being very odd in avoiding the question
I presume Starmer is trying to turn this into a Dementia Tax moment - to get a sound bite with Johnson admitting that *someone* will have to sell their house under this plan.
'Has Gavin Williamson ever met Marcus Rashford? “We met over Zoom and he seemed incredibly engaged, compassionate and charming". Later Williamson’s team tell me he actually met the rugby player Maro Itoje, not Rashford.'
And let's be honest, Labour isn't going to win a majority anyway
Why not....The Tories aren't very good, Brexit is still divisive and as we see on here lots of natural Tories appear to have had enough with the policy direction.
Because such a swing is virtually unheard of. I am not living in cloud cuckoo land
People overreact when news happens. You are certainly correct tactically that Labour should be working towards preventing a Tory majority rather than hoping for a Labour one.
I think the thing to distinguish between is what I want and what I think is likely to happen, in the actual world in which we live.
I want, ideally, a Labour majority Government. But I don't want one right now because they have not committed to PR and I do not believe they will implement it unless they are forced to. So therefore by default I support a Labour/LD coalition/C&S.
In reality, Labour is not going to win a majority because the swing required is absurd and anyone pretending Starmer is going to do better than Blair is off their face. I'm not going to sit here and pretend otherwise. Therefore, as I have said many times the intelligent thing for Labour to do is to ensure a Lib Dem revival and stay the hell out of their seats.
The Tory majority collapses because of the Lib Dems, not Labour, IMHO.
It so happens that what I want happens to align with what I think will happen. But that is not a necessity and could change.
You do know Blair wouldn't be giving a detailed plan right, just as he did not prior to 1997.
The Labour strategy has his hands all over it.
This isn't 1997.
And the social care issue has been dithered and delayed for ten years since Dilnot. So Labour needs an answer today.
As the Guardian is reporting this morning one of the reasons there will not be a big rebellion on the tory side is that Labour has no alternative plan.
It is Hobson's choice.
It isn't 1997 - but I think the way Labour wins an election/governs, is probably to listen to the man who won three elections. Not the man who lost two
No one needs to sell their house as it can be deferred until they cease to need care at end of life iirc.
I believe this is wrong - and if it is wrong Johnson is being very odd in avoiding the question
It can be deferred until their cease care or pass away
My son in law is doing exactly that just now
The norm is that the local authority will take a charge over the house which will only be called up on death but many families are content to sell the house once it is clear that the elderly person is in a home and not coming back. So, some will sell their homes through choice.
No one needs to sell their house as it can be deferred until they cease to need care at end of life iirc.
I believe this is wrong - and if it is wrong Johnson is being very odd in avoiding the question
It can be deferred until their cease care or pass away
My son in law is doing exactly that just now
The norm is that the local authority will take a charge over the house which will only be called up on death but many families are content to sell the house once it is clear that the elderly person is in a home and not coming back. So, some will sell their homes through choice.
Yes agreed but there is no forced sale while still in care
'Has Gavin Williamson ever met Marcus Rashford? “We met over Zoom and he seemed incredibly engaged, compassionate and charming". Later Williamson’s team tell me he actually met the rugby player Maro Itoje, not Rashford.'
I disagree with @Philip_Thompson on many things. But, on topic, he is spot on. Marginal tax rates for the low paid have long been a scandal. They are even worse if you are on UC. This government just made them much worse. Almost anything else would been fairer and more incentive to a productive economy. Absolutely no excuse accepted by me. Thanks for the effective and affecting precis of just what a dire policy this is.
'Has Gavin Williamson ever met Marcus Rashford? “We met over Zoom and he seemed incredibly engaged, compassionate and charming". Later Williamson’s team tell me he actually met the rugby player Maro Itoje, not Rashford.'
I'm watching Jamie's School Dinners, the programme from years ago about Jamie Oliver and school food.
It is genuinely disgraceful what we were serving our children at school! And under a Labour Government too!!!! Shocking
Having said that we were having a laugh about a tweet yesterday. Jamie had been going on about the importance of healthy breakfasts and asked someone where they went for breakfast. The reply was "I am not telling you because you would try to get it shut down!"
Probably the best breakfast is none, or just a black coffee*. That breakfast is the most important meal of the day is a myth promoted by cereal manufacturers.
You do know Blair wouldn't be giving a detailed plan right, just as he did not prior to 1997.
The Labour strategy has his hands all over it.
This isn't 1997.
And the social care issue has been dithered and delayed for ten years since Dilnot. So Labour needs an answer today.
the tories would either shit on it to distract from their own farrago or nick it in the unlikely event it was any good
no policy is the right policy for now
I have to say despite having no policies, Labour has actually lead in polls and the gap is narrowing over time (albeit because of the slow Tory collapse).
Boris quoting back to the SNP as well as Labour that this was their policy he's implemented.
That's the issue though.
Yup, what's the bloody point of the Tory party? In fact the Labour solution would have been more equitable as they wouldn't have spared rich old people from the tax rise.
Fairly even knockabout PMQ - but a noisy chamber means Starmer has to deliver at a louder pitch and against a background of Tory abuse. I suspect this will make him seem a lot more engaged and passionate. That could be very helpful.
A cunning and subtle one, as cunning as a fox who’s just been appointed Professor of Cunning at Oxford University, no doubt.
Us plebs won't find out until the next election (or maybe even after that) when the Labour MPs (this time) are returning to their constituencies and preparing for government
You do know Blair wouldn't be giving a detailed plan right, just as he did not prior to 1997.
