The future of the Labour Party

[marinello59]

https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1563067579119329280?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Another tweet that we were not meant to actually believe. [emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That was said in 2022. About the winter of 2022. :confused:

[grunt]

That was said in 2022. About the winter of 2022. :confused:I think people are wondering about the fully costed plan to freeze energy bills. If it would have worked in 2022 when prices were at their highest, might there be a chance he could get the plan out of the cupboard and dust it down now?

[marinello59]

I think people are wondering about the fully costed plan to freeze energy bills. If it would have worked in 2022 when prices were at their highest, might there be a chance he could get the plan out of the cupboard and dust it down now?

That was two years of Tory economic turmoil ago. When Labour called for a windfall tax to be imposed to pay for the price freeze I don't think many of us would have argued with it.
The pledge made coming in to Government was to impose a windfall tax with the money being spent on green investment which I'm assuming (OK guessing :greengrin) includes GB Energy to provide a long term solution to energy pricing and security. The cynic in me doubts that and I can see it disappearing in to the general pot, hopefully I am proved wrong.
But there has been no u turn or broken promise made by Starmer. Well not on this one. Yet. :greengrin

[grunt]

That was two years of Tory economic turmoil ago. When Labour called for a windfall tax to be imposed to pay for the price freeze I don't think many of us would have argued with it.
The pledge made coming in to Government was to impose a windfall tax with the money being spent on green investment which I'm assuming (OK guessing :greengrin) includes GB Energy to provide a long term solution to energy pricing and security. The cynic in me doubts that and I can see it disappearing in to the general pot, hopefully I am proved wrong.
But there has been no u turn or broken promise made by Starmer. Well not on this one. Yet. :greengrinIf he had a "fully costed plan" to cap energy costs when the Energy Price Index for Electricity was 210, it's reasonable to ask him why he doesn't now have a plan when the Price Index is 180 (and rising).

It seems his "plan" to deal with rising energy costs is to remove the WFP for 8m pensioners. Good idea, so glad we're governed by Labour. At least they're on the side of the working people.

[marinello59]

If he had a "fully costed plan" to cap energy costs when the Energy Price Index for Electricity was 210, it's reasonable to ask him why he doesn't now have a plan when the Price Index is 180 (and rising).

It seems his "plan" to deal with rising energy costs is to remove the WFP for 8m pensioners. Good idea, so glad we're governed by Labour. At least they're on the side of the working people.

It's always reasonable to ask our politicians anything. He previously said he was going to use the money from a windfall tax to pay everyone's price rise for them. A great idea, especially when you are in opposition. That money has now been ear marked for a long term fix rather than a one off measure. If he said he had a fully costed plan now to cover all price increases this Winter without using a windfall tax then I would reckon he was telling fibs. Wouldn't you?

Your second part is more to do with the merits of universal benefits. Whilst I love personally love free stuff as a socialist I'd rather see money redistributed to the those who actually need it. In saying that restricting the benefit to those who receive pension credits brings the cliff edge too close, a greater degree of means testing should have been considered though I don't know how practical that would have been.

[Andy Bee]

It's always reasonable to ask our politicians anything. He previously said he was going to use the money from a windfall tax to pay everyone's price rise for them. A great idea, especially when you are in opposition. That money has now been ear marked for a long term fix rather than a one off measure. If he said he had a fully costed plan now to cover all price increases this Winter without using a windfall tax then I would reckon he was telling fibs. Wouldn't you?

Your second part is more to do with the merits of universal benefits. Whilst I love personally love free stuff as a socialist I'd rather see money redistributed to the those who actually need it. In saying that restricting the benefit to those who receive pension credits brings the cliff edge too close, a greater degree of means testing should have been considered though I don't know how practical that would have been.

That's the problem in this country, they have no info or systems in place that can identify certain cohorts of the population. They use a sledgehammer to pass out benefits instead of focussing on certain groups. For example, as you mention, the Winter payment, 11 million pensioners receive it now but only 1 million will qualify for it when the restrictions come into place. Of the 10 million who will not get it I would guess the majority are on a State pension only and the rest could be anything up to millionaires. Often it's stated that it's cheaper just to blanket pay everyone rather than identifying the people that either need or don't need it. I find it mental in this day and age of technology they can't pinpoint the groups that should receive the help.

[Ozyhibby]

That's the problem in this country, they have no info or systems in place that can identify certain cohorts of the population. They use a sledgehammer to pass out benefits instead of focussing on certain groups. For example, as you mention, the Winter payment, 11 million pensioners receive it now but only 1 million will qualify for it when the restrictions come into place. Of the 10 million who will not get it I would guess the majority are on a State pension only and the rest could be anything up to millionaires. Often it's stated that it's cheaper just to blanket pay everyone rather than identifying the people that either need or don't need it. I find it mental in this day and age of technology they can't pinpoint the groups that should receive the help.

It’s only needed at all because our pension provision is pathetic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

You said its confusing. No one with a few braincells thought UK energy would be ready to go on day one.


Did you truly believe that on day one of a Labour Government GB energy would emerge fully formed, manned and open for business? Would any reasonable person think that?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GVrnEIqXYAANNaD?format=png&name=900x900

[jamie_1875]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GVrnEIqXYAANNaD?format=png&name=900x900

When it says "launch" did you believe that it meant they would create GB Energy and the corporate structure and employ all the required people, pass the bill through parliament and then make the necessary investments that would hopefully bring down energy prices in a matter of days? I suspect not?

If you never believed that what did you believe "launch" actually meant?

[Jack]

That's the problem in this country, they have no info or systems in place that can identify certain cohorts of the population. They use a sledgehammer to pass out benefits instead of focussing on certain groups. For example, as you mention, the Winter payment, 11 million pensioners receive it now but only 1 million will qualify for it when the restrictions come into place. Of the 10 million who will not get it I would guess the majority are on a State pension only and the rest could be anything up to millionaires. Often it's stated that it's cheaper just to blanket pay everyone rather than identifying the people that either need or don't need it. I find it mental in this day and age of technology they can't pinpoint the groups that should receive the help.

I was thinking about this earlier, why can't HMRC and DWP get together and identify all the people that are due all the benefits that are due and pay them.

From the DWP website:
DWP and HMRC work very closely together, and share information often. This is because benefits and pensions are affected by how much you earn and the National Insurance contributions you have paid.

I can only imagine this alliance works to catch people who are overpaid benefits or have underpaid tax because there's no evidence it works to identify those unaware of what benefits they might be due.

I can't imagine it's beyond the wit of a novice programmer to identify from HMRCs records who earns above/below £x to pay the winter fuel allowance to those whose income is at a certain level and pass that information to DWP to pay.

[Ozyhibby]

I was thinking about this earlier, why can't HMRC and DWP get together and identify all the people that are due all the benefits that are due and pay them.

From the DWP website:
DWP and HMRC work very closely together, and share information often. This is because benefits and pensions are affected by how much you earn and the National Insurance contributions you have paid.

I can only imagine this alliance works to catch people who are overpaid benefits or have underpaid tax because there's no evidence it works to identify those unaware of what benefits they might be due.

I can't imagine it's beyond the wit of a novice programmer to identify from HMRCs records who earns above/below £x to pay the winter fuel allowance to those whose income is at a certain level and pass that information to DWP to pay.

My wife works in this and the system is a complete mess. Between the fraud, genuine mistakes and the government’s casual approach to recovering the money, I’m surprised the country has not gone bankrupt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

When it says "launch" did you believe that it meant they would create GB Energy and the corporate structure and employ all the required people, pass the bill through parliament and then make the necessary investments that would hopefully bring down energy prices in a matter of days? I suspect not?

If you never believed that what did you believe "launch" actually meant?
It's been 7 weeks, 50 days. Did I miss the launch? Have they actually done *anything* about GB Energy? It wasn't me that said that Labour was "ready to launch GB Energy within days".

Also: what does it matter what I believe? I'm talking about what they said. It seems they lied. That's Labour for you, it seems. Labour liars. Rings a bell, eh?

[Andy Bee]

I was thinking about this earlier, why can't HMRC and DWP get together and identify all the people that are due all the benefits that are due and pay them.

From the DWP website:
DWP and HMRC work very closely together, and share information often. This is because benefits and pensions are affected by how much you earn and the National Insurance contributions you have paid.

I can only imagine this alliance works to catch people who are overpaid benefits or have underpaid tax because there's no evidence it works to identify those unaware of what benefits they might be due.

I can't imagine it's beyond the wit of a novice programmer to identify from HMRCs records who earns above/below £x to pay the winter fuel allowance to those whose income is at a certain level and pass that information to DWP to pay.


Yup, I was reading earlier that there's hundreds of thousands of pensioners who should be receiving pension credits but are not claiming, so if they know that much then why not identify them and pay it, they would if it was an overpayment. Of course in an ideal world pensions would be adequate enough to rule out having to claim benefits on top just to afford to heat your home. I actually think it would be cheaper for the state if they could just pinpoint whatever people are in need of the help. Estonia does it but that involves the dreaded ID cards.

[jamie_1875]

It's been 7 weeks, 50 days. Did I miss the launch? Have they actually done *anything* about GB Energy? It wasn't me that said that Labour was "ready to launch GB Energy within days".

Also: what does it matter what I believe? I'm talking about what they said. It seems they lied. That's Labour for you, it seems. Labour liars. Rings a bell, eh?

Did you miss the launch? Yes.

"New Great British Energy partnership launched to turbocharge energy independence"

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-great-british-energy-partnership-launched-to-turbocharge-energy-independence

[marinello59]

It's been 7 weeks, 50 days. Did I miss the launch? Have they actually done *anything* about GB Energy? It wasn't me that said that Labour was "ready to launch GB Energy within days".

Also: what does it matter what I believe? I'm talking about what they said. It seems they lied. That's Labour for you, it seems. Labour liars. Rings a bell, eh?

25th July.
Heavily reported at time.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-great-british-energy-partnership-launched-to-turbocharge-energy-independence#:~:text=The%20Great%20British%20Energ y%20Bill,has%20access%20to%20necessary%20finances.

[Andy Bee]

When it says "launch" did you believe that it meant they would create GB Energy and the corporate structure and employ all the required people, pass the bill through parliament and then make the necessary investments that would hopefully bring down energy prices in a matter of days? I suspect not?

If you never believed that what did you believe "launch" actually meant?


"Advanced plans are in place, it's not a case these plans are begun on day one of a Labour Government, they've already begun and on day one of a Labour Government they will be implemented". That's pretty clear and that's from the BBC not Twitter. Instead of implying people are daft for believing the UK PM, shouldn't the UK PM be called out for blatant bull****. Just an observation from a Tartan Tammy wearing Independence obsessed Hibs supporter. :greengrin

[cabbageandribs1875]

they certainly fooled some muppets vote for "change" :faf: Trump would be proud

https://scontent.fman1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/456486873_918797610277665_1842854873426146306_n.jp g?_nc_cat=101&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=833d8c&_nc_ohc=bfgSUr1-fPkQ7kNvgH1uEl7&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-2.fna&oh=00_AYBib4DaQWCSVItNtWRpV3OJnLsmSpduiZnAWwW1M-2pAg&oe=66CED080

[Moulin Yarns]

they certainly fooled some muppets vote for "change" :faf: Trump would be proud

https://scontent.fman1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/456486873_918797610277665_1842854873426146306_n.jp g?_nc_cat=101&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=833d8c&_nc_ohc=bfgSUr1-fPkQ7kNvgH1uEl7&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-2.fna&oh=00_AYBib4DaQWCSVItNtWRpV3OJnLsmSpduiZnAWwW1M-2pAg&oe=66CED080

Glad I'm a grand in credit!!!

[marinello59]

they certainly fooled some muppets vote for "change" :faf: Trump would be proud

https://scontent.fman1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/456486873_918797610277665_1842854873426146306_n.jp g?_nc_cat=101&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=833d8c&_nc_ohc=bfgSUr1-fPkQ7kNvgH1uEl7&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-2.fna&oh=00_AYBib4DaQWCSVItNtWRpV3OJnLsmSpduiZnAWwW1M-2pAg&oe=66CED080

Again, that is from 2022 when Labour were in opposition. That’s not the promise they went in to the election with. Covered several posts up.

[marinello59]

Claims of cronyism when it comes to civil service appointments. This needs thoroughly investigated, it really doesn’t look good.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckg2jz3djedo

[grunt]

Did you miss the launch? Yes.

"New Great British Energy partnership launched to turbocharge energy independence"

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-great-british-energy-partnership-launched-to-turbocharge-energy-independence


25th July.
Heavily reported at time.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-great-british-energy-partnership-launched-to-turbocharge-energy-independence#:~:text=The%20Great%20British%20Energ y%20Bill,has%20access%20to%20necessary%20finances. :greengrin Must have been asleep that day.

[JimBHibees]

Yup, I was reading earlier that there's hundreds of thousands of pensioners who should be receiving pension credits but are not claiming, so if they know that much then why not identify them and pay it, they would if it was an overpayment. Of course in an ideal world pensions would be adequate enough to rule out having to claim benefits on top just to afford to heat your home. I actually think it would be cheaper for the state if they could just pinpoint whatever people are in need of the help. Estonia does it but that involves the dreaded ID cards.

Seems a complete shambles. Remember many years ago there was a lot of chat of a catastrophic IT system implementation probably a legacy of that. Can remember when the most recent change to benefits happened government announced that people had to reclaim as the change wouldn’t happen automatically. Why would it not? Can only imagine there are thousands upon thousands of people not claiming what is their right. You would think it would be within the capacity of human intelligence to be able to identify all the benefits someone is due and pay them correctly. Funny how there is no media coverage of that rather than the more regular coverage of benefits cheats.

[marinello59]

:greengrin Must have been asleep that day.

You missed yourself. We made a real day of it here, party poppers, balloons, bouncy castle for the kids. What a day. :greengrin

[grunt]

You missed yourself. We made a real day of it here, party poppers, balloons, bouncy castle for the kids. What a day. :greengrin
Story of my life tbh.

[Stairway 2 7]

they certainly fooled some muppets vote for "change" :faf: Trump would be proud

https://scontent.fman1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/456486873_918797610277665_1842854873426146306_n.jp g?_nc_cat=101&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=833d8c&_nc_ohc=bfgSUr1-fPkQ7kNvgH1uEl7&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-2.fna&oh=00_AYBib4DaQWCSVItNtWRpV3OJnLsmSpduiZnAWwW1M-2pAg&oe=66CED080

Think yesterday was the day of putting up videos and pictures from years ago. This and the videos of Starmer was from years ago when the price flew due to Russias invasion. The tories did roughly what Starmer said he would do, they heavily subsidised our bills. Starmer would have done the same. It's not relevant now as the prices have came down massively thankfully.

[Stairway 2 7]

It's been 7 weeks, 50 days. Did I miss the launch? Have they actually done *anything* about GB Energy? It wasn't me that said that Labour was "ready to launch GB Energy within days".

Also: what does it matter what I believe? I'm talking about what they said. It seems they lied. That's Labour for you, it seems. Labour liars. Rings a bell, eh?

I don't think that you think GB energy would be up and running in a few months. The job applications are just up online. How long will it take to build the offices for the headquarters? They said it will take over a year, with uk planning I'd double that for a start

[Ozyhibby]

I don't think that you think GB energy would be up and running in a few months. The job applications are just up online. How long will it take to build the offices for the headquarters? They said it will take over a year, with uk planning I'd double that for a start

Have they eleven chosen where it will be based? Where are the jobs advertised based?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Have they eleven chosen where it will be based? Where are the jobs advertised based?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aberdeen. They had said it would be either Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen but the papers in Aberdeen have said they have won it. Financial community in Edinburgh were wanting it here but I think with Aberdeen inevitably loosing all of its oil jobs we should think about replacing them or expect the cities collapse

[Ozyhibby]

Aberdeen. They had said it would be either Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen but the papers in Aberdeen have said they have won it. Financial community in Edinburgh were wanting it here but I think with Aberdeen inevitably loosing all of its oil jobs we should think about replacing them or expect the cities collapse

If it’s the same type of jobs? Isn’t GB energy just an investment company?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

If it’s the same type of jobs? Isn’t GB energy just an investment company?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah but the change over will be 30 years so it doesn't really matter what the jobs are if they are well paying. The idea I heard was most of the £8 billion would go to investment around the HQ to streamline things. If there was to follow thousands of green jobs in Aberdeen that would be great. Chances are it's all bollox though imo just like the green ports. Regardless oil will be shut of in future decades as it has to be. I think times will be tough for Aberdeen and this token won't change that

[grunt]

Think yesterday was the day of putting up videos and pictures from years ago. This and the videos of Starmer was from years ago when the price flew due to Russias invasion. The last photo I posted was from June 2024. Not exactly "years ago".


I don't think that you think GB energy would be up and running in a few months. The job applications are just up online. How long will it take to build the offices for the headquarters? They said it will take over a year, with uk planning I'd double that for a start
Who needs to build offices? There's hundreds of empty office buildings all over the country. Again, it's not what I expect, it's about Starmer's repeated use of the phrase "Day One".

[grunt]

Yeah but the change over will be 30 years so it doesn't really matter what the jobs are if they are well paying. The idea I heard was most of the £8 billion would go to investment around the HQ to streamline things. If there was to follow thousands of green jobs in Aberdeen that would be great. Chances are it's all bollox though imo just like the green ports. Regardless oil will be shut of in future decades as it has to be. I think times will be tough for Aberdeen and this token won't change that
What!!?? Thought it was supposed to be an Energy Company. I'm sure that's what Anas Sarwar called it.

[Stairway 2 7]

The last photo I posted was from June 2024. Not exactly "years ago".


Who needs to build offices? There's hundreds of empty office buildings all over the country. Again, it's not what I expect, it's about Starmer's repeated use of the phrase "Day One".

I'm not sure what photo you're talking about I didn't quote you, I'm talking about Starmer saying he'd freeze the price in 2022 and MF talking about Godley.

As for GB energy it's just ludicrous to think it would be open day one. Labour didn't say it is think 99% of the population wouldn't think they meant that or believe that is possible. They started it straight away, the jobs are online as we speak.

[Andy Bee]

Yeah but the change over will be 30 years so it doesn't really matter what the jobs are if they are well paying. The idea I heard was most of the £8 billion would go to investment around the HQ to streamline things. If there was to follow thousands of green jobs in Aberdeen that would be great. Chances are it's all bollox though imo just like the green ports. Regardless oil will be shut of in future decades as it has to be. I think times will be tough for Aberdeen and this token won't change that

£3 billion of the £8.3 billion is going on funding solar etc on local authority buildings. Of course the elephant in the room here is the grid and how that's going to be overcome so it'll probably be reduced bills for each building involved but next to no generation for anything else. I suppose we could ask JP Morgan, Vanguard, Merrill Lynch and Blackrock nicely if they'd upgrade storage dramatically.

[RyeSloan]

£3 billion of the £8.3 billion is going on funding solar etc on local authority buildings. Of course the elephant in the room here is the grid and how that's going to be overcome so it'll probably be reduced bills for each building involved but next to no generation for anything else. I suppose we could ask JP Morgan, Vanguard, Merrill Lynch and Blackrock nicely if they'd upgrade storage dramatically.

Well these BESS projects need to be financed somehow no?

The U.K. had about 4.5GW of storage now online and a substantial pipeline at various stages. It’s estimated that about 4GW is under construction and more than 24Gw has been consented. All with the initial government target of 30GW by 2030 in mind.

I posted on another thread that the U.K. has hardly helped itself here with how National Grid was royally screwing the existing BESS by not using their power. Thankfully that seems to be slowly getting sorted.

The U.K. (not alone in this one) was also rather poor at prioritising grid connections. Again this is slowly being corrected by moving to a system where those installations that are grid ready are prioritised compared to the previous system which was essentially just a reserved list where actual build and readiness were not the major factor.

Labour has also recently pushed through planning approvals for some hefty interconnectors to get the offshore renewables to where it’s needed.

It’s taken a bit of work sorting out some of the blockers and the Electricty Generator Levy was a classic case of unintended consequences re the impact on the renewables sector but the U.K. overall has done OK with regards to renewables I think.

Some of the above and the chunky pipeline of projects across the sector topped off with a dash more of political will (esp. around planning and sensible financing) suggests it looks set to make some very good progress over the coming years.

[Andy Bee]

Well these BESS projects need to be financed somehow no?

The U.K. had about 4.5GW of storage now online and a substantial pipeline at various stages. It’s estimated that about 4GW is under construction and more than 24Gw has been consented. All with the initial government target of 30GW by 2030 in mind.

I posted on another thread that the U.K. has hardly helped itself here with how National Grid was royally screwing the existing BESS by not using their power. Thankfully that seems to be slowly getting sorted.

The U.K. (not alone in this one) was also rather poor at prioritising grid connections. Again this is slowly being corrected by moving to a system where those installations that are grid ready are prioritised compared to the previous system which was essentially just a reserved list where actual build and readiness were not the major factor.

Labour has also recently pushed through planning approvals for some hefty interconnectors to get the offshore renewables to where it’s needed.

It’s taken a bit of work sorting out some of the blockers and the Electricty Generator Levy was a classic case of unintended consequences re the impact on the renewables sector but the U.K. overall has done OK with regards to renewables I think.

Some of the above and the chunky pipeline of projects across the sector topped off with a dash more of political will (esp. around planning and sensible financing) suggests it looks set to make some very good progress over the coming years.


Thanks RS, very informative as ever. I've no doubt they have to be financed but given the big four above and adding Tesla, Samsung, SSE, China etc it's all private money or Governments elsewhere so where does GB Energy come in and fulfil their remit of "energy security", "lowering bills" and "creating 69,000 GB Energy jobs" given that they're effectively a tadpole swimming in the Pacific Ocean of energy. generation? Tesla probably spent £8bn alone in their R&D into BESS.

[RyeSloan]

Thanks RS, very informative as ever. I've no doubt they have to be financed but given the big four above and adding Tesla, Samsung, SSE, China etc it's all private money or Governments elsewhere so where does GB Energy come in and fulfil their remit of "energy security", "lowering bills" and "creating 69,000 GB Energy jobs" given that they're effectively a tadpole swimming in the Pacific Ocean of energy. generation? Tesla probably spent £8bn alone in their R&D into BESS.

Ahh yeah well good questions…not sure anyone has the answers, even the people proposing the thing!

I can only assume that they see themselves as a bit of an accelerator and facilitator.

Made up numbers but if GB Energy can provide 10% government backed financing AND a regular and repeatable framework for the financing they can help a lot of deals happen faster.

They could also act as the lightning rod for feedback and policy around the regulatory regime which would in turn create the most favourable conditions for the first part.

Otherwise it’s just another layer of bureaucracy and spending that just muddies an already rather muddy pool.

Progress to date kind of feels like it’s been despite of instead of because of government, policies and the myriad of regulatory regimes where it’s very hard to balance the returns on capital for private investment, the good of the public purse and the interests of generators, transmitters and consumers. So if GB Energy can help fix that then all good.

But who really knows at this stage!

[grunt]

May 2024. To be fair, this headline doesn't give a timeline.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GVpeyWkXAAAS3_E?format=jpg&name=medium

[marinello59]

May 2024. To be fair, this headline doesn't give a timeline.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GVpeyWkXAAAS3_E?format=jpg&name=medium

When the Titanic sank the Aberdeen Press and Journal are said to have gone with the headline ‘Aberdeen Man Drowns.’:greengrin Not true sadly but a good story. The article of course would have told a different story.

Do you have link to the article linked to that headline?

[grunt]

When the Titanic sank the Aberdeen Press and Journal are said to have gone with the headline ‘Aberdeen Man Drowns.’:greengrin Not true sadly but a good story. The article of course would have told a different story.

Do you have link to the article linked to that headline?No. Nor can I find it on the Independent website. Labour have obviously had them remove the evidence.

[marinello59]

No. Nor can I find it on the Independent website. Labour have obviously had them remove the evidence.

Or…….:greengrin

[Hibbyradge]

May 2024. To be fair, this headline doesn't give a timeline.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GVpeyWkXAAAS3_E?format=jpg&name=medium

To be fair...

https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/energy-bills-labour-starmer-general-election-b2550795.html

[lapsedhibee]

To be fair...

https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/energy-bills-labour-starmer-general-election-b2550795.html

A pedant writes:

Very much doubt he said that GB Energy would be a 'publically owned company'. :tsk tsk:

[Stairway 2 7]

To be fair...

https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/energy-bills-labour-starmer-general-election-b2550795.html

So £400 once it's set up which they said will take over a year. I've no idea if that is likely guess we'll see once it's set up

[Hibbyradge]

A pedant writes:

Very much doubt he said that GB Energy would be a 'publically owned company'. :tsk tsk:

You say tomato...

[Moulin Yarns]

So £400 once it's set up which they said will take over a year. I've no idea if that is likely guess we'll see once it's set up

I'm not good at holding my breath!


Much rather go down this route


https://www.thenational.scot/politics/24536810.robin-mcalpine-scotland-can-escape-uk-energy-policy-mess/

[Kato]

Our electricity bills go to our neighbour countries and billionaires. We subsidise the bills of european users and help buy bigger yachts for another type of user.

Taking the current labour govt to task about, what appears to be, an acorn of public ownership seems a bit naff with that backdrop.

Daft way to run a country, having a key part of national security outwith your control.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[GlesgaeHibby]

Well these BESS projects need to be financed somehow no?

The U.K. had about 4.5GW of storage now online and a substantial pipeline at various stages. It’s estimated that about 4GW is under construction and more than 24Gw has been consented. All with the initial government target of 30GW by 2030 in mind.

I posted on another thread that the U.K. has hardly helped itself here with how National Grid was royally screwing the existing BESS by not using their power. Thankfully that seems to be slowly getting sorted.

The U.K. (not alone in this one) was also rather poor at prioritising grid connections. Again this is slowly being corrected by moving to a system where those installations that are grid ready are prioritised compared to the previous system which was essentially just a reserved list where actual build and readiness were not the major factor.

Labour has also recently pushed through planning approvals for some hefty interconnectors to get the offshore renewables to where it’s needed.

It’s taken a bit of work sorting out some of the blockers and the Electricty Generator Levy was a classic case of unintended consequences re the impact on the renewables sector but the U.K. overall has done OK with regards to renewables I think.

Some of the above and the chunky pipeline of projects across the sector topped off with a dash more of political will (esp. around planning and sensible financing) suggests it looks set to make some very good progress over the coming years.

The grid reforms promised sounded great - "first ready, first connected". The reality is that the bar is going to be set so low (land rights secured) that it won't make a meaningful difference to queue management. There are plenty shovel ready projects out there that are massively delayed due to grid constraints. The network operators are absolutely rammed at the minute, and will have to massively expand in order to deliver transmission upgrades. Resourcing is going to be a huge problem - I was speaking to folk at Scottish Power last week who said that the Scottish Power Transmission would have to grow 4-fold in the next few years.

The early moves from Labour have largely been positive for renewables - CFD budget increased, onshore ban lifted in England and the new east coast interconnector. Tackling the grid challenge is going to be huge though.

[Stairway 2 7]

I'm not good at holding my breath!


Much rather go down this route


https://www.thenational.scot/politics/24536810.robin-mcalpine-scotland-can-escape-uk-energy-policy-mess/

You were arguing against we when I put up that SNP had privatised our renewables for a pittance. I then put up an article similar to above from common weal and Robin McAlpine. Labour, tories, SNP are all the same neoliberal parties selling our assets to big business profit.

https://commonweal.scot/policies/scotwind-privatising-scotlands-future-again/

Scotwind is the first auction of Scotland’s offshore territory for the purpose of generating renewable wind energy in a decade and is the largest such auction of its kind so far in Scotland.

But the way it has been done has effectively privatised Scotland’s next generation of energy assets before they’ve even been built, has done so for an unbelievably small fraction of the potential profits to be extracted from the resources and has not done nearly enough to secure the local ownership and supply chain benefits that should come to Scotland as a result of this project.

This report estimates that ScotWind will result in around £50-£90 million per year coming to Scotland in rents from the energy generation in addition to the £700 million already raised from the initial auction. However, analysis of the return of investment and profits from extant offshore wind operations suggest that the energy production from ScotWind could result in £3.5 to £5.5 billion in profits shared collectively between the companies involved in the project.

The report presents a plan that could have retained ownership and operations of this project in Scottish public hands using policies already endorsed by the SNP, Scottish Greens or both.

[Andy Bee]

You were arguing against we when I put up that SNP had privatised our renewables for a pittance. I then put up an article similar to above from common weal and Robin McAlpine. Labour, tories, SNP are all the same neoliberal parties selling our assets to big business profit.

https://commonweal.scot/policies/scotwind-privatising-scotlands-future-again/

Scotwind is the first auction of Scotland’s offshore territory for the purpose of generating renewable wind energy in a decade and is the largest such auction of its kind so far in Scotland.

But the way it has been done has effectively privatised Scotland’s next generation of energy assets before they’ve even been built, has done so for an unbelievably small fraction of the potential profits to be extracted from the resources and has not done nearly enough to secure the local ownership and supply chain benefits that should come to Scotland as a result of this project.

This report estimates that ScotWind will result in around £50-£90 million per year coming to Scotland in rents from the energy generation in addition to the £700 million already raised from the initial auction. However, analysis of the return of investment and profits from extant offshore wind operations suggest that the energy production from ScotWind could result in £3.5 to £5.5 billion in profits shared collectively between the companies involved in the project.

The report presents a plan that could have retained ownership and operations of this project in Scottish public hands using policies already endorsed by the SNP, Scottish Greens or both.


I think you're giving the SNP more credit than they're due here when you label them Neoliberal and selling our assets for big business profit. That would suggest they know what they're doing. They simply didn't know what the Scotwind project was worth IMO. Initial pricing was actually capped at £10k per Km squared, after some studies and discussions that was raised to the £100k per KM squared they then received. The only saving grace is that it's a 10 year lease and the jury is still out on how much their contract stipulations for work and manufacture are to be kept in Scotland will come to fruition. The fines imposed if the companies don't comply would suggest that there probably aint going to be that much.

Kato touches on the subject above about foreign investment and other countries benefitting from Scottish energy. Apart from the well known ones like EDF in France who actually used profits from Scottish energy to help implement a 4% price cap for everyone in France and the others like Spain, China, Norway, USA and many others we've got the more less known like the Canadian public workers pension fund so we've got a load of Mountys and Canadian bin men thanking us for their pensions whilst everyone here is paying some of the highest prices in Europe and on one of the lowest pensions. :greengrin

As for shovel ready projects, we've got a number of pumped water storage projects ready to go but the UK Government aren't interested, we've had talks with the German Government on supplying Hydrogen to power the heavy industry in Ruhr instead of them relying on Russian gas to power things like blast furnaces but again the UK Government aren't interested. Tidal in places like the Pentland Firth with two tides a day, every day. Whilst the Scotwind project baffles me there's still huge potential left, because of Scotlands demographics and weather we're one of the best places in the world for energy generation and Hydrogen production but it remains to be seen if people will realise the opportunities on offer or are happy to carry on with a system that keeps big business ticking over and us funding it. This is one of the main reasons I'm "obsessed" with Independence.

[RyeSloan]

The grid reforms promised sounded great - "first ready, first connected". The reality is that the bar is going to be set so low (land rights secured) that it won't make a meaningful difference to queue management. There are plenty shovel ready projects out there that are massively delayed due to grid constraints. The network operators are absolutely rammed at the minute, and will have to massively expand in order to deliver transmission upgrades. Resourcing is going to be a huge problem - I was speaking to folk at Scottish Power last week who said that the Scottish Power Transmission would have to grow 4-fold in the next few years.

The early moves from Labour have largely been positive for renewables - CFD budget increased, onshore ban lifted in England and the new east coast interconnector. Tackling the grid challenge is going to be huge though.

Yeah good points and in my defence I did say ‘slowly being corrected’ [emoji1787]

At least they are going to apply the gating system retroactively as well now so while to my eye the whole thing seems to be missing at least another level of readiness it’s still progress.

But for sure no matter how great your queue if you don’t have the boots on the ground to deliver the work then you are stuffed.

[Just Alf]

Interesting view on how the UK (driven by GB Energy) should consider an alternative to the price cap and disconnect prices from the cost of gas....

Outside Europe it's normal to protect basic energy needs - so why don't we? | New Economics Foundation

https://neweconomics.org/2024/08/outside-europe-its-normal-to-protect-basic-energy-needs-so-why-dont-we

[GlesgaeHibby]

Yeah good points and in my defence I did say ‘slowly being corrected’ [emoji1787]

At least they are going to apply the gating system retroactively as well now so while to my eye the whole thing seems to be missing at least another level of readiness it’s still progress.

But for sure no matter how great your queue if you don’t have the boots on the ground to deliver the work then you are stuffed.

Agree, although inevitably it'll take the network operators a long time to go through the process with each customer. There is a great pipeline of renewable projects with planning and land rights in place in the UK (particularly Scotland), but being held up by grid dates being pushed back in to the 2030s. Anything that speeds up the build out is welcome - be it queue management, less conservative modelling of fault level to get more projects connected, or physical grid infrastructure upgrades.

Still plenty of reasons to be positive - got the CFD round 6 results due next week :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

https://x.com/stephenflynnsnp/status/1828564858750611555?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

https://x.com/STVNews/status/1828767427431207070

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has said the Scottish Government is 'as guilty' as the previous Tory government on the country’s finances.

https://i.stv.tv/3T8KjIl (https://t.co/EzusPxNGQR)

[marinello59]

https://x.com/stephenflynnsnp/status/1828564858750611555?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Starmer thinks he can just bluster his way out of it. He can't , caught bang to rights. You'd don't restore trust by copying Tory style cronyism.

[marinello59]

https://x.com/STVNews/status/1828767427431207070

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has said the Scottish Government is 'as guilty' as the previous Tory government on the country’s finances.

https://i.stv.tv/3T8KjIl (https://t.co/EzusPxNGQR)

As guilty as the Tories may be pushing it somewhat, the SNP mistakes don't even come close to the scale of the damage done by the the Tories but the SNP has brought a lot of pressure on itself according to the Scottish Fiscal Commission. Mistakes were made both sides of the border.

[grunt]

I hate what this country has become. Hate the way politics is delivered, hate the lies, the dissembling, the constant antagonism towards the opposition, hate the connivance of the media. Hate the fact that even the most wrong-headed views seem to find support, hate that liars and grifters (not a word I like but it fits) always seem to get away with their lies and their wrongdoing and aren't made to pay for their actions. Hate that people seem more bent on killing other people than at any time since WW2. Hate that people ignore the damage being done to our world. If I was younger I'd be thinking twice about bringing children into this world. "Hate" is not a word I use lightly. This is a bad day.

[Ozyhibby]

Starmer thinks he can just bluster his way out of it. He can't , caught bang to rights. You'd don't restore trust by copying the Tory style cronyism.

Starmer has never had a plan or a vision. He just had to be not the Tories. Even it it meant mimicking then. And people were so desperate for change they were happy to believe that secretly Starmer would deliver whatever their own priorities were.
Everyone is waiting on the budget now to see what the plan is going to be and I suspect there will be a lot of disappointment.
He keeps talking about laying foundations but foundations of what? What is it that Starmer is planning to build? Where is the vision for what Britain should look like? If this isn’t brought forward very soon I suspect it never will be.
Everyone is assuming this is a ten year Labour govt but folk thought the same when Johnson won in 2019. Labour sorted themselves out into something boring but non threatening and won. I wouldn’t rule out the Tories doing the same over the next 5 years. They tend to get their act together quicker than Labour do.
And Labour might find their massive majority works against them when it comes to discipline. A lot of Labour mp’s may not like the Starmer plan when we find out what it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

Starmer has never had a plan or a vision. He just had to be not the Tories. Even it it meant mimicking then. And people were so desperate for change they were happy to believe that secretly Starmer would deliver whatever their own priorities were.
Everyone is waiting on the budget now to see what the plan is going to be and I suspect there will be a lot of disappointment.
He keeps talking about laying foundations but foundations of what? What is it that Starmer is planning to build? Where is the vision for what Britain should look like? If this isn’t brought forward very soon I suspect it never will be.
Everyone is assuming this is a ten year Labour govt but folk thought the same when Johnson won in 2019. Labour sorted themselves out into something boring but non threatening and won. I wouldn’t rule out the Tories doing the same over the next 5 years. They tend to get their act together quicker than Labour do.
And Labour might find their massive majority works against them when it comes to discipline. A lot of Labour mp’s may not like the Starmer plan when we find out what it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I saw a Frankie Boyle clip the other day where he described Kier Starmer as the picture that comes in the frame when you buy it. :greengrin
Funny yet disheartening at the same time. The first priority was to get rid of the Tories. Labour may get away with this budget by laying all the blame for any cuts and tax rises at the door of the Tories. That won't work at the next one.

[JimBHibees]

I saw a Frankie Boyle clip the other day where he described Kier Starmer as the picture that comes in the frame when you buy it. :greengrin
Funny yet disheartening at the same time. The first priority was to get rid of the Tories. Labour may get away with this budget by laying all the blame for any cuts and tax rises at the door of the Tories. That won't work at the next one.

Not sure it will work at this one

[McD]

I hate what this country has become. Hate the way politics is delivered, hate the lies, the dissembling, the constant antagonism towards the opposition, hate the connivance of the media. Hate the fact that even the most wrong-headed views seem to find support, hate that liars and grifters (not a word I like but it fits) always seem to get away with their lies and their wrongdoing and aren't made to pay for their actions. Hate that people seem more bent on killing other people than at any time since WW2. Hate that people ignore the damage being done to our world. If I was younger I'd be thinking twice about bringing children into this world. "Hate" is not a word I use lightly. This is a bad day.



I’ve disagreed with plenty that you’ve posted mate, but wholeheartedly agree with you with all of this.

[500miles]

I think Starmer is laying the groundwork for a return to the Customs Union or even more. He may not call it that, he may dress it up as a compromise, cloaked as a reaction to a dire economic situation caused by the Tories, and he will do everything in his power to not mention Brexit while he does it, but that is the only thing I think he has I'm his arsenal to make a dent in his growth plans.

[Ozyhibby]

I think Starmer is laying the groundwork for a return to the Customs Union or even more. He may not call it that, he may dress it up as a compromise, cloaked as a reaction to a dire economic situation caused by the Tories, and he will do everything in his power to not mention Brexit while he does it, but that is the only thing I think he has I'm his arsenal to make a dent in his growth plans.

I think there is zero chance he is that imaginative. Cosy wee chat with the Germans today but zero substance behind it. I don’t think he has any plan at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jack]

Mistakes were made both sides of the border.

I'm not sure the misappropriation of billions was a tory mistake.

[Paul1642]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2lgl9kypno

A big test for Labour is how they handle the water companies crisis in England.

Surely the Scottish water model is a benchmark for what needs done. I appreciate we have a geographical advantage however we never seem to have any of issues constantly being reported down south.

To be honest I’m increasingly becoming a fan of nationalising all infrastructure but Labour seem as far away firm this mindset as they ever have been.

[RyeSloan]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2lgl9kypno

A big test for Labour is how they handle the water companies crisis in England.

Surely the Scottish water model is a benchmark for what needs done. I appreciate we have a geographical advantage however we never seem to have any of issues constantly being reported down south.

To be honest I’m increasingly becoming a fan of nationalising all infrastructure but Labour seem as far away firm this mindset as they ever have been.

It’s pretty hard to do a comparison I suppose.

Thames Water seems to have been a bit of a basket case but that company alone has more than 3 times as many customers than the whole of the Scottish population.

Then you have the rather large increase in population England has seen…all these people add extra demands onto the system.

The average bills seem relatively similar but as the bill in Scotland is rolled into your council tax bill it’s not really as visible or seen as a direct cost in the same way as gas or electric.

Then there is the fact that sewage discharges and the likes appear to be significantly less monitored up here.

But regardless there is little doubt that some of the English water companies have been very poorly run, to put it politely!

[Ozyhibby]

It’s pretty hard to do a comparison I suppose.

Thames Water seems to have been a bit of a basket case but that company alone has more than 3 times as many customers than the whole of the Scottish population.

Then you have the rather large increase in population England has seen…all these people add extra demands onto the system.

The average bills seem relatively similar but as the bill in Scotland is rolled into your council tax bill it’s not really as visible or seen as a direct cost in the same way as gas or electric.

Then there is the fact that sewage discharges and the likes appear to be significantly less monitored up here.

But regardless there is little doubt that some of the English water companies have been very poorly run, to put it politely!

Yeh, Scotland is just as bad.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

This is what Labour says it will do. I know it would be complicated but nationalising is the only way imo. Monitoring every outlet would be great and something we should do

Giving the water regulator powers to block the payment of any bonuses

Water bosses who oversee repeated law-breaking will face criminal charges

Ending self-monitoring and forcing all companies to monitor every single water outlet under independent supervision

Introducing severe and automatic fines that water companies can’t afford to ignore for illegal sewage discharges

[Stairway 2 7]

Rumours are they are going to raise the road tax, it won't be popular but it's about time.

The other rumour today that I am delighted about is smoking will be banned in children's playparks, school and university grounds and pub and restaurant beer gardens and terraces. On a sunny day I feel like I have to eat or drink inside when I'm out with my kids as beer gardens are just smoking areas now and not wanting my bairns to get cancer from selfish people I'll move. More and more decent people are getting up from their seat and smoking away from everyone before sitting back down.

[RyeSloan]

Yeh, Scotland is just as bad.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why do you say that?

[Ozyhibby]

Rumours are they are going to raise the road tax, it won't be popular but it's about time.

The other rumour today that I am delighted about is smoking will be banned in children's playparks, school and university grounds and pub and restaurant beer gardens and terraces. On a sunny day I feel like I have to eat or drink inside when I'm out with my kids as beer gardens are just smoking areas now and not wanting my bairns to get cancer from selfish people I'll move. More and more decent people are getting up from their seat and smoking away from everyone before sitting back down.

They should do away with road tax altogether and bring in road pricing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

They should do away with road tax altogether and bring in road pricing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How does that work?

[SHODAN]

My MP has been in post for less than two months and already he's been off on an LFI-funded trip to Israel. :aok:

[Ozyhibby]

How does that work?

You are charged different prices for driving on different roads at different times.
Drive along Queen street at 5pm = expensive
Drive along St. John’s Road 5pm = expensive
M8 at 5pm = expensive
M8 at midnight = very cheap or free
Rural roads = free
City driving = not free
Very rough explanation but that’s the general idea. It discourages driving at peak times and helps with congestion.
And you can price according to the size and engine type of a vehicle. Cheap for small electric cars, expensive for large luxury Range rovers. Very progressive.[emoji6]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

My MP has been in post for less than two months and already he's been off on an LFI-funded trip to Israel. :aok:

But he’s not a Tory. Remember that that was all he had to be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

You are charged different prices for driving on different roads at different times.
Drive along Queen street at 5pm = expensive
Drive along St. John’s Road 5pm = expensive
M8 at 5pm = expensive
M8 at midnight = very cheap or free
Rural roads = free
City driving = not free
Very rough explanation but that’s the general idea. It discourages driving at peak times and helps with congestion.
And you can price according to the size and engine type of a vehicle. Cheap for small electric cars, expensive for large luxury Range rovers. Very progressive.[emoji6]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fair enough but how are your journeys recorded? There would be an outcry if a tracking device needs to be fitted to every ve. People are averse to big brother.

[Ozyhibby]

Fair enough but how are your journeys recorded? There would be an outcry if a tracking device needs to be fitted to every ve. People are averse to big brother.

There are many way to do it. And people are not that averse to big brother. We have one of the highest concentration of cctv cameras in the world.
It can be done with number plate recognition cameras. The tech has been there for this for a while now. Just needs a bit of ambition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[McD]

You are charged different prices for driving on different roads at different times.
Drive along Queen street at 5pm = expensive
Drive along St. John’s Road 5pm = expensive
M8 at 5pm = expensive
M8 at midnight = very cheap or free
Rural roads = free
City driving = not free
Very rough explanation but that’s the general idea. It discourages driving at peak times and helps with congestion.
And you can price according to the size and engine type of a vehicle. Cheap for small electric cars, expensive for large luxury Range rovers. Very progressive.[emoji6]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I like the idea in principle, not so sure about the peak time element. Most people aren’t in control of when their working hours are, or their job location. I know you will talk about encouraging people onto public transport (not against that at all), but the public transport we have is expensive, not particularly reliable/clean/comfortable, not joined up in any way, etc.


Definitely agree there will be better and more progressive ways than the current method

[grunt]

You are charged different prices for driving on different roads at different times.
Is there anywhere in the world that operates a scheme like this?

[Ozyhibby]

Is there anywhere in the world that operates a scheme like this?

London does it only in a simpler format. I’m not aware of any nationwide schemes but it is tried and tested in multiple cities. It’s just a matter of scale.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kato]

Just needs a bit of ambition.




...and x billion pounds
...and x amount of years
...and x amount of years of an inquiry into the millions siphoned off from the x billions into someone's off shore amount...

...given how things work in this scam-fest nation.



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Just Alf]

Simpler method is to move the road tax onto fuel, that way how far you travel is automatically taxed. Encourages walks to local shop/school etc and a hopefully a trend to reduce car use generally.

Of course that argument falls apart unless you can do something for the ever increasing proportion of electric car numbers.

[CropleyWasGod]

Simpler method is to move the road tax onto fuel, that way how far you travel is automatically taxed. Encourages walks to local shop/school etc and a hopefully a trend to reduce car use generally.

Of course that argument falls apart unless you can do something for the ever increasing proportion of electric car numbers.

The latter can be addressed by taxing the charging of vehicles, possibly at a lower rate. That's easily done at public charging points, less so for charging at home. Smart meters could play their part here.

Having said all that, what is the argument for getting rid of VED? (one of those pedants who hates the term Road Tax :greengrin) It's an efficient system at the moment, in that it recognises the different types of vehicles, and is easily collectable.

[Ozyhibby]

Simpler method is to move the road tax onto fuel, that way how far you travel is automatically taxed. Encourages walks to local shop/school etc and a hopefully a trend to reduce car use generally.

Of course that argument falls apart unless you can do something for the ever increasing proportion of electric car numbers.

That doesn’t help with congestion though. And as you say, electric cars.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

The latter can be addressed by taxing the charging of vehicles, possibly at a lower rate. That's easily done at public charging points, less so for charging at home. Smart meters could play their part here.

Having said all that, what is the argument for getting rid of VED? (one of those pedants who hates the term Road Tax :greengrin) It's an efficient system at the moment, in that it recognises the different types of vehicles, and is easily collectable.

You can keep both I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

You can keep both I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So a fixed charge based on the emissions of your car, plus a variable one based on its use?

I can hear the AA screaming already :greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

Not sure how to make it work for younger vehicles but the dvla has a note of mileage for every vehicle when it is mot'd. That means mileage travelled each year is recorded so a charge could be made annually. Just a thought, wouldn't need lots of geographical charges or times, just a flat rate per mile travelled.

[Andy Bee]

The latter can be addressed by taxing the charging of vehicles, possibly at a lower rate. That's easily done at public charging points, less so for charging at home. Smart meters could play their part here.

Having said all that, what is the argument for getting rid of VED? (one of those pedants who hates the term Road Tax :greengrin) It's an efficient system at the moment, in that it recognises the different types of vehicles, and is easily collectable.


There's people that do 100k a year and people that travel 1k, I suppose a toll based system is fairer to differentiate between them. It's seems to work in a lot of European countries.

[Keith_M]

Currently, fuel is taxed at a fixed rate of 52.95 pence per litre, plus VAT on the overall price at 20%.

On a back-of-a-fag-packet calculation, I currently pay the government £600 per year for fuel taxes.

That amount will vary according to your mileage (mine is quite low).


I do sometimes wonder why we have to pay 'Road Tax' on top of that.

[CropleyWasGod]

There's people that do 100k a year and people that travel 1k, I suppose a toll based system is fairer to differentiate between them. It's seems to work in a lot of European countries.

Is that not reflected in the fuel duty that we pay, though?

[Moulin Yarns]

Not sure how to make it work for younger vehicles but the dvla has a note of mileage for every vehicle when it is mot'd. That means mileage travelled each year is recorded so a charge could be made annually. Just a thought, wouldn't need lots of geographical charges or times, just a flat rate per mile travelled.

Another thing for this, no huge infrastructure, such as tolls or anpr cameras are required. We could get Fujitsu to design a system to collect it.😉

[hibee]

Not sure how to make it work for younger vehicles but the dvla has a note of mileage for every vehicle when it is mot'd. That means mileage travelled each year is recorded so a charge could be made annually. Just a thought, wouldn't need lots of geographical charges or times, just a flat rate per mile travelled.

With modern cars it’s very easy to DIY install a mileage blocker for under £300 so MOT mileage would be useless.

[Stairway 2 7]

Rumours are they are going to raise the road tax, it won't be popular but it's about time.

The other rumour today that I am delighted about is smoking will be banned in children's playparks, school and university grounds and pub and restaurant beer gardens and terraces. On a sunny day I feel like I have to eat or drink inside when I'm out with my kids as beer gardens are just smoking areas now and not wanting my bairns to get cancer from selfish people I'll move. More and more decent people are getting up from their seat and smoking away from everyone before sitting back down.

What a tool. Farage won't go to the pub ever again if a ban on smoking in beer gardens comes in. Why is he getting the paps to take pictures of him inside pubs where you can't smoke

"Nigel Farage says he will never go to the pub again if Keir Starmer goes ahead with the smoking ban in pub gardens

"It will kill off the traditional pub forever. For my own part, I simply would not go to the pub ever again if these restrictions are imposed""

"Once again, the Labour Party is showing its authoritarian socialist state control instincts and mentality."

[grunt]

https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-laser-focused-on-israel-trade-deal-amid-ongoing-genocide/

LABOUR ‘LASER-FOCUSED’ ON ISRAEL TRADE DEAL ...
Anyone remember all the fuss in the Scottish press about Angus Roberston speaking to Israel ... last week? ISTR it was a resignation issue?

[CropleyWasGod]

https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-laser-focused-on-israel-trade-deal-amid-ongoing-genocide/

LABOUR ‘LASER-FOCUSED’ ON ISRAEL TRADE DEAL ...
Anyone remember all the fuss in the Scottish press about Angus Roberston speaking to Israel ... last week? ISTR it was a resignation issue?

Could have had a better choice of words, too. :cb

[marinello59]

https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-laser-focused-on-israel-trade-deal-amid-ongoing-genocide/

LABOUR ‘LASER-FOCUSED’ ON ISRAEL TRADE DEAL ...
Anyone remember all the fuss in the Scottish press about Angus Roberston speaking to Israel ... last week? ISTR it was a resignation issue?

It was SNP members who declared it a resignation issue. Not the press.

[marinello59]

Could have had a better choice of words, too. :cb

An awful choice of words and an extremely poor decision. Disappointing to say the least that Israel continues to enjoy normal relations with any other countries right now.

[Moulin Yarns]

With modern cars it’s very easy to DIY install a mileage blocker for under £300 so MOT mileage would be useless.

I suppose being a law abiding citizen has its downside!!

Solution is heavy fines or gaol for offenders who have fitted one.

Edit. Having said that I do favour a return of the stocks and jougs for minor offences. 😉

[Moulin Yarns]

Pressure from within labour on reeves to reverse the winter fuel allowance

[lapsedhibee]

What a tool. Farage won't go to the pub ever again if a ban on smoking in beer gardens comes in. Why is he getting the paps to take pictures of him inside pubs where you can't smoke

"Nigel Farage says he will never go to the pub again if Keir Starmer goes ahead with the smoking ban in pub gardens

"It will kill off the traditional pub forever. For my own part, I simply would not go to the pub ever again if these restrictions are imposed""

"Once again, the Labour Party is showing its authoritarian socialist state control instincts and mentality."

If Farage and his brain-dead followers enact a boycott, that might not be enough to kill off the traditional pub - but it would go some way to killing off the traditional pub bore. Hurrah!

[cabbageandribs1875]

and when the cuts come it will be SNP Baaaaaaaddd

(2) Patrick_Woodside.🏳️*🌈 on X: "Labour run-West Dunbartonshire Council has collapsed It comes following the resignation of two Clydebank Labour councillors earlier this week, leaving the remaining members to form an SNP, Community Party & independent Council Administration https://t.co/Zpaff6TbJ2" / X (https://x.com/pjwoodside/status/1828907940184781011?t=dY0WTmujlEg7hkV6fMjviQ&s=19&fbclid=IwY2xjawE9jmxleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHd-3fB43Ooq6gUH4jwizjs6GQXlrQB4cjyxV2nInBZyEDc5G5SN-jduuWw_aem_trZRFtKqs9K87rfi_Mn_NQ)

[grunt]

Austerity has failed, eh?

https://x.com/RachelReevesMP/status/1238208392608415744

[Stairway 2 7]

Austerity has failed, eh?

https://x.com/RachelReevesMP/status/1238208392608415744

But how's it austerity if the rumours are it's tax rises to pay for more spending isn't that the opposite. I thought they are expecting £22 billion of tax rises? I could be wrong all I've seen are rumours and I wouldn't be surprised if Starmer wanted cuts but I thought he was buttering up the public for tax rises

[Bostonhibby]

If Farage and his brain-dead followers enact a boycott, that might not be enough to kill off the traditional pub - but it would go some way to killing off the traditional pub bore. Hurrah![emoji23]
Could have a major impact on some wetherspoons sales though[emoji6]

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

If Farage and his brain-dead followers enact a boycott, that might not be enough to kill off the traditional pub - but it would go some way to killing off the traditional pub bore. Hurrah!

It appears he's been getting pictured all day outside pubs smoking, what a hero

[lapsedhibee]

It appears he's been getting pictured all day outside pubs smoking, what a hero

If medical staff in chest wards had nothing to do and were just sat around twiddling their thumbs all day it would be very bad for their moral fibre, so I reckon he's doing it for them. So selfless. :agree:

[Paul1642]

You are charged different prices for driving on different roads at different times.
Drive along Queen street at 5pm = expensive
Drive along St. John’s Road 5pm = expensive
M8 at 5pm = expensive
M8 at midnight = very cheap or free
Rural roads = free
City driving = not free
Very rough explanation but that’s the general idea. It discourages driving at peak times and helps with congestion.
And you can price according to the size and engine type of a vehicle. Cheap for small electric cars, expensive for large luxury Range rovers. Very progressive.[emoji6]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This sounds outrageously difficult and expensive to implement. Why not just scrap road tax and increase fuel duty. Those who use more fuel, therefore causing more pollution get taxed more.

EVs would be naturally exempt which is fine and those who do lower manage save some money.

[RyeSloan]

This sounds outrageously difficult and expensive to implement. Why not just scrap road tax and increase fuel duty. Those who use more fuel, therefore causing more pollution get taxed more.

EVs would be naturally exempt which is fine and those who do lower manage save some money.

Those that use more fuel already do get charged more. Fuel duty takes in 3-4 times what VED does.

But you can’t just exempt EV’s…the loss of revenue as they force people to go electric is already an issue. Scrapping the concept of VED and / or ignoring ‘pay per mile’ does nothing to replace the £26bn odd that fuel charges currently bring in.

Want to really cut congestion? Go all Singaporean and charge people £80k just for the right to own a car…that’ll sort it [emoji1787]

[Ozyhibby]

This sounds outrageously difficult and expensive to implement. Why not just scrap road tax and increase fuel duty. Those who use more fuel, therefore causing more pollution get taxed more.

EVs would be naturally exempt which is fine and those who do lower manage save some money.

Doesn’t solve congestion problems in cities and if everyone has an EV then there is no money coming in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paul1642]

Doesn’t solve congestion problems in cities and if everyone has an EV then there is no money coming in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

According to Google 3.5% of the cars on the UK roads are Electric which I thought would have been a lot higher. I thought we wanted to get that figure up and incentivising it is probably the way to go. The loss is on a few hundred thousand road tax payments is probably worth it to help meet our climate change targets.

Driving already costs a fortune between buying and maintaining a car, fuel and tax. A few extra £ in congestion charges isn’t going to change anything. If we want to reduce congestion we need to give people transport that is equally as convenient as driving. At the moment trains cost a fortune and the tram covers a very select portion of the city (Edinburgh only solution of course). I work shifts and travel from Edinburgh to a Midlothian town most days and can safely say that I have absolutely no choice but to take the car.

According to google maps right now my drive is 11 minutes and public transport would be 48 minutes. It’s a no brainer. Chuck in a congestion charge for me to cross sheriff hall at the early stages of rush hour and i still have no choice but to do it.

[Ozyhibby]

According to Google 3.5% of the cars on the UK roads are Electric which I thought would have been a lot higher. I thought we wanted to get that figure up and incentivising it is probably the way to go. The loss is on a few hundred thousand road tax payments is probably worth it to help meet our climate change targets.

Driving already costs a fortune between buying and maintaining a car, fuel and tax. A few extra £ in congestion charges isn’t going to change anything. If we want to reduce congestion we need to give people transport that is equally as convenient as driving. At the moment trains cost a fortune and the tram covers a very select portion of the city (Edinburgh only solution of course). I work shifts and travel from Edinburgh to a Midlothian town most days and can safely say that I have absolutely no choice but to take the car.

According to google maps right now my drive is 11 minutes and public transport would be 48 minutes. It’s a no brainer. Chuck in a congestion charge for me to cross sheriff hall at the early stages of rush hour and i still have no choice but to do it.

48 mins doesn’t seem like a hellish commute?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paul1642]

48 mins doesn’t seem like a hellish commute?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As opposed to 11? It’s almost a 5x longer journey.

[Paul1642]

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1943532/bereaved-pensioners-face-new-worry/amp

“Ms Rayner said Westminster has no plans to increase English council taxes but refused to say whether she would scrap the single person discount to the bill”

I appreciate this is just paper talk for now but this would a proper blow to many. By nature most single occupancy (adults only) households will be worse off than couples or multi adult households. Paying a full households bills by yourself is no easy task for many as it is.

I’d imagine a high percentage are single parents or pensioners. Further it’s a not a benefit, it’s in place because a single adult uses less amenities than 2 or more adults.

In Edinburgh someone living in the lowest band A, and by effect someone who’s potentially not very well off, would pay an extra £332 a year which is unthinkable for some really. You can increase that number to £500 for someone in band D and a whopping £1160 a year extra for someone in a band H.

Am I right in believing this is a devolved issue and the SNP could keep this discount in place? Major brownie point for the SNP from me if Labour do make this change and SNP don’t.

[Ozyhibby]

https://x.com/savanqadir/status/1832908641235812477?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Trying hard not to criticise this new Labour govt until the budget (should have had it by now) but it’s not easy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://x.com/peston/status/1833175652847042899?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy Bee]

https://x.com/peston/status/1833175652847042899?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Your previous clip with Reeves has her going on to mention the fact if she didn't cut the benefit it could see a run on the pound and inflation and the likes increasing. Lucy Powell went one step further and spoke about it creating a run on the pound with inflation and interest rates rising on the scale of the Liz Truss mini budget. It's complete bollox and I'm hoping that they know that and are just bull****ting, the more it goes on though I'm actually starting to worry that they actually believe it.

[wookie70]

48 mins doesn’t seem like a hellish commute?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Not far off an extra day a week in work.

[wookie70]

https://x.com/savanqadir/status/1832908641235812477?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Trying hard not to criticise this new Labour govt until the budget (should have had it by now) but it’s not easy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk She was absolutely bang on when it was simply about what was best. As soon as it became politics and how can I stay in power and have a lucrative career funded by rich companies afterwards all of a sudden the obvious solution evades her. I like conviction politicians personally. The Chameleons like Starmer and Reeves etc have no believes and I wouldn't trust her when she says she wants people out of poverty either. That would change at the drop of an opinion poll or focus group

[Ozyhibby]

https://youtu.be/0SzkRmaoBUw?si=JCHBPV1nu6sVFp16

Could have put this in a few threads.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Not far off an extra day a week in work.

Except your not in work. My commute was 40 minutes by car or 75 minutes by bus. I could read on the bus and got through lots of books, but I also made a few good friends.

[wookie70]

Except your not in work. My commute was 40 minutes by car or 75 minutes by bus. I could read on the bus and got through lots of books, but I also made a few good friends.

I suppose it depends on your viewpoint. I travelled through to Glasgow to work for years. Trains, Motorbikes, Buses and car including car share. The second I left the house I was working as I had, at best, a far narrower range of choices and mostly just doing something I would rather avoid. I work from home now for my main job but also travel frequently doing my photography. As a freelancer travel time is always considered in the price of a job and if it is worth doing. For me any commute, by any means is inextricably linked to work and should be minimised or rewarded. Great if you enjoy it but give me free time over commuting any day of the week

[Pretty Boy]

I suppose it depends on your viewpoint. I travelled through to Glasgow to work for years. Trains, Motorbikes, Buses and car including car share. The second I left the house I was working as I had, at best, a far narrower range of choices and mostly just doing something I would rather avoid. I work from home now for my main job but also travel frequently doing my photography. As a freelancer travel time is always considered in the price of a job and if it is worth doing. For me any commute, by any means is inextricably linked to work and should be minimised or rewarded. Great if you enjoy it but give me free time over commuting any day of the week

You have to factor in that travel time is time that eats in to time when other things need doing.

I cycle to work most days and that takes about 45 minutes. Only marginally longer than it takes to drive as I take a near traffic free route. I ran in this morning and got the bus home and that took 95 minutes from leaving work to getting home; Sighthill to Fort Kinnaird. That just isn't doable for me regularly as my wife works back shift 3 nights a week and I have to be home for her leaving at 5. For others that will getting kids to sports or classes, picking kids up from childcare on time, caring for elderly relatives etc etc. The difference between 30 mins and 60 mins can be huge. My own situation isn't helped by the fact that ScotRail have 'temporarily' cancelled a couple of trains that would make it quicker (if 7 weeks and counting can be called temporary).

I'm not suggesting it is realistic for public transport to be as quick as a private car or even a bike but it has to be better than more than double the time. You aren't going to tempt people out the car with 'well it's not that bad'. We need to get to a point at which using public or active transport becomes the no brainer option and we are miles away.

[superfurryhibby]

Another consideration in all of this is the cost of my time to my employers. I commuted from south Edinburgh to Glasgow by car recently, Just over an hour door to door.

If I had taken public transport, I would have been lucky to be sitting on the train in that time (taking into account waiting on the bus, walking to the stop, walking from bus to train station and then waiting on the train). I would then have had to go to Glasgow Central and take the train to Crosshill and walked for another 15 mins. That journey door -door would have been well over two hours.

Time is money (I should add that travel is an essential part of what I do, public transport works for travel around Edinburgh, but it has it's limits).

[grunt]

I'm not suggesting it is realistic for public transport to be as quick as a private car or even a bike but it has to be better than more than double the time. You aren't going to tempt people out the car with 'well it's not that bad'. We need to get to a point at which using public or active transport becomes the no brainer option and we are miles away.
:agree: As in London.

[GlesgaeHibby]

It's no wonder folk don't switch to public transport when the cost and reliability of service is shocking. I decided to try and get the bus into town this morning from Haddington. Two buses in a row didn't show up. Now had to dive in car to newcraighall for a train that is running late and overcrowded.

[McD]

You have to factor in that travel time is time that eats in to time when other things need doing.

I cycle to work most days and that takes about 45 minutes. Only marginally longer than it takes to drive as I take a near traffic free route. I ran in this morning and got the bus home and that took 95 minutes from leaving work to getting home; Sighthill to Fort Kinnaird. That just isn't doable for me regularly as my wife works back shift 3 nights a week and I have to be home for her leaving at 5. For others that will getting kids to sports or classes, picking kids up from childcare on time, caring for elderly relatives etc etc. The difference between 30 mins and 60 mins can be huge. My own situation isn't helped by the fact that ScotRail have 'temporarily' cancelled a couple of trains that would make it quicker (if 7 weeks and counting can be called temporary).

I'm not suggesting it is realistic for public transport to be as quick as a private car or even a bike but it has to be better than more than double the time. You aren't going to tempt people out the car with 'well it's not that bad'. We need to get to a point at which using public or active transport becomes the no brainer option and we are miles away.



:agree:


There’s also similar issues in the morning. My daughter’s school goes in at 8:40, I imagine others are similar, so in order to get her into school there’s no way I could use public transport and be at work for 9.

[cabbageandribs1875]

Sir **** Starmer, the king of flip flop, and shame on every BLiS MP and those that voted them in, BLiS have a lot more damage to do to people in Scotland, said it before and i'll say it again...shame on yi's

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GXHnjL8XkAEvPMT?format=jpg&name=large

[JimBHibees]

Sir **** Starmer, the king of flip flop, and shame on every BLiS MP and those that voted them in, BLiS have a lot more damage to do to people in Scotland, said it before and i'll say it again...shame on yi's

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GXHnjL8XkAEvPMT?format=jpg&name=large

Seems a really odd policy to be honest. Let’s kick some of the most vulnerable in society. Strange when so many other areas to focus on and apparently doesn’t save that much anyway.

[marinello59]

Seems a really odd policy to be honest. Let’s kick some of the most vulnerable in society. Strange when so many other areas to focus on and apparently doesn’t save that much anyway.

I can see there is an argument to be made about targeting a winter fuel payment towards those who really need it but doing it with such a harsh cut off point is cruel.
The big thing for me is the lie they are trying to spin about pensioners all being better off because of the triple lock. No, they aren’t, they are worse off , this has devalued the triple lock increase. It’s dishonest and cowardly.

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240912/9595d75c58b4cfd4df18b5c4056bd246.png


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://x.com/brianleishmanmp/status/1808180064653058177?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

He done some lying during that campaign. Did he not say ‘read my lips, no austerity’?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

Oh.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GXScn7kXcAEKSyH?format=png&name=900x900

[DaveF]

Anas has said it's deeply disappointing. Oh well, that's reassuring for the 300 or so people whose jobs you said you would protect.

[Pretty Boy]

I was always loathe to use the red Tories line but that is where we are now. It's been an utterly shameful first few weeks in power for Labour.

The PMs namesake must be turning in his grave at what his party has become. There isn't even a nod to socialism within the leadership and shame on those MPs who voted in favour of the policy or gave tacit approval by abstaining rather than voting against.

[marinello59]

I was always loathe to use the red Tories line but that is where we are now. It's been an utterly shameful first few weeks in power for Labour.

The PMs namesake must be turning in his grave at what his party has become. There isn't even a nod to socialism within the leadership and shame on those MPs who voted in favour of the policy or gave tacit approval by abstaining rather than voting against.

I still don’t think the Red Tories attack line is justified but they certainly ain’t Socialist. I really don’t know what they are.

[Moulin Yarns]

Anas has said it's deeply disappointing. Oh well, that's reassuring for the 300 or so people whose jobs you said you would protect.

Multiply by at least 3.

Sure it's 800 direct jobs,but also the indirect jobs in grangemouth and surrounding area.

I used live there and every other person worked in the petrochemical industry.

[Ozyhibby]

https://x.com/ian_fraser/status/1834135194971820441?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

This sort of nonsense needs to stop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

I still don’t think the Red Tories attack line is justified but they certainly ain’t Socialist. I really don’t know what they are.

I've been holding back on commenting on the new government until we've seen what direction they take. So far it's not great, they certainly aren't 2022 Tories but the similarities to the Tories 2012 is definitely there.

[Ozyhibby]

I've been holding back on commenting on the new government until we've seen what direction they take. So far it's not great, they certainly aren't 2022 Tories by the similarities to the Tories 2012 is definitely there.

They look to the right of Cameron to be honest. Similar lack of a grand plan as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

They look to the right of Cameron to be honest. Similar lack of a grand plan as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:agree: They seem to be cuffing it, however I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt because of what they've inherited. They do however need to come up with a transparent plan and soon.

[Ozyhibby]

:agree: They seem to be cuffing it, however I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt because of what they've inherited. They do however need to come up with a transparent plan and soon.

They didn’t mention in July when they wanted everyone’s votes that they wouldn’t do a budget till October and not really start work before it. [emoji2369]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

They didn’t mention in July when they wanted everyone’s votes that they wouldn’t do a budget till October and not really start work before it. [emoji2369]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They've taken over a **** show, but that argument will only hold up so long but I'm willing to bide my time.

[Jack]

Is Scotland the biggest oil producer in the world that will not have an oil refinery?

England has 5, even Wales has 1!

Is it a case of Westminster not investing in Scotland in case independence comes along one day?

I did think it a wee bit odd when gas from Norway to the UK bypassed Scotland through a 700+ mile pipeline laid under the North Sea, at a cost of £1.7bn, to the Easington Gas Terminal near Hull. Peterhead which has a gas terminal would have been around 450 miles.

[marinello59]

They didn’t mention in July when they wanted everyone’s votes that they wouldn’t do a budget till October and not really start work before it. [emoji2369]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They did. We all knew the first budget was months away. Let’s not just make stuff up.

[Ozyhibby]

https://x.com/theresa_may/status/1834259640399393118?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

I remember when Labour wanted to make the Lords elected.[emoji23]
You can’t vote mp’s out anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

They look to the right of Cameron to be honest. Similar lack of a grand plan as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cameron went for austerity. City am today are saying the city is expecting at least £23 billion in tax rises. I'm sure if that happens you'll agree that is literally the opposite of austerity and what cameron would choose?

Adding VAT to private schools simply wouldn't have happened under any Tory government. Neither would scrapping nom doms, ending onshore wind farm ban, ending no fault evections, ending the Rwanda scheme, uk energy getting its headquarters in Scotland, ban zero-hour contracts, end fire and rehire, a bill to nationalise the railways, bill to check every water outlet and charge directors of failing water companies, ban hereditary peers, ban conversion therapy, pledge 1.5 million homes and force councils to hit targets

That's all in a few months tax rises, Rwanda, private school tax alone show that anyone saying they are right of the tories either doesn't know much about politics or has another motivate imo. They are a centrists government similar to the SNP, that's unfortunate as there isn't any left wing uk main political choices

[grunt]

I still don’t think the Red Tories attack line is justified but they certainly ain’t Socialist. I really don’t know what they are.
Liars?

[Andy Bee]

Cameron went for austerity. City am today are saying the city is expecting at least £23 billion in tax rises. I'm sure if that happens you'll agree that is literally the opposite of austerity and what cameron would choose?

Adding VAT to private schools simply wouldn't have happened under any Tory government. Neither would scrapping nom doms, ending onshore wind farm ban, ending no fault evections, ending the Rwanda scheme, uk energy getting its headquarters in Scotland, ban zero-hour contracts, end fire and rehire, a bill to nationalise the railways, bill to check every water outlet and charge directