On a cheerier note there’s a really gorgeous spell of weather approaching
Pure sunshine over London. 21-24C for day after day. Nice
Undoubtedly contributing to my benevolent image of London in 2025. I have been looking very hard for signs of the Boriswave but haven’t seen any yet.
It's not good at all. Most of northern Europe is on a drought warning.
Yes.
Despite the wet January, in the Flatlands we are now well below normal rainfall, and the evaporation exceeds it. We've had less that 20mm since the 1st March.
Not good for bogs in a marginal environment. Fire risk will be extreme.
Yorkshire's reservoirs are ten percentage points lower than last year.
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
I could agree with most of that.
But as I was remarking the other day, it could peel off the new Reform (last week) voters, but less likely to win over the 2024 Reform voters.
Even as someone who - for now - supports Reform, I fully accept that they are Marmite. A lof of people don't WANT to vote for Farage, or Reform, and will do it with distaste. But they see no choice. The Tories abjectly failed and Labour are failing even harder and quicker. Scuzz Nation is real
So Labout can win back these people with actual practical improvements in these key areas
What's more, they have a massive majority, lots and lots of MPs who are desperate to hold on to their seats. Starmer has limitless political power, if he has the will. It's up to him
Maybe he can find some inner super-strength, and do it. He's got four years max
Labour won the last election with 33.7%. Reform were on 32% in the locals according to R&T. Marmite doesn't seem so important with these figures.
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
Well, Starmer wanted to be PM and no one said "being Prime Minister of Great Britain is easy"
It's up to him. He has the majority
I'm just countering the notion that all we do on here is carp and whine. We do carp and whine, coz it's fun - and boy did the left carp and whine from 2010-2024...
But here I am being positive. I despise Labour and hope they die. But if they take my advice and do the above, I will honestly applaud them and say, fair enough, that's a better Britain - you deserve another term. And I reckon the voters would say the same
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
I could agree with most of that.
But as I was remarking the other day, it could peel off the new Reform (last week) voters, but less likely to win over the 2024 Reform voters.
Even as someone who - for now - supports Reform, I fully accept that they are Marmite. A lof of people don't WANT to vote for Farage, or Reform, and will do it with distaste. But they see no choice. The Tories abjectly failed and Labour are failing even harder and quicker. Scuzz Nation is real
So Labout can win back these people with actual pratical improvements in these key areas
What's more, they have a massive majority, lots and lots of MPs who are desperate to hold on to their seats. Starmer has limitless political power, if he has the will. It's up to him
Maybe he can find some inner super-strength, and do it. He's got four years max
Is copying Sunak’s “Adidas Trainers with a suit” look a positive or negative?
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
Whatever your view on this, the fact they've changed their mind after a few days makes them look slightly ridiculous.
"Germany’s spy agency walks back extremist label for AfD The domestic intelligence agency steps back from labeling the AfD a confirmed extremist group — just days after making the explosive claim."
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
I could agree with most of that.
But as I was remarking the other day, it could peel off the new Reform (last week) voters, but less likely to win over the 2024 Reform voters.
Even as someone who - for now - supports Reform, I fully accept that they are Marmite. A lof of people don't WANT to vote for Farage, or Reform, and will do it with distaste. But they see no choice. The Tories abjectly failed and Labour are failing even harder and quicker. Scuzz Nation is real
So Labout can win back these people with actual pratical improvements in these key areas
What's more, they have a massive majority, lots and lots of MPs who are desperate to hold on to their seats. Starmer has limitless political power, if he has the will. It's up to him
Maybe he can find some inner super-strength, and do it. He's got four years max
Is copying Sunak’s “Adidas Trainers with a suit” look a positive or negative?
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
I could agree with most of that.
But as I was remarking the other day, it could peel off the new Reform (last week) voters, but less likely to win over the 2024 Reform voters.
Even as someone who - for now - supports Reform, I fully accept that they are Marmite. A lof of people don't WANT to vote for Farage, or Reform, and will do it with distaste. But they see no choice. The Tories abjectly failed and Labour are failing even harder and quicker. Scuzz Nation is real
So Labout can win back these people with actual pratical improvements in these key areas
What's more, they have a massive majority, lots and lots of MPs who are desperate to hold on to their seats. Starmer has limitless political power, if he has the will. It's up to him
Maybe he can find some inner super-strength, and do it. He's got four years max
Is copying Sunak’s “Adidas Trainers with a suit” look a positive or negative?
Just makes him look an even bigger twat
If you are going to do it, then wear a pair of Trump's gold sneakers. Then at least everyone could assume he was taking the piss....
Trump: We had a very good outcome with the Houthis, and we honor their word.. They took tremendous punishment. You could say there’s a lot of bravery there. But we honor their commitment and their word. They gave us their word that they wouldn't be shooting ships anymore and we honor that. https://x.com/Acyn/status/1920176510734094414
Is it perhaps related to the fact that an aircraft carrier has now dumped three $65m aircraft over the side while avoiding fire from them?
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all - the narrative is now stuck. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
Carla Denyer has stepped down as Co-leader (sic) of the Green Party.
Why did she do that? I'd've thought she was sitting pretty?
She saw that the Greens didn't win the West of England Mayoralty, and realised that she might to need to do some work in Bristol to ensure she holds her MP seat at the next election - so wants to focus on that.
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
On (7) the government could do that tomorrow. Would even be a good idea - just abolish stamp duty.
Reducing friction in the housing market has to be a good thing. Random taxation when people up size or down size to suitable sized homes, or move for work just incentivises inefficient use of our housing stock.
A radical reforming government could abolish a lot of our stupid taxes - stamp duty, IHT, NI, the weird steps in the income tax scales, and jack up VAT and income tax to compensate. It's a win in every way - less perverse economic incentives, less scope for avoidance/evasion, less work for lawyers and tax advisers. As a bonus, you could ditch several whole departments at HMRC.
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
I could agree with most of that.
But as I was remarking the other day, it could peel off the new Reform (last week) voters, but less likely to win over the 2024 Reform voters.
Even as someone who - for now - supports Reform, I fully accept that they are Marmite. A lof of people don't WANT to vote for Farage, or Reform, and will do it with distaste. But they see no choice. The Tories abjectly failed and Labour are failing even harder and quicker. Scuzz Nation is real
So Labout can win back these people with actual pratical improvements in these key areas
What's more, they have a massive majority, lots and lots of MPs who are desperate to hold on to their seats. Starmer has limitless political power, if he has the will. It's up to him
Maybe he can find some inner super-strength, and do it. He's got four years max
Is copying Sunak’s “Adidas Trainers with a suit” look a positive or negative?
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
I could agree with most of that.
But as I was remarking the other day, it could peel off the new Reform (last week) voters, but less likely to win over the 2024 Reform voters.
Even as someone who - for now - supports Reform, I fully accept that they are Marmite. A lof of people don't WANT to vote for Farage, or Reform, and will do it with distaste. But they see no choice. The Tories abjectly failed and Labour are failing even harder and quicker. Scuzz Nation is real
So Labout can win back these people with actual pratical improvements in these key areas
What's more, they have a massive majority, lots and lots of MPs who are desperate to hold on to their seats. Starmer has limitless political power, if he has the will. It's up to him
Maybe he can find some inner super-strength, and do it. He's got four years max
Is copying Sunak’s “Adidas Trainers with a suit” look a positive or negative?
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
My idea about smashing the black economy - you could frame it as progressive. Go after the abusers and make them pay restitution to the immigrants they've abused.
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
On track for 1, 5, 6. 4 can't happen without Ukraine/China situations changing... so very unlikely.
"Sotheby's halts Buddha jewels auction after India threat
"The auction house Sotheby's has postponed its sale in Hong Kong of hundreds of sacred jewels linked to the Buddha's remains, after a threat of legal action by the Indian government.
"The sale of the collection - described as one of the most astonishing archaeological finds of the modern era - had drawn criticism from Buddhist academics and monastic leaders. India had said it offended the global Buddhist community."
"The strongest piece of evidence was the video found by police on Daniel Graham's mobile phone."
"Mr Graham's argument was simple - yes, his car and phone were used in the felling but someone else had taken both, and he was asleep at home at the time."
I can't see how he gets off. Evidence against Carruthers is a bit weaker. Jury might not be able to reach a verdict on him - potentially.
"Sotheby's halts Buddha jewels auction after India threat
"The auction house Sotheby's has postponed its sale in Hong Kong of hundreds of sacred jewels linked to the Buddha's remains, after a threat of legal action by the Indian government.
"The sale of the collection - described as one of the most astonishing archaeological finds of the modern era - had drawn criticism from Buddhist academics and monastic leaders. India had said it offended the global Buddhist community."
Sounds like the Indian governement have been turning the screws for a while:
"Peppé, who wrote a piece for Sotheby’s about his family’s custodianship of the gems, said: “In light of the Indian government’s sudden interest in the gems, 25% of auction proceeds will be donated to the displaying of the main Kolkata collection of the Piprahwa gems for Buddhists and the larger public to enjoy. Another 25% will be donated to Buddhist institutions.” (guardian)
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
On (7) the government could do that tomorrow. Would even be a good idea - just abolish stamp duty.
Reducing friction in the housing market has to be a good thing. Random taxation when people up size or down size to suitable sized homes, or move for work just incentivises inefficient use of our housing stock.
A radical reforming government could abolish a lot of our stupid taxes - stamp duty, IHT, NI, the weird steps in the income tax scales, and jack up VAT and income tax to compensate. It's a win in every way - less perverse economic incentives, less scope for avoidance/evasion, less work for lawyers and tax advisers. As a bonus, you could ditch several whole departments at HMRC.
Housing transactions in Scotland are down 40% compared with pre-2008, and they are highly sensitive to tax. I don't understand why no government has done it.
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
I could agree with most of that.
But as I was remarking the other day, it could peel off the new Reform (last week) voters, but less likely to win over the 2024 Reform voters.
Even as someone who - for now - supports Reform, I fully accept that they are Marmite. A lof of people don't WANT to vote for Farage, or Reform, and will do it with distaste. But they see no choice. The Tories abjectly failed and Labour are failing even harder and quicker. Scuzz Nation is real
So Labout can win back these people with actual pratical improvements in these key areas
What's more, they have a massive majority, lots and lots of MPs who are desperate to hold on to their seats. Starmer has limitless political power, if he has the will. It's up to him
Maybe he can find some inner super-strength, and do it. He's got four years max
Is copying Sunak’s “Adidas Trainers with a suit” look a positive or negative?
Starmer = Continuity Sunak?
Sunak just sat in the chair - he wasn't really a proper PM in terms of what he did. Our last real PM before Starmer was May - no love for her at all, but she filled the office. Boris wanted to and hinted at it and then Brexit and Covid overwhelmed him, and after that he simply became a joke. Truss pushed the joke far too far.
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
My idea about smashing the black economy - you could frame it as progressive. Go after the abusers and make them pay restitution to the immigrants they've abused.
It would gut the market for illegal immigration.
Yes, but asylum seekers are not illegals, and can legally work after either getting Leave to Remain or after one year. So how would it stop the boats?
The only way to stop the boats is to rewrite our asylum laws, which means leaving the conventions, or getting a major rewrite of them (something that would get a lot of international support).
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
My idea about smashing the black economy - you could frame it as progressive. Go after the abusers and make them pay restitution to the immigrants they've abused.
It would gut the market for illegal immigration.
Yes, but asylum seekers are not illegals, and can legally work after either getting Leave to Remain or after one year. So how would it stop the boats?
The only way to stop the boats is to rewrite our asylum laws, which means leaving the conventions, or getting a major rewrite of them (something that would get a lot of international support).
The people coming on the boats are seeking asylum in the UK as a backstop, when they get caught. The intention is to end up working here.
Most are a mix of economics and social (asylum reasons).
And many (most?) work illegally while their claims are being assessed.
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
On track for 1, 5, 6. 4 can't happen without Ukraine/China situations changing... so very unlikely.
2 and3 are REALLY important. Labour will lose if they don't do either of those
Sometimes real names are better than made up ones. Eat your heart out Dickens
A man has appeared in court, charged with murder after a stabbing inside a bank in Derby city centre.
Haybe Cabdiraxmaan Nur, 47, from Normanton, Derby, was remanded in custody at Southern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court on Thursday.
You've never heard of the Matlock Cabidraxmaan-Nurs? Famous fox-hunting family. Been in Derbyshire for centuries
Well of course. The whole escapade with the young heiress and the happy snaps with the chap in Camden, just out of focus, and then all 42 of the family throwing themselves off Beachy Head? No doubt there's an explanation.
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
My idea about smashing the black economy - you could frame it as progressive. Go after the abusers and make them pay restitution to the immigrants they've abused.
It would gut the market for illegal immigration.
Yes, but asylum seekers are not illegals, and can legally work after either getting Leave to Remain or after one year. So how would it stop the boats?
The only way to stop the boats is to rewrite our asylum laws, which means leaving the conventions, or getting a major rewrite of them (something that would get a lot of international support).
That's not really the point. It's to be seen to be doing something tangible and punitive.
Sometimes real names are better than made up ones. Eat your heart out Dickens
A man has appeared in court, charged with murder after a stabbing inside a bank in Derby city centre.
Haybe Cabdiraxmaan Nur, 47, from Normanton, Derby, was remanded in custody at Southern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court on Thursday.
You've never heard of the Matlock Cabidraxmaan-Nurs? Famous fox-hunting family. Been in Derbyshire for centuries
Yes, of course I meant Haybe Cabdiraxmaan Nur MFH. The dynasty is mentioned in Trollope's 'Can you forgive her' in connection with the meet at Edgehill, where Burgo Fitzgerald rides his horse to death.
"The strongest piece of evidence was the video found by police on Daniel Graham's mobile phone."
"Mr Graham's argument was simple - yes, his car and phone were used in the felling but someone else had taken both, and he was asleep at home at the time."
I can't see how he gets off. Evidence against Carruthers is a bit weaker. Jury might not be able to reach a verdict on him - potentially.
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
On track for 1, 5, 6. 4 can't happen without Ukraine/China situations changing... so very unlikely.
2 and3 are REALLY important. Labour will lose if they don't do either of those
3 is an area where government could actually make a difference. Much more easily than any of the others, anyway.
Sometimes real names are better than made up ones. Eat your heart out Dickens
A man has appeared in court, charged with murder after a stabbing inside a bank in Derby city centre.
Haybe Cabdiraxmaan Nur, 47, from Normanton, Derby, was remanded in custody at Southern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court on Thursday.
You've never heard of the Matlock Cabidraxmaan-Nurs? Famous fox-hunting family. Been in Derbyshire for centuries
Well of course. The whole escapade with the young heiress and the happy snaps with the chap in Camden, just out of focus, and then all 42 of the family throwing themselves off Beachy Head? No doubt there's an explanation.
"all 42 of the family throwing themselves off Beachy Head"
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
My idea about smashing the black economy - you could frame it as progressive. Go after the abusers and make them pay restitution to the immigrants they've abused.
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
On track for 1, 5, 6. 4 can't happen without Ukraine/China situations changing... so very unlikely.
2 and3 are REALLY important. Labour will lose if they don't do either of those
3 is an area where government could actually make a difference. Much more easily than any of the others, anyway.
Yes, 3 is a really important one, relatively easy to do. FFS it's not like winning World War 2 (which we did in five years). We're asking the government to make our streets safer and cleaner, and maybe stop obvious shoplifting
If Labour can't even do THAT then they deserve the extinction hurtling towards them
On topic, I think the tip is a one of those good value losers. In today's febrile voting environment, it is far from impossible that you get four parties between 15 and 30% come the next election, and -thanks to their transfer friendliness*- the LibDems outpoll their share markedly.
For it to happen, the LibDems would really need to be in the 20s, though, and probably more like the mid 20s than the low 20s, and the Conservatives would need to have drifted back to 15% or so. And Reform couldn't really be above 31-32%.
And the "story" would need to the British equivalent of Macron v Le Pen, which means the LibDems would need to upgrade their leader.
So, better than a 50-1 shot. But nowhere near a 20-1 shot. The kind of bet where £5 makes sense.
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
My idea about smashing the black economy - you could frame it as progressive. Go after the abusers and make them pay restitution to the immigrants they've abused.
It would gut the market for illegal immigration.
Might not disincentivise immigration, though.
It will cause a collapse in demand for sub-minimum wage employees who can be treated like shit.
And the sale of visa (already illegal) will be hit under the same law. I suspect that this would cause a collapse in the requesting and issuance of visas. There is a whole industry for that, now.
Essentially, it gives power and agency to exploited workers.
Over the next couple of years the Lib Dems will be running a large number of local councils. This will be hard given the financial and structural problems of local government, However unlike Reform they have a cohort of experienced and well-connected councillors. A good example is Heather Kidd who has just been elected as leader of Shropshire County Council. She was previously leader of South Shropshire District Council and served on a number of LGA boards. She also has a claim to be the most popular councillor in the country. On May 1st she was re-elected in Chirbury and Worthen with 70.96% of the vote compared to 18.4% Reform, 7.7% Con, 1.47% Green, and 1.4% Lab.
Sometimes real names are better than made up ones. Eat your heart out Dickens
A man has appeared in court, charged with murder after a stabbing inside a bank in Derby city centre.
Haybe Cabdiraxmaan Nur, 47, from Normanton, Derby, was remanded in custody at Southern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court on Thursday.
You've never heard of the Matlock Cabidraxmaan-Nurs? Famous fox-hunting family. Been in Derbyshire for centuries
Well of course. The whole escapade with the young heiress and the happy snaps with the chap in Camden, just out of focus, and then all 42 of the family throwing themselves off Beachy Head? No doubt there's an explanation.
All we have to go on is the jars of pickled onions labelled 'Cabidraxmann-Nurs', with a skull and crossbones motif, which are arriving anonymously at addresses in the Staffordshire Moorlands, daily. If only we could spot the pattern...
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
On track for 1, 5, 6. 4 can't happen without Ukraine/China situations changing... so very unlikely.
2 and3 are REALLY important. Labour will lose if they don't do either of those
3 is an area where government could actually make a difference. Much more easily than any of the others, anyway.
Yes, 3 is a really important one, relatively easy to do. FFS it's not like winning World War 2 (which we did in five years). We're asking the government to make our streets safer and cleaner, and maybe stop obvious shoplifting
If Labour can't even do THAT then they deserve the extinction hurtling towards them
The obvious steps would be
1) Appoint a shoplifting czar or supremo 2) Ensure Trigger has a new head and handle for his broom 3) Purge the nation with fire and sword to create a rightous and law abiding people 4) Employ approximately 400,000 sworn constables to police each and every shop and high street 5) ? 6) Profit
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
Sometimes real names are better than made up ones. Eat your heart out Dickens
A man has appeared in court, charged with murder after a stabbing inside a bank in Derby city centre.
Haybe Cabdiraxmaan Nur, 47, from Normanton, Derby, was remanded in custody at Southern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court on Thursday.
You've never heard of the Matlock Cabidraxmaan-Nurs? Famous fox-hunting family. Been in Derbyshire for centuries
Well of course. The whole escapade with the young heiress and the happy snaps with the chap in Camden, just out of focus, and then all 42 of the family throwing themselves off Beachy Head? No doubt there's an explanation.
All we have to go on is the jars of pickled onions labelled 'Cabidraxmann-Nurs', with a skull and crossbones motif, which are arriving anonymously at addresses in the Staffordshire Moorlands, daily. If only we could spot the pattern...
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
On track for 1, 5, 6. 4 can't happen without Ukraine/China situations changing... so very unlikely.
2 and3 are REALLY important. Labour will lose if they don't do either of those
3 is an area where government could actually make a difference. Much more easily than any of the others, anyway.
Yes, 3 is a really important one, relatively easy to do. FFS it's not like winning World War 2 (which we did in five years). We're asking the government to make our streets safer and cleaner, and maybe stop obvious shoplifting
If Labour can't even do THAT then they deserve the extinction hurtling towards them
The obvious steps would be
1) Appoint a shoplifting czar or supremo 2) Ensure Trigger has a new head and handle for his broom 3) Purge the nation with fire and sword to create a rightous and law abiding people 4) Employ approximately 400,000 sworn constables to police each and every shop and high street 5) ? 6) Profit
4) will be implemented as part of my Plan for UnDictatorship.
Traffic Wardens will become a heavily armed agency. Police powers etc. Ordinary traffic wardens will be armed with SLRs (wooden furniture). Specialist teams will have tanks, artillery and small tactical nuclear weapons. While their prime focus will be on eMotorbikes, can't see why they can say hi to the shop lifters as well.
Sometimes real names are better than made up ones. Eat your heart out Dickens
A man has appeared in court, charged with murder after a stabbing inside a bank in Derby city centre.
Haybe Cabdiraxmaan Nur, 47, from Normanton, Derby, was remanded in custody at Southern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court on Thursday.
You've never heard of the Matlock Cabidraxmaan-Nurs? Famous fox-hunting family. Been in Derbyshire for centuries
Well of course. The whole escapade with the young heiress and the happy snaps with the chap in Camden, just out of focus, and then all 42 of the family throwing themselves off Beachy Head? No doubt there's an explanation.
All we have to go on is the jars of pickled onions labelled 'Cabidraxmann-Nurs', with a skull and crossbones motif, which are arriving anonymously at addresses in the Staffordshire Moorlands, daily. If only we could spot the pattern...
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
My idea about smashing the black economy - you could frame it as progressive. Go after the abusers and make them pay restitution to the immigrants they've abused.
It would gut the market for illegal immigration.
Yes, but asylum seekers are not illegals, and can legally work after either getting Leave to Remain or after one year. So how would it stop the boats?
The only way to stop the boats is to rewrite our asylum laws, which means leaving the conventions, or getting a major rewrite of them (something that would get a lot of international support).
The people coming on the boats are seeking asylum in the UK as a backstop, when they get caught. The intention is to end up working here.
Most are a mix of economics and social (asylum reasons).
And many (most?) work illegally while their claims are being assessed.
No, the vast majority of boat arrivals claim asylum immediately upon landing, so have legal status in that category.
People working illegally are a mix, but mostly of tax dodging Britons, visa overstayers, and those working while on other forms of visitor visas.
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
My idea about smashing the black economy - you could frame it as progressive. Go after the abusers and make them pay restitution to the immigrants they've abused.
It would gut the market for illegal immigration.
Yes, but asylum seekers are not illegals, and can legally work after either getting Leave to Remain or after one year. So how would it stop the boats?
The only way to stop the boats is to rewrite our asylum laws, which means leaving the conventions, or getting a major rewrite of them (something that would get a lot of international support).
The people coming on the boats are seeking asylum in the UK as a backstop, when they get caught. The intention is to end up working here.
Most are a mix of economics and social (asylum reasons).
And many (most?) work illegally while their claims are being assessed.
No, the vast majority of boat arrivals claim asylum immediately upon landing, so have legal status in that category.
People working illegally are a mix, but mostly of tax dodging Britons, visa overstayers, and those working while on other forms of visitor visas.
I wonder how many of our homeless would like to claim asylum if they got treated the same way....I suspect a lot
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
On track for 1, 5, 6. 4 can't happen without Ukraine/China situations changing... so very unlikely.
2 and3 are REALLY important. Labour will lose if they don't do either of those
3 is an area where government could actually make a difference. Much more easily than any of the others, anyway.
Yes, 3 is a really important one, relatively easy to do. FFS it's not like winning World War 2 (which we did in five years). We're asking the government to make our streets safer and cleaner, and maybe stop obvious shoplifting
If Labour can't even do THAT then they deserve the extinction hurtling towards them
The obvious steps would be
1) Appoint a shoplifting czar or supremo 2) Ensure Trigger has a new head and handle for his broom 3) Purge the nation with fire and sword to create a rightous and law abiding people 4) Employ approximately 400,000 sworn constables to police each and every shop and high street 5) ? 6) Profit
5) is surely "relaunch the policy every few months"
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
My idea about smashing the black economy - you could frame it as progressive. Go after the abusers and make them pay restitution to the immigrants they've abused.
It would gut the market for illegal immigration.
Yes, but asylum seekers are not illegals, and can legally work after either getting Leave to Remain or after one year. So how would it stop the boats?
The only way to stop the boats is to rewrite our asylum laws, which means leaving the conventions, or getting a major rewrite of them (something that would get a lot of international support).
The people coming on the boats are seeking asylum in the UK as a backstop, when they get caught. The intention is to end up working here.
Most are a mix of economics and social (asylum reasons).
And many (most?) work illegally while their claims are being assessed.
No, the vast majority of boat arrivals claim asylum immediately upon landing, so have legal status in that category.
People working illegally are a mix, but mostly of tax dodging Britons, visa overstayers, and those working while on other forms of visitor visas.
I wonder how many of our homeless would like to claim asylum if they got treated the same way....I suspect a lot
Not many when they find the reality is very different to the myths spread on social media, with conditions and restrictions generally worse than homeless hostels. This is the reality of asylum hotels:
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
My idea about smashing the black economy - you could frame it as progressive. Go after the abusers and make them pay restitution to the immigrants they've abused.
It would gut the market for illegal immigration.
Yes, but asylum seekers are not illegals, and can legally work after either getting Leave to Remain or after one year. So how would it stop the boats?
The only way to stop the boats is to rewrite our asylum laws, which means leaving the conventions, or getting a major rewrite of them (something that would get a lot of international support).
The people coming on the boats are seeking asylum in the UK as a backstop, when they get caught. The intention is to end up working here.
Most are a mix of economics and social (asylum reasons).
And many (most?) work illegally while their claims are being assessed.
No, the vast majority of boat arrivals claim asylum immediately upon landing, so have legal status in that category.
People working illegally are a mix, but mostly of tax dodging Britons, visa overstayers, and those working while on other forms of visitor visas.
The claim that they pretty much all claim asylum on landing doesn't match the accounts (by BBC reports, police etc) of large numbers who run for it. What seems to happen is that they claim asylum if caught, otherwise head into the black economy, if they can.
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
On track for 1, 5, 6. 4 can't happen without Ukraine/China situations changing... so very unlikely.
2 and3 are REALLY important. Labour will lose if they don't do either of those
3 is an area where government could actually make a difference. Much more easily than any of the others, anyway.
Yes, 3 is a really important one, relatively easy to do. FFS it's not like winning World War 2 (which we did in five years). We're asking the government to make our streets safer and cleaner, and maybe stop obvious shoplifting
If Labour can't even do THAT then they deserve the extinction hurtling towards them
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
My idea about smashing the black economy - you could frame it as progressive. Go after the abusers and make them pay restitution to the immigrants they've abused.
It would gut the market for illegal immigration.
Yes, but asylum seekers are not illegals, and can legally work after either getting Leave to Remain or after one year. So how would it stop the boats?
The only way to stop the boats is to rewrite our asylum laws, which means leaving the conventions, or getting a major rewrite of them (something that would get a lot of international support).
The people coming on the boats are seeking asylum in the UK as a backstop, when they get caught. The intention is to end up working here.
Most are a mix of economics and social (asylum reasons).
And many (most?) work illegally while their claims are being assessed.
No, the vast majority of boat arrivals claim asylum immediately upon landing, so have legal status in that category.
People working illegally are a mix, but mostly of tax dodging Britons, visa overstayers, and those working while on other forms of visitor visas.
I wonder how many of our homeless would like to claim asylum if they got treated the same way....I suspect a lot
Not many when they find the reality is very different to the myths spread on social media, with conditions and restrictions generally worse than homeless hostels. This is the reality of asylum hotels:
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
Leon-style TMI. An acute mental health episode overnight has played absolute havoc with my innards. Brain is in a much better place than it was, having accepted the need to (a) get some support and (b) fix the underlying issues which have been increasingly mentally crushing over the last few months.
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
Politically, [axing winter fuel allowance] was a supreme act of self-harm which may yet end up costing Rachel Reeves her job. Campaigners say the issue was brought up time and again on the doorstep during recent local elections, and it is widely thought to be a major cause of Labour’s drubbing on polling day.
Of all the things Rachel Reeves could have cut, this was possibly the worst target she might have chosen.
Axing the winter fuel allowance was precisely the sort of penny-wise, pound-foolish measure that Treasury officials like to sneak through while the Chancellor’s guard is down and the hunt is on for quick, emblematic fixes.
Telegraph
Cutting WFA was precisely the right thing to do, the only right thing she did in an otherwise awful budget.
The self-entitled moaning prats who are whinging need to get over it, or there can be no sensible governance if we keep kowtowing and blowing money on unearned entitlements.
I think the WFA is totemic of the government's inability to win the political debate.
It's not enough for the government to do something right, it also has to persuade the voters that they have done something right.
I think it's the defining feature of the Starmer government. Their skills of persuasion are sorely lacking. I don't suppose I've been following British politics as closely as I once would, but has the government won a single political argument in it's first ten months? I can't think of any.
From a distance there already seems to be a stench of doom emanating from this government's corpse. They're heading for a defeat that will make Sunak look like a political giant. Farage is a much more dangerous leader of the opposition than Starmer ever was. He has a lot of time to put the boot in - giving Britain yet another useless chancer as PM.
Right; the reason that doing something about the WFA was perpetually on the Treasury's list of suggestions they put to new CofEs and why successive CofEs ignored the suggestion (according to Osborne) is that it makes sense in economic terms but is a hard sell politically. There was I think a case that the government could have made for the WFA changes, but it would have required them to do it and sell it as part of a wider range of changes, so voters could see both the "this is what it's going to cost and overall where we're increasing the burden" and the "and this is what it will allow us to do that you voted us in to improve" side. As it was, the WFA change appeared as a standalone single thing that was easy for opponents to paint as a heartless removal of a benefit from vulnerable older people.
There's that mental image of an elderly person huddled up in a cold house not able to put the heating on. If you're a right wing national populist, it's an open goal for spurious emotive comparisons:
"Our own people who've worked hard all their lives can't keep warm because we're spending all the money on putting big strapping migrants, young men of fighting age, into luxury hotels."
The core message being Britain is "broken" and only when it's "fixed" can we spare any thought or resource for outsiders. Charity begins at home. I think that sentiment is common (both meanings) and is a powerful driver of RUK and Farage support.
Presumably you agree with Starmer that "charity begins abroad", and Britons should come last in every deal and instance where the British government can manage it
Labour cut the overseas aid budget. It's now less than half what it was under the Conservatives.
Doesn't most of it now go on housing asylum seekers anyway? I believe the Tories rather deviously categorised that as "overseas aid"
Most of the cut was on exactly that - aid for asylum seekers within the UK.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
What utterly ridiculous advice. "There's no point in doing anything about it coz even if we succeed people will lie"
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
But you were on here getting upset about overseas aid even though we now spend only 0.3% of GDP on it. And you're better informed than about 95% of people.
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
Well, you shouldn't be depressed to the point of suicidal ennui, which is what this sounds like
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Actually, I agree with the general tone. I just think they should choose a different battlefield to small boats, which Reform will always win. The NHS and interest rates are probably the best things to go on. A bit of energy market reform too.
My idea about smashing the black economy - you could frame it as progressive. Go after the abusers and make them pay restitution to the immigrants they've abused.
It would gut the market for illegal immigration.
Yes, but asylum seekers are not illegals, and can legally work after either getting Leave to Remain or after one year. So how would it stop the boats?
The only way to stop the boats is to rewrite our asylum laws, which means leaving the conventions, or getting a major rewrite of them (something that would get a lot of international support).
The people coming on the boats are seeking asylum in the UK as a backstop, when they get caught. The intention is to end up working here.
Most are a mix of economics and social (asylum reasons).
And many (most?) work illegally while their claims are being assessed.
No, the vast majority of boat arrivals claim asylum immediately upon landing, so have legal status in that category.
People working illegally are a mix, but mostly of tax dodging Britons, visa overstayers, and those working while on other forms of visitor visas.
The claim that they pretty much all claim asylum on landing doesn't match the accounts (by BBC reports, police etc) of large numbers who run for it. What seems to happen is that they claim asylum if caught, otherwise head into the black economy, if they can.
In practice very few asylum seekers work illegally while awaiting outcomes. They are moved about randomly, often dispersed to sites where there is no casual work, and are severely punished if found to be working. If found working illegally their asylum application is no longer valid.
Yes, we do have a problem of an illegal economy, but no it is not down to small boat arrivals.
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
I'm feeling cheery now my cold has abated, my sense of smell has returned, sunshine is coming, and I've been invited to the fourth best hotel in Luxembourg, so I'm gonna give Labour a helping hand with some serious advice
I know, radical
THIS is how they see off Reform, and win the next election
1. Slash immigration. It needs to be under 300,000 by 2028
2. Stop the boats. It doesn't have to be all of them, but there needs to be so few you have to wait weeks for the next. So, down by 80% at least (and FFS get all the asylum seekers out of hotels, fly most of them home)
3. Do something about "Scuzz Nation". The litter, the graffiti, the grot, the fake candy shops, the shoplifting. DO IT, don't talk about it. And do it so that Britons can see the visible difference on their streets
4. Make it clear that most of the Boriswave is going home
5. Shorten NHS waiting times. It doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be obviously positive by 2028
6. Make Britons richer. As with the NHS, it doesn't have to be dramatic, but the trajectory needs to be positive. Household incomes need to be higher, even if only by a few quid, in 2028 than they were in 2024
Six points. Do those and Labour can recover, see off Reform, and win
People will forgive everything else, foreign policy stupidity, Chagos, homelessness, train times, house prices, bad weather, even WFA, if Labour can just do the above
Good list. But there is a problem. Each of them is, on examination in a similar category to bright ideas like
7. Make house prices higher for sellers and lower for buyers 8. Build more houses in nice places except in all nice places 9. Smash the small boats gangs when you can't control real gang members who are prison
Leon-style TMI. An acute mental health episode overnight has played absolute havoc with my innards. Brain is in a much better place than it was, having accepted the need to (a) get some support and (b) fix the underlying issues which have been increasingly mentally crushing over the last few months.
Ah well, I need to lose some weight anyway
Sorry to hear that - take care of yourself. None of the "carrying on regardless" bloke stuff.
Will the Lib Dems be targeting enough seats to win most seats? Bearing in mind that they'd have to come from third in a lot of them?
Anti-Farage tactical voting will be incredibly difficult because the changes in support are so large. It won't be obvious to voters where Faragists could realistically win, and who will be best placed to defeat them. Do you vote for the red or blue incumbents, even though they are losing more votes, or do you switch to the yellows in the hope that red/blue voters will cop on that the yellows have the best chance, even when starting from third or fourth?
I think the Faragists are set to win lots of seats on record low shares of the vote.
Labour are likely to be down at the next election. Will the Tories, with or without Kemi, improve much on where they are now. I read that 2 Reform councillors are out already, could some scandals be due before the GE? I suspect that there may be anti-Reform tactical voting. The Lib Dems could be well placed to improve on 72 MPs. FPTP will be even more of a lottery than usual. So, what are the odds on No Overall Majority with a 2 or 3 party coalition needed?
Kenilworth & Southam is the 28th seat on the Lib Dems target list, which they'd need to win to reach 100 seats. Its vote in 2024 was: CON 36% LAB 24% LDM 20% RFM 13% GRN 6% Reform voters are not tactical voters. They won't be fazed by the party coming 4th last time. Who do anti-Farage tactical voters vote for?
This is one of many seats that Farage's lot have a better chance of winning from fourth than the Lib Dems do of winning from third.
Lib Dem targeting in 2024 was so efficient that it puts a cap on their potential for further progress at the next election. They raced very fast down a cul-de-sac.
Lib Dem targetting was based on the assumption that they would gain about 20 seats, and line the next 30 up for next time. Nobody expected the Tory collapse to be so complete that they would win the lot.
Next time out will be very different but also bear in mind that in many seats 35% will be a winning score. It's much easier to get to 35% from 10% (see Inverness, Skey and West Ross) when you can gain votes from multiple parties than to 50% from 30% when you need a direct transfer from a single party, as was usually the case in the traditional C-LD marginal.
For the LDs to get most seats it probably does need quite a large lead over everyone else, but not impossible if Labour don't deliver, the Tories stay out of contention but don't collapse entirely, and Reform decline under scrutiny and lose some of the NOTA/anti-Labour vote.
In reality, who knows what will happen in the next 4 years? There have been massive shifts over the last 4-5, no reason to assume they won't continue.
Kenilworth and Southam so far as I can tell broadly aligns with the following LE wards
Dunsmore & Learne Valley Southam, Stockton & Napton Feldon Kiveton & Red Horse Wellesbourne - includes some rurals presumably better for Reform/Con than Wellesbourne proper - LD stronghold ? Budbrooke & Bishop's tachbrook - Note Bishop's Tachbrook part of Warwick & Leamington Cubbington & Leek Wooton Lapworth and West Kenilworth Kenilworth Park Hill Kenilworth St John's
Local election results.
Con 10897 Ref 7180 LD 7288 Lab 2622 Green 4983 Ind 47
Who knows - the Tories might just be able to hang on. Lib Dems surely would target it though with activists from nearby Stratford Upon Avon.
Warks North & Bedworth and Nuneaton look nailed on for Reform, not sure about Rugby.
LDs second to the Tories, squeezing Green and Lab could see them win. Con or Ref could take it if one of them collapsed. An interesting seat.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
It's the social media world, so Labour need to get a lot better at communicating via social media.
It's not that hard. They only have to look at the way that the Trump admin creates social media about immigration enforcement, that rapidly goes viral.
The actual deportation numbers under Trump are lower than those under Biden (11% lower as at April), but the Trump admin is able to communicate a lot better & so people feel that Trump doing more on enforcement.
Starmer could just copy what Trump is doing. Post videos of masked Border Force officers nabbing migrants from London streets & bunding them into vans, and videos of migrants being deported from the UK in chains.
Off topic, but potentially good news: "In a darkening world, here’s an unlikely glimmer of light: Last month, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda signed a “declaration of principles” that could end an unspeakably brutal border war that has killed 6 million people over the past 30 years.
It’s a sign of how crazy Washington is these days that this remarkable good news went almost unnoticed. Maybe that’s because the omnipresent news magnet, President Donald Trump, had little to do with it. Instead, it was crafted quietly by a diverse group that included a bipartisan team of senators, a Biden administration intelligence chief, a Qatari mediator and, finally, the father-in-law of Trump’s daughter Tiffany." source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/05/06/congo-rwanda-peace-trump-rubio/
(I say "potentially" because there are so many ways this could go wrong -- and powerful leaders with an incentive for sabotaging it. I don't think, for example, that "Emperor" Xi will be happy with the fact that the deal may give the West access to important minerals in the area.)
It will be interesting to see how many BLM supporters applaud this effort.
Whatever your view on this, the fact they've changed their mind after a few days makes them look slightly ridiculous.
"Germany’s spy agency walks back extremist label for AfD The domestic intelligence agency steps back from labeling the AfD a confirmed extremist group — just days after making the explosive claim."
It's actually standard procedure for the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz. They did exactly the same thing in 2023, for example, when they designated the youth wing of the AfD as confirmed extremist, then put that on hold while the AfD made a challenge in court. After the AfD had lost in court they used the confirmed extremist designation again. The same has happened in other cases.
Comments
It's up to him. He has the majority
I'm just countering the notion that all we do on here is carp and whine. We do carp and whine, coz it's fun - and boy did the left carp and whine from 2010-2024...
But here I am being positive. I despise Labour and hope they die. But if they take my advice and do the above, I will honestly applaud them and say, fair enough, that's a better Britain - you deserve another term. And I reckon the voters would say the same
It's a bit naff.
I guess this is evidence for why it's not worth Labour doing much about small boats etc - in a social media world, it's simply swallowed up by misinformation or the next thing the Telegraph gets upset about. Whackamole.
"Germany’s spy agency walks back extremist label for AfD
The domestic intelligence agency steps back from labeling the AfD a confirmed extremist group — just days after making the explosive claim."
https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-spy-agency-walk-back-extremist-label-afd/
So far as I can see it's mostly loafing.
No, do it. Get it done. If Labour reduce the boats by 80%, so you can go weeks without one, PEOPLE WILL NOTICE. Farage won't be able to go to Dover and say "look, another one" - because the next one might be a fortnight away. Locals will say "yes it's much better". Numbers will visibly drop on our TVs and in the stats
Voters want things to get better and will believe good evidence if they see it. Yours is a total counsel of despair. What is the fucking point in being in politics if they have your attitude
I think you would need to get small boats down to literally zero for a few years for it to penetrate at all - the narrative is now stuck. And yes, I am pretty depressed, mainly due to the reaction to WFP.
I've no idea why you are so Coy.
"Doing anything is pointless because they lie"
When did Blair ever believe that? Thatcher? Yes I know the media is hostile but also the public WANTS a reason to be optimistic, and if they can see visible improvements in life they will ignore Farage and GBNews and vote Labour again
I genuinely believe that if Labour do my six point plan, or something like it, people will forget about WFP - it will be a stupid thing you missold four years ago, it's not like you went to war illegally (and Blair got re-elected after THAT).
Come on. Buck up. I've given you a plan, now get to it. Thank me later
Reducing friction in the housing market has to be a good thing. Random taxation when people up size or down size to suitable sized homes, or move for work just incentivises inefficient use of our housing stock.
A radical reforming government could abolish a lot of our stupid taxes - stamp duty, IHT, NI, the weird steps in the income tax scales, and jack up VAT and income tax to compensate. It's a win in every way - less perverse economic incentives, less scope for avoidance/evasion, less work for lawyers and tax advisers.
As a bonus, you could ditch several whole departments at HMRC.
Remove Carp from Fridge.
Place Carp in bin.
Drink the wine.
It would gut the market for illegal immigration.
"Sotheby's halts Buddha jewels auction after India threat
"The auction house Sotheby's has postponed its sale in Hong Kong of hundreds of sacred jewels linked to the Buddha's remains, after a threat of legal action by the Indian government.
"The sale of the collection - described as one of the most astonishing archaeological finds of the modern era - had drawn criticism from Buddhist academics and monastic leaders. India had said it offended the global Buddhist community."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9299nln2ko
It sounds terrible - and it was delicious
"Mr Graham's argument was simple - yes, his car and phone were used in the felling but someone else had taken both, and he was asleep at home at the time."
I can't see how he gets off. Evidence against Carruthers is a bit weaker. Jury might not be able to reach a verdict on him - potentially.
"Peppé, who wrote a piece for Sotheby’s about his family’s custodianship of the gems, said: “In light of the Indian government’s sudden interest in the gems, 25% of auction proceeds will be donated to the displaying of the main Kolkata collection of the Piprahwa gems for Buddhists and the larger public to enjoy. Another 25% will be donated to Buddhist institutions.” (guardian)
A man has appeared in court, charged with murder after a stabbing inside a bank in Derby city centre.
Haybe Cabdiraxmaan Nur, 47, from Normanton, Derby, was remanded in custody at Southern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court on Thursday.
The only way to stop the boats is to rewrite our asylum laws, which means leaving the conventions, or getting a major rewrite of them (something that would get a lot of international support).
Most are a mix of economics and social (asylum reasons).
And many (most?) work illegally while their claims are being assessed.
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5kugpi
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/R5k8GLgnDnY
If Labour can't even do THAT then they deserve the extinction hurtling towards them
For it to happen, the LibDems would really need to be in the 20s, though, and probably more like the mid 20s than the low 20s, and the Conservatives would need to have drifted back to 15% or so. And Reform couldn't really be above 31-32%.
And the "story" would need to the British equivalent of Macron v Le Pen, which means the LibDems would need to upgrade their leader.
So, better than a 50-1 shot. But nowhere near a 20-1 shot. The kind of bet where £5 makes sense.
* See Scotland
And the sale of visa (already illegal) will be hit under the same law. I suspect that this would cause a collapse in the requesting and issuance of visas. There is a whole industry for that, now.
Essentially, it gives power and agency to exploited workers.
If you want to reduce the number of people turning up by small boats, reduce the incentives for them to do so.
1) Appoint a shoplifting czar or supremo
2) Ensure Trigger has a new head and handle for his broom
3) Purge the nation with fire and sword to create a rightous and law abiding people
4) Employ approximately 400,000 sworn constables to police each and every shop and high street
5) ?
6) Profit
Traffic Wardens will become a heavily armed agency. Police powers etc. Ordinary traffic wardens will be armed with SLRs (wooden furniture). Specialist teams will have tanks, artillery and small tactical nuclear weapons. While their prime focus will be on eMotorbikes, can't see why they can say hi to the shop lifters as well.
People working illegally are a mix, but mostly of tax dodging Britons, visa overstayers, and those working while on other forms of visitor visas.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/22/shared-rooms-rancid-food-no-clothes-new-report-lays-bare-shocking-conditions-of-those-seeking-refuge-in-uk?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
https://honest-food.net/pike-recipe-pike-balls/
Ah well, I need to lose some weight anyway
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Y7gAzTMdMA
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01403/#:~:text=The number of asylum seekers,of whom applied for asylum.
In practice very few asylum seekers work illegally while awaiting outcomes. They are moved about randomly, often dispersed to sites where there is no casual work, and are severely punished if found to be working. If found working illegally their asylum application is no longer valid.
Yes, we do have a problem of an illegal economy, but no it is not down to small boat arrivals.
A lot of monasteries had carp ponds though its true
NEW THREAD
Con or Ref could take it if one of them collapsed.
An interesting seat.
It's not that hard. They only have to look at the way that the Trump admin creates social media about immigration enforcement, that rapidly goes viral.
The actual deportation numbers under Trump are lower than those under Biden (11% lower as at April), but the Trump admin is able to communicate a lot better & so people feel that Trump doing more on enforcement.
Starmer could just copy what Trump is doing. Post videos of masked Border Force officers nabbing migrants from London streets & bunding them into vans, and videos of migrants being deported from the UK in chains.
https://www.axios.com/2025/04/01/immigrant-removals-deportations-trump
It’s a sign of how crazy Washington is these days that this remarkable good news went almost unnoticed. Maybe that’s because the omnipresent news magnet, President Donald Trump, had little to do with it. Instead, it was crafted quietly by a diverse group that included a bipartisan team of senators, a Biden administration intelligence chief, a Qatari mediator and, finally, the father-in-law of Trump’s daughter Tiffany."
source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/05/06/congo-rwanda-peace-trump-rubio/
(I say "potentially" because there are so many ways this could go wrong -- and powerful leaders with an incentive for sabotaging it. I don't think, for example, that "Emperor" Xi will be happy with the fact that the deal may give the West access to important minerals in the area.)
It will be interesting to see how many BLM supporters applaud this effort.