The Labour strategy has his hands all over it.
This isn't 1997.
And the social care issue has been dithered and delayed for ten years since Dilnot. So Labour needs an answer today.
As the Guardian is reporting this morning one of the reasons there will not be a big rebellion on the tory side is that Labour has no alternative plan.
It is Hobson's choice.
The signs are that Labour would also be split on how to raise the money for social care and particularly around the role of a wealth tax.
Income tax, which personally I would have chosen, would still have increased the burden on the working poor so presumably that and NI are out.
My fear, and this is obviously hypothetical, is that Labour wouldn't agree and nothing would be done. My evidence for that is that they can't agree and they aren't proposing anything.
I'm watching Jamie's School Dinners, the programme from years ago about Jamie Oliver and school food.
It is genuinely disgraceful what we were serving our children at school! And under a Labour Government too!!!! Shocking
Having said that we were having a laugh about a tweet yesterday. Jamie had been going on about the importance of healthy breakfasts and asked someone where they went for breakfast. The reply was "I am not telling you because you would try to get it shut down!"
Probably the best breakfast is none, or just a black coffee*. That breakfast is the most important meal of the day is a myth promoted by cereal manufacturers.
You do know Blair wouldn't be giving a detailed plan right, just as he did not prior to 1997.
The Labour strategy has his hands all over it.
This isn't 1997.
And the social care issue has been dithered and delayed for ten years since Dilnot. So Labour needs an answer today.
As the Guardian is reporting this morning one of the reasons there will not be a big rebellion on the tory side is that Labour has no alternative plan.
It is Hobson's choice.
The signs are that Labour would also be split on how to raise the money for social care and particularly around the role of a wealth tax.
Income tax, which personally I would have chosen, would still have increased the burden on the working poor so presumably that and NI are out.
My fear, and this is obviously hypothetical, is that Labour wouldn't agree and nothing would be done. My evidence for that is that they can't agree and they aren't proposing anything.
As Boris so clearly identified Labour policy is the same using NI
I had no idea they had put exactly this on the table in previous cross party discussions
This is what leaning left on the economy and leaning right on culture looks like. It is a new era in British politics.....
.....Classic low tax fiscal Conservatives will hate it. Many on left will struggle to reply to it. But goes to show how tectonic plates of British politics are on move, also (imo) Johnson underestimated. Happy to be wrong but suspect much of this strengthens not weakens his appeal
BBC staff have been offered an “allyship” test which identifies whether they are more privileged than their colleagues, as part of diversity training.
The resource, called The Ally Track, begins with an online game where 10 players line up on a race track and answer 20 questions. The first to reach the finish line enjoys the most “advantages” in life.
Staff are asked questions such as “Is your player a man?”, “Does your player identify as white?” and “Has your player ever been the only person of their race in a room at work?”
Another question is “Does your player identify with the gender they were born with?”
The manual also sets out seven types of allies that staff can become in the workplace.
----
One of them, the “upstander”, is someone who “shuts down, reports and pushes back on offensive jokes and inappropriate comments, even if no one’s hurt by them”. This type of ally should “check in privately with anyone who’s been offended” by the joke and “don’t just be a bystander”.
Another ally is a “confidant”, described as someone who “gives your colleague a safe space to share their experiences” and “not to jump in with your own narrative”.
A third ally type is a “champion”, who “voluntarily defers to colleagues from underrepresented groups in meetings, events and conferences”.
I'm watching Jamie's School Dinners, the programme from years ago about Jamie Oliver and school food.
It is genuinely disgraceful what we were serving our children at school! And under a Labour Government too!!!! Shocking
Having said that we were having a laugh about a tweet yesterday. Jamie had been going on about the importance of healthy breakfasts and asked someone where they went for breakfast. The reply was "I am not telling you because you would try to get it shut down!"
Probably the best breakfast is none, or just a black coffee*. That breakfast is the most important meal of the day is a myth promoted by cereal manufacturers.
You do know Blair wouldn't be giving a detailed plan right, just as he did not prior to 1997.
The Labour strategy has his hands all over it.
This isn't 1997.
And the social care issue has been dithered and delayed for ten years since Dilnot. So Labour needs an answer today.
As the Guardian is reporting this morning one of the reasons there will not be a big rebellion on the tory side is that Labour has no alternative plan.
It is Hobson's choice.
The signs are that Labour would also be split on how to raise the money for social care and particularly around the role of a wealth tax.
Income tax, which personally I would have chosen, would still have increased the burden on the working poor so presumably that and NI are out.
My fear, and this is obviously hypothetical, is that Labour wouldn't agree and nothing would be done. My evidence for that is that they can't agree and they aren't proposing anything.
As Boris so clearly identified Labour policy is the same using NI
I had no idea they had put exactly this on the table in previous cross party discussions
Ian Birrell @ianbirrell · 2h 'If Labour has nothing to say on social care, what is the point of their party?'
You do know Blair wouldn't be giving a detailed plan right, just as he did not prior to 1997.
The Labour strategy has his hands all over it.
This isn't 1997.
And the social care issue has been dithered and delayed for ten years since Dilnot. So Labour needs an answer today.
As the Guardian is reporting this morning one of the reasons there will not be a big rebellion on the tory side is that Labour has no alternative plan.
It is Hobson's choice.
The signs are that Labour would also be split on how to raise the money for social care and particularly around the role of a wealth tax.
Income tax, which personally I would have chosen, would still have increased the burden on the working poor so presumably that and NI are out.
My fear, and this is obviously hypothetical, is that Labour wouldn't agree and nothing would be done. My evidence for that is that they can't agree and they aren't proposing anything.
As Boris so clearly identified Labour policy is the same using NI
I had no idea they had put exactly this on the table in previous cross party discussions
Similar to Iraq and the GFC then. Doesn't make it right if government and the opposition both are determined to be wrong. Only one is the government in the end.
Genuinely at this point, Cummings should just join Labour, his best chance to destroy BoJo
Arguably, Labour should join Cummings, as their best change to win a popular vote.
I just remind everyone that one of my known unknowns the other day in my header was Cummings launching some kind of party or political vehicle to unseat Johnson. Now he is using the tag #regimechange
And let's be honest, Labour isn't going to win a majority anyway
Why not....The Tories aren't very good, Brexit is still divisive and as we see on here lots of natural Tories appear to have had enough with the policy direction. And if Brexit hadn't, COVID has totally turned over the apple cart.
The thing with FPTP, if you get a swing, you can quickly start gaining large numbers of seats, hence current 80 seat majority.
I think its highly unlikely given historical precedents, but the Tories appear to be giving it the good old British try.
'Has Gavin Williamson ever met Marcus Rashford? “We met over Zoom and he seemed incredibly engaged, compassionate and charming". Later Williamson’s team tell me he actually met the rugby player Maro Itoje, not Rashford.'
A cunning and subtle one, as cunning as a fox who’s just been appointed Professor of Cunning at Oxford University, no doubt.
Us plebs won't find out until the next election (or maybe even after that) when the Labour MPs (this time) are returning to their constituencies and preparing for government
It is so cunning that if they reveal it to you, you will die with surprise and delight. So it is best kept in the dark.
'Has Gavin Williamson ever met Marcus Rashford? “We met over Zoom and he seemed incredibly engaged, compassionate and charming". Later Williamson’s team tell me he actually met the rugby player Maro Itoje, not Rashford.'
That's the 3rd time this tweet has been posted in past 30 mins.
Can I make a polite suggestion, if you are going to post a tweet (especially one that is an hour old), just do a quick "find" on the link and see if it has been posted already.....otherwise we go back to threads been just filled with repetitive tw@ttering.
This is what leaning left on the economy and leaning right on culture looks like. It is a new era in British politics.....
.....Classic low tax fiscal Conservatives will hate it. Many on left will struggle to reply to it. But goes to show how tectonic plates of British politics are on move, also (imo) Johnson underestimated. Happy to be wrong but suspect much of this strengthens not weakens his appeal
Zahawi confirming vaccine passports will go ahead, details to follow.
Again....if they always wanted to go for it and to really drive uptake in vaccines, they should have just gone for the French approach....wasted months.
This is what leaning left on the economy and leaning right on culture looks like. It is a new era in British politics.....
.....Classic low tax fiscal Conservatives will hate it. Many on left will struggle to reply to it. But goes to show how tectonic plates of British politics are on move, also (imo) Johnson underestimated. Happy to be wrong but suspect much of this strengthens not weakens his appeal
BBC staff have been offered an “allyship” test which identifies whether they are more privileged than their colleagues, as part of diversity training.
The resource, called The Ally Track, begins with an online game where 10 players line up on a race track and answer 20 questions. The first to reach the finish line enjoys the most “advantages” in life.
Staff are asked questions such as “Is your player a man?”, “Does your player identify as white?” and “Has your player ever been the only person of their race in a room at work?”
Another question is “Does your player identify with the gender they were born with?”
The manual also sets out seven types of allies that staff can become in the workplace.
----
One of them, the “upstander”, is someone who “shuts down, reports and pushes back on offensive jokes and inappropriate comments, even if no one’s hurt by them”. This type of ally should “check in privately with anyone who’s been offended” by the joke and “don’t just be a bystander”.
Another ally is a “confidant”, described as someone who “gives your colleague a safe space to share their experiences” and “not to jump in with your own narrative”.
A third ally type is a “champion”, who “voluntarily defers to colleagues from underrepresented groups in meetings, events and conferences”.
Johnson doesn't have a plan either. He keeps asking Starmer where his plan is. But his own plan doesn't remotely do what he says it will.
Johnson's plan is to implement Dilnot after ten years of wasted dither.
What is Labour's?
Our plan will be revealed within our next manifesto - why should we give you the chance to copy our hard work.
I remember the last social care plan that was revealed in a manifesto.....
The truth is this is very tricky ground for Labour to oppose, and politically Boris is introducing his plan at the bang spot on optimum point.
Yep - but were I labour I wouldn't be looking at social care in the next election - I would be looking at the health and social care tax and saying, because the people who are benefiting from it are the wealthy we will replace that tax with a wealth tax - at X% of your house price.
Zahawi confirming vaccine passports will go ahead, details to follow.
Again....if they always wanted to go for it and to really drive uptake in vaccines, they should have just gone for the French approach....wasted months.
Digital national ID and health social credit system here we come.
Well done Philip for having the courage of your convictions. I am not against a tax increase to put both the NHS and social care on a sustainable footing (the distinction is irrelevant as the NHS is mostly about pensioners anyway). Having the highest peacetime tax burden on record is inevitable with an ageing society and it will only get worse - this is a simple fact of demographics and shouldn't really be a left vs right issue. But in my opinion hiking NI not income tax or a wealth tax is the wrong way to go, for the reasons Richard gives. It's a tax that falls solely on working people.
'Has Gavin Williamson ever met Marcus Rashford? “We met over Zoom and he seemed incredibly engaged, compassionate and charming". Later Williamson’s team tell me he actually met the rugby player Maro Itoje, not Rashford.'
That's the 3rd time this tweet has been posted in past 30 mins.
Can I make a polite suggestion, if you are going to post a tweet (especially one that is an hour old), just do a quick "find" on the link and see if it has been posted already.....otherwise we go back to threads been just filled with repetitive tw@ttering.
What's going to be an extra cherry on top of the bullshit is that in the run up to 2024 the Tory party will be looking to win back it's low tax credentials and the state finances will likely be close to a current budget surplus. The Tories are going to run on a manifesto commitment to lower income tax rates to 19% and 39%. It's very clear to me now what they're doing, a net transfer of tax burden from working people (not Tories) to non-working people (Tories). It's absolutely disgusting.
What they will be able to say in 2024 is that Labour would tax you even more heavily. And that will almost certainly be true. SKS may be opportunistically opposing these tax increases but his central critique (so far as it can be ascertained) is that the government is not doing enough, not too much.
Labour will say that we all now agree taxes must go up, but they will be asking the people the Tories refuse to ask to pay more. Starmer made that pretty clear in his response to Johnson yesterday.
Might be prudent to wait until Rishi's budget in October where further tax rises may well be announced
Yep - which, of course, is one reason why all those calling for detailed, costed Labour policies so far ahead of a general election are wrong.
Yes, quite so. And for the record, those who watched Starmer's response to the statement yesterday will have heard him make it clear that rather than the NI rise on workers the extra money needed should be sought from those "with the broadest shoulders" (quote), so he's set out a clear principle. The detail can wait.
Indeed - he was very clear.
He needs a better slogan.
Would you prefer "fuck the rich"?
"Tax wealth, not workers"
I am not sure that will be as popular as you think.
It's just that is what BJO was praising Andy Burnham for saying and he's apparently the man who is going to win Labour a majority despite being no more popular than Starmer. Oh well, what would a man who flipped from Corbyn to Starmer know anyway?
Let's be honest, it's a populist supporter flipping from populist to populist. That is and never has been why I supported Labour
If there is a consensus that the state needs more money to carry out its duties - and I think there is, though I'm not sure it's yet a consensus I buy into - the question of who pays is never easy, though a consensus can usually be built around 'somebody else'. - I'm with Philip and others that the answer 'low paid workers' is probably the wrong one. - I think the answer of 'high earners' is also questionable - high earners already pay a worrying percentage of all income tax (the richest 1% pay 28% of the tax, is the stat I remember though no doubt it has changed slightly since 2019) - I'm certainly not keen to further imbalance this, since a) it would be counterproductive and probably result in lower tax revenues, since the highest earners are generally able to relocate to better tax regimes (or simply work less), and b) while I'm in favour of the rich paying a greater share, there's something unhealthy about a state without a broad tax base, and we're already worryingly exposed to the whims of a narrow strata of society. - I think the answer 'the future' - the easy answer of politicians who want to spend but not tax and who aren't answerable to the electors of the next generation - is morally questionable.
This doesn't leave us many options.
Personally, I've been persuaded in the past by the virtues of a land value tax, though I can't remember all the details of the argument. I think the thrust of it was twofold: while the division between 'earned' and 'unearned' income is full of grey areas, wealth acquired through appreciation of land values is a long way down to the 'unearned' end of the spectrum; and we're still in a position in the UK that we've been in since the Norman Conquest of a tiny number of aristocratic families owning a staggeringly disproportionate quantity of land. It's easy to be sanguine about the wealth of, say, Richard Branson, who has achieved it through his own efforts, ideas and risks; less easy to be sanguine about the wealth of the Marquis of Borsetshire who is wealthy because his great-great-great-...-grandfather was one of William the Conqueror's henchmen. I think a land value tax could also have beneficial effects in promoting a more efficient use of British land, which will be a general benefit, though I'm sure there are also arguments why it would not.
All that said, 1) we're all descended from William the Conqueror and his henchmen, as well as the Anglo-Saxons and Celts whose land they took, though few of us inherited vast swathes of Britain; and 2) it's easy to make this argument because it comes back to answering the question of who pays with 'someone else'.
I just knew Owen wouldn't let us down this morning!
Owen Jones 🌹 @OwenJones84 · 27m Labour were offered a massive open goal - "Let's introduce a wealth tax to pay for social care instead of hammering the low-paid!" - and instead wet themselves in public, leaving the Tories jubilant.
Utterly pathetic. There is no Official Opposition in this country.
Zahawi confirming vaccine passports will go ahead, details to follow.
Again....if they always wanted to go for it and to really drive uptake in vaccines, they should have just gone for the French approach....wasted months.
Digital national ID and health social credit system here we come.
I am utterly opposed to this.
Further proof that this is not a Conservative Party but a party of populists lacking any principle.
Seriously Owen has a point. This might have been an ideal time to get the public to debate amongst themselves whether a wealth tax would be better than this NI up lift levy thing.
Kate Proctor @Kate_M_Proctor This might be the most happy I've seen Boris Johnson. Pleased as punch with health & social care levy/tax hike. Riding high, saying he has a plan to fix care (granted it's emerged 19mo later than billed) + Labour doesn't.
Starmer says the Tories are hammering working ppl.
I just knew Owen wouldn't let us down this morning!
Owen Jones 🌹 @OwenJones84 · 27m Labour were offered a massive open goal - "Let's introduce a wealth tax to pay for social care instead of hammering the low-paid!" - and instead wet themselves in public, leaving the Tories jubilant.
Utterly pathetic. There is no Official Opposition in this country.
A wealth tax is electorally popular, especially if its from a high entry point. Perhaps it wouldn't raise as much as forecast as the elite find ways to avoid it, perhaps it might, but either way it would have been simple good politics from Labour to promote it.
BBC staff have been offered an “allyship” test which identifies whether they are more privileged than their colleagues, as part of diversity training.
The resource, called The Ally Track, begins with an online game where 10 players line up on a race track and answer 20 questions. The first to reach the finish line enjoys the most “advantages” in life.
Staff are asked questions such as “Is your player a man?”, “Does your player identify as white?” and “Has your player ever been the only person of their race in a room at work?”
Another question is “Does your player identify with the gender they were born with?”
The manual also sets out seven types of allies that staff can become in the workplace.
----
One of them, the “upstander”, is someone who “shuts down, reports and pushes back on offensive jokes and inappropriate comments, even if no one’s hurt by them”. This type of ally should “check in privately with anyone who’s been offended” by the joke and “don’t just be a bystander”.
Another ally is a “confidant”, described as someone who “gives your colleague a safe space to share their experiences” and “not to jump in with your own narrative”.
A third ally type is a “champion”, who “voluntarily defers to colleagues from underrepresented groups in meetings, events and conferences”.
"Hell, how can it compete with YouTube? At the low-budget end of content production, YouTube has an entire eco-system of creators who are laser focused on niche audiences, who can use new technology to produce near-broadcast quality content for them."
The thing is, this is becoming false too. Its not near-broadcast quality, its superior.
The big Youtube creators are far from "low budget" these days and many exceed the broadcast quality of the likes of the BBC e.g. Linus Tech Tips has built a whole house inside a warehouse, everything is filmed in 4k using the equipment that costs $100ks, he has a team of many people to produce videos that are just superior to any nonsense the BBC put out with the likes of Click.
Or MKBHD, its super slick production of tech videos.
Big YouTube money has rapidly moved away from idiots in their bedrooms screaming at nonsense they find on the internet.
e.g. Veritasium channel again explains science, all in 4k, with high quality graphics, animations, footage form exciting locations etc etc etc.
Zahawi confirming vaccine passports will go ahead, details to follow.
Again....if they always wanted to go for it and to really drive uptake in vaccines, they should have just gone for the French approach....wasted months.
Digital national ID and health social credit system here we come.
I am utterly opposed to this.
Further proof that this is not a Conservative Party but a party of populists lacking any principle.
Looks like I will be voting LibDem or Green in 2023/4 then.
FWIW, my opinion is the nightclub vaxpass will fail. Once uni term starts we will just see tons of students having huge house parties or if weather still ok, mass gatherings at the local park and so on.
'Has Gavin Williamson ever met Marcus Rashford? “We met over Zoom and he seemed incredibly engaged, compassionate and charming". Later Williamson’s team tell me he actually met the rugby player Maro Itoje, not Rashford.'
That's the 3rd time this tweet has been posted in past 30 mins.
Can I make a polite suggestion, if you are going to post a tweet (especially one that is an hour old), just do a quick "find" on the link and see if it has been posted already.....otherwise we go back to threads been just filled with repetitive tw@ttering.
Are you sure they are the same tweet? Maybe all tweets critical of Gavin Williamson's ability to differentiate between two different black people look the same to you?
Zahawi confirming vaccine passports will go ahead, details to follow.
Lib Dems, your time has come.
The Urgent Question was from Alistair Carmichael, Lib Dem....
Yes, got it on. I’ll be writing to my MP about this.
Notably some of the fiercest criticism is coming from the Tory benches....have avoided a revolt on the NI increase, they may have to back down on this....
Personally, I've been persuaded in the past by the virtues of a land value tax, though I can't remember all the details of the argument. I think the thrust of it was twofold: while the division between 'earned' and 'unearned' income is full of grey areas, wealth acquired through appreciation of land values is a long way down to the 'unearned' end of the spectrum; and we're still in a position in the UK that we've been in since the Norman Conquest of a tiny number of aristocratic families owning a staggeringly disproportionate quantity of land. It's easy to be sanguine about the wealth of, say, Richard Branson, who has achieved it through his own efforts, ideas and risks; less easy to be sanguine about the wealth of the Marquis of Borsetshire who is wealthy because his great-great-great-...-grandfather was one of William the Conqueror's henchmen. I think a land value tax could also have beneficial effects in promoting a more efficient use of British land, which will be a general benefit, though I'm sure there are also arguments why it would not.
One of the issues with a pure land tax is liquidity - there isn't necessarily cash each year in which to pay the tax - and any sensible level will raise far below what is needed here.
However, on the first issue, personally I believe in a proper inheritance tax - levied on the recipient - which will over time help the levelling up, but also what is currently council tax should be levied both taking into account current values, but more specifically, not have the very low upper limits it currently has. Both will help make overall tax collection fairer, but neither will be the sort of sums required for the NHS. Taxes should be looked at in totality - looking at one part of the system on its own will always give a distorted answer.
Zahawi confirming vaccine passports will go ahead, details to follow.
Lib Dems, your time has come.
The Urgent Question was from Alistair Carmichael, Lib Dem....
Yes, got it on. I’ll be writing to my MP about this.
Notably some of the fiercest criticism is coming from the Tory benches....have avoided a revolt on the NI increase, they may have to back down on this....
I reckon Labour would vote for this, but a big rebellion could hurt the government badly.
BBC staff have been offered an “allyship” test which identifies whether they are more privileged than their colleagues, as part of diversity training.
The resource, called The Ally Track, begins with an online game where 10 players line up on a race track and answer 20 questions. The first to reach the finish line enjoys the most “advantages” in life.
Staff are asked questions such as “Is your player a man?”, “Does your player identify as white?” and “Has your player ever been the only person of their race in a room at work?”
Another question is “Does your player identify with the gender they were born with?”
The manual also sets out seven types of allies that staff can become in the workplace.
----
One of them, the “upstander”, is someone who “shuts down, reports and pushes back on offensive jokes and inappropriate comments, even if no one’s hurt by them”. This type of ally should “check in privately with anyone who’s been offended” by the joke and “don’t just be a bystander”.
Another ally is a “confidant”, described as someone who “gives your colleague a safe space to share their experiences” and “not to jump in with your own narrative”.
A third ally type is a “champion”, who “voluntarily defers to colleagues from underrepresented groups in meetings, events and conferences”.
"Hell, how can it compete with YouTube? At the low-budget end of content production, YouTube has an entire eco-system of creators who are laser focused on niche audiences, who can use new technology to produce near-broadcast quality content for them."
The thing is, this is becoming false too.
The big Youtube creators are far from "low budget" these days and many exceed the broadcast quality of the likes of the BBC e.g. Linus Tech Tips has built a whole house inside a warehouse, everything is filmed in 4k using the equipment that costs $100ks, he has a team of many people to produce videos that are just superior to any nonsense the BBC put out with the likes of Click.
Then you have creators who have all of this, plus drones etc etc etc.
Plus infinite podcasts which go into far greater detail - about every subject under the sun - than even the geekiest bbc radio show
I watched episode 4 of ‘9/11, One Day in America’ last night. Every episode is intense, surprising, tear-jerking, clever, remarkable, superbly researched and structured. It knocks any BBC documentary of the last decades right out of the park, and over the next park, too
And it was made by Nat Geo, not even one of the major players
The BBC is attacked from all sides and the licence fee model is dying as we watch. Kids are barely aware of the BBC. If it wants to survive in any form it needs brilliant new ideas for new funding models, and it needs them now
No one needs to sell their house as it can be deferred until they cease to need care at end of life iirc.
I believe this is wrong - and if it is wrong Johnson is being very odd in avoiding the question
Starmer is wrong. (He knows this, of course.)
Point 39. of the proposals announced yesterday make clear that no one has to sell their home within their lifetime.
This allows the care contributions that they are liable for to be deferred until after their death. This is important because there is always a chance, I guess, that the person will improve and come out of the home in the future.
BBC staff have been offered an “allyship” test which identifies whether they are more privileged than their colleagues, as part of diversity training.
The resource, called The Ally Track, begins with an online game where 10 players line up on a race track and answer 20 questions. The first to reach the finish line enjoys the most “advantages” in life.
Staff are asked questions such as “Is your player a man?”, “Does your player identify as white?” and “Has your player ever been the only person of their race in a room at work?”
Another question is “Does your player identify with the gender they were born with?”
The manual also sets out seven types of allies that staff can become in the workplace.
----
One of them, the “upstander”, is someone who “shuts down, reports and pushes back on offensive jokes and inappropriate comments, even if no one’s hurt by them”. This type of ally should “check in privately with anyone who’s been offended” by the joke and “don’t just be a bystander”.
Another ally is a “confidant”, described as someone who “gives your colleague a safe space to share their experiences” and “not to jump in with your own narrative”.
A third ally type is a “champion”, who “voluntarily defers to colleagues from underrepresented groups in meetings, events and conferences”.
"Hell, how can it compete with YouTube? At the low-budget end of content production, YouTube has an entire eco-system of creators who are laser focused on niche audiences, who can use new technology to produce near-broadcast quality content for them."
The thing is, this is becoming false too.
The big Youtube creators are far from "low budget" these days and many exceed the broadcast quality of the likes of the BBC e.g. Linus Tech Tips has built a whole house inside a warehouse, everything is filmed in 4k using the equipment that costs $100ks, he has a team of many people to produce videos that are just superior to any nonsense the BBC put out with the likes of Click.
Then you have creators who have all of this, plus drones etc etc etc.
Plus infinite podcasts which go into far greater detail - about every subject under the sun - than even the geekiest bbc radio show
I watched episode 4 of ‘9/11, One Day in America’ last night. Every episode is intense, surprising, tear-jerking, clever, remarkable, superbly researched and structured. It knocks any BBC documentary of the last decades right out of the park, and over the next park, too
And it was made by Nat Geo, not even one of the major players
The BBC is attacked from all sides and the licence fee model is dying as we watch. Kids are barely aware of the BBC. If it wants to survive in any form it needs brilliant new ideas for new funding models, and it needs them now
I think the pandemic has also sped this up. All of a sudden for 18 months people haven't been able to move about freely, for many months stuck at home.
a) People are looking for something interesting
b) People who probably never would have got into podcasting have and also really big names have gone onto shows because they don't have much else to do, and certainly haven't been able to travel to meet the usual media gatekeepers if they have a book to plug etc.
Comments
The thing with FPTP, if you get a swing, you can quickly start gaining large numbers of seats, hence current 80 seat majority.
I think its highly unlikely given historical precedents, but the Tories appear to be giving it the good old British try.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-eating-late-bad-for-your-heart1/
Where the frig is it then?
The Labour strategy has his hands all over it.
We want lots more health care. We need an economy that can afford consistent real term increases in spending to achieve this. The rest of public spending is increasingly details.
No one needs to sell their house as it can be deferred until they cease to need care at end of life iirc.
This is an awful policy. Where is the Opposition? Where is the alternative? 🤦♂️🤬
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1435561321647546376?s=20
'Has Gavin Williamson ever met Marcus Rashford? “We met over Zoom and he seemed incredibly engaged, compassionate and charming". Later Williamson’s team tell me he actually met the rugby player Maro Itoje, not Rashford.'
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1435559102718091264?s=20
And the social care issue has been dithered and delayed for ten years since Dilnot. So Labour needs an answer today.
As the Guardian is reporting this morning one of the reasons there will not be a big rebellion on the tory side is that Labour has no alternative plan.
It is Hobson's choice.
My son in law is doing exactly that just now
I want, ideally, a Labour majority Government. But I don't want one right now because they have not committed to PR and I do not believe they will implement it unless they are forced to. So therefore by default I support a Labour/LD coalition/C&S.
In reality, Labour is not going to win a majority because the swing required is absurd and anyone pretending Starmer is going to do better than Blair is off their face. I'm not going to sit here and pretend otherwise. Therefore, as I have said many times the intelligent thing for Labour to do is to ensure a Lib Dem revival and stay the hell out of their seats.
The Tory majority collapses because of the Lib Dems, not Labour, IMHO.
It so happens that what I want happens to align with what I think will happen. But that is not a necessity and could change.
It was wrong when Labour did it, it is wrong when the Tories do it. But the Opposition have no answer as the Tories are implementing Labour policies.
I didn't vote for Labour policies to be implemented though. If I'd wanted that, I'd have voted for Labour.
What is Labour's?
no policy is the right policy for now
Matt has given up trying to be an interesting academic.
"An unpopular view" - what? It's literally the consensus view, what a muppet
It was some moment though when Boris checkmated Starmer on this
That's the issue though.
This government just made them much worse. Almost anything else would been fairer and more incentive to a productive economy.
Absolutely no excuse accepted by me.
Thanks for the effective and affecting precis of just what a dire policy this is.
'Has Gavin Williamson ever met Marcus Rashford? “We met over Zoom and he seemed incredibly engaged, compassionate and charming". Later Williamson’s team tell me he actually met the rugby player Maro Itoje, not Rashford.'
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1435559102718091264?s=20
Sell off another UK asset
Genuinely at this point, Cummings should just join Labour, his best chance to destroy BoJo
Us plebs won't find out until the next election (or maybe even after that) when the Labour MPs (this time) are returning to their constituencies and preparing for government
Income tax, which personally I would have chosen, would still have increased the burden on the working poor so presumably that and NI are out.
My fear, and this is obviously hypothetical, is that Labour wouldn't agree and nothing would be done. My evidence for that is that they can't agree and they aren't proposing anything.
I had no idea they had put exactly this on the table in previous cross party discussions
.....Classic low tax fiscal Conservatives will hate it. Many on left will struggle to reply to it. But goes to show how tectonic plates of British politics are on move, also (imo) Johnson underestimated. Happy to be wrong but suspect much of this strengthens not weakens his appeal
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1435543769303158790?s=20
The resource, called The Ally Track, begins with an online game where 10 players line up on a race track and answer 20 questions. The first to reach the finish line enjoys the most “advantages” in life.
Staff are asked questions such as “Is your player a man?”, “Does your player identify as white?” and “Has your player ever been the only person of their race in a room at work?”
Another question is “Does your player identify with the gender they were born with?”
The manual also sets out seven types of allies that staff can become in the workplace.
----
One of them, the “upstander”, is someone who “shuts down, reports and pushes back on offensive jokes and inappropriate comments, even if no one’s hurt by them”. This type of ally should “check in privately with anyone who’s been offended” by the joke and “don’t just be a bystander”.
Another ally is a “confidant”, described as someone who “gives your colleague a safe space to share their experiences” and “not to jump in with your own narrative”.
A third ally type is a “champion”, who “voluntarily defers to colleagues from underrepresented groups in meetings, events and conferences”.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/09/07/bbc-criticised-diversity-training-quiz-asking-staff-player-man/
How about just making some decent programmes instead?
There is really is a weird kind of inverse racism being espoused.
Loving that Starmer is channeling both Jezzas - "I went on the internet, and received this email".
@ianbirrell
·
2h
'If Labour has nothing to say on social care, what is the point of their party?'
The truth is this is very tricky ground for Labour to oppose, and politically Boris is introducing his plan at the bang spot on optimum point.
'Has Gavin Williamson ever met Marcus Rashford? “We met over Zoom and he seemed incredibly engaged, compassionate and charming". Later Williamson’s team tell me he actually met the rugby player Maro Itoje, not Rashford.'
Can I make a polite suggestion, if you are going to post a tweet (especially one that is an hour old), just do a quick "find" on the link and see if it has been posted already.....otherwise we go back to threads been just filled with repetitive tw@ttering.
‘The BBC is heading into a death spiral and we should worry about it’
https://twitter.com/psythor/status/1435483461498855426?s=21
I am utterly opposed to this.
I am not against a tax increase to put both the NHS and social care on a sustainable footing (the distinction is irrelevant as the NHS is mostly about pensioners anyway). Having the highest peacetime tax burden on record is inevitable with an ageing society and it will only get worse - this is a simple fact of demographics and shouldn't really be a left vs right issue. But in my opinion hiking NI not income tax or a wealth tax is the wrong way to go, for the reasons Richard gives. It's a tax that falls solely on working people.
- I'm with Philip and others that the answer 'low paid workers' is probably the wrong one.
- I think the answer of 'high earners' is also questionable - high earners already pay a worrying percentage of all income tax (the richest 1% pay 28% of the tax, is the stat I remember though no doubt it has changed slightly since 2019) - I'm certainly not keen to further imbalance this, since a) it would be counterproductive and probably result in lower tax revenues, since the highest earners are generally able to relocate to better tax regimes (or simply work less), and b) while I'm in favour of the rich paying a greater share, there's something unhealthy about a state without a broad tax base, and we're already worryingly exposed to the whims of a narrow strata of society.
- I think the answer 'the future' - the easy answer of politicians who want to spend but not tax and who aren't answerable to the electors of the next generation - is morally questionable.
This doesn't leave us many options.
Personally, I've been persuaded in the past by the virtues of a land value tax, though I can't remember all the details of the argument. I think the thrust of it was twofold: while the division between 'earned' and 'unearned' income is full of grey areas, wealth acquired through appreciation of land values is a long way down to the 'unearned' end of the spectrum; and we're still in a position in the UK that we've been in since the Norman Conquest of a tiny number of aristocratic families owning a staggeringly disproportionate quantity of land. It's easy to be sanguine about the wealth of, say, Richard Branson, who has achieved it through his own efforts, ideas and risks; less easy to be sanguine about the wealth of the Marquis of Borsetshire who is wealthy because his great-great-great-...-grandfather was one of William the Conqueror's henchmen. I think a land value tax could also have beneficial effects in promoting a more efficient use of British land, which will be a general benefit, though I'm sure there are also arguments why it would not.
All that said, 1) we're all descended from William the Conqueror and his henchmen, as well as the Anglo-Saxons and Celts whose land they took, though few of us inherited vast swathes of Britain; and 2) it's easy to make this argument because it comes back to answering the question of who pays with 'someone else'.
Owen Jones 🌹
@OwenJones84
·
27m
Labour were offered a massive open goal - "Let's introduce a wealth tax to pay for social care instead of hammering the low-paid!" - and instead wet themselves in public, leaving the Tories jubilant.
Utterly pathetic. There is no Official Opposition in this country.
Kate Proctor
@Kate_M_Proctor
This might be the most happy I've seen Boris Johnson. Pleased as punch with health & social care levy/tax hike.
Riding high, saying he has a plan to fix care (granted it's emerged 19mo later than billed) + Labour doesn't.
Starmer says the Tories are hammering working ppl.
The thing is, this is becoming false too. Its not near-broadcast quality, its superior.
The big Youtube creators are far from "low budget" these days and many exceed the broadcast quality of the likes of the BBC e.g. Linus Tech Tips has built a whole house inside a warehouse, everything is filmed in 4k using the equipment that costs $100ks, he has a team of many people to produce videos that are just superior to any nonsense the BBC put out with the likes of Click.
Or MKBHD, its super slick production of tech videos.
Big YouTube money has rapidly moved away from idiots in their bedrooms screaming at nonsense they find on the internet.
e.g. Veritasium channel again explains science, all in 4k, with high quality graphics, animations, footage form exciting locations etc etc etc.
One rule for them...
However, on the first issue, personally I believe in a proper inheritance tax - levied on the recipient - which will over time help the levelling up, but also what is currently council tax should be levied both taking into account current values, but more specifically, not have the very low upper limits it currently has. Both will help make overall tax collection fairer, but neither will be the sort of sums required for the NHS. Taxes should be looked at in totality - looking at one part of the system on its own will always give a distorted answer.
I watched episode 4 of ‘9/11, One Day in America’ last night. Every episode is intense, surprising, tear-jerking, clever, remarkable, superbly researched and structured. It knocks any BBC documentary of the last decades right out of the park, and over the next park, too
And it was made by Nat Geo, not even one of the major players
The BBC is attacked from all sides and the licence fee model is dying as we watch. Kids are barely aware of the BBC. If it wants to survive in any form it needs brilliant new ideas for new funding models, and it needs them now
Point 39. of the proposals announced yesterday make clear that no one has to sell their home within their lifetime.
This allows the care contributions that they are liable for to be deferred until after their death. This is important because there is always a chance, I guess, that the person will improve and come out of the home in the future.
a) People are looking for something interesting
b) People who probably never would have got into podcasting have and also really big names have gone onto shows because they don't have much else to do, and certainly haven't been able to travel to meet the usual media gatekeepers if they have a book to plug etc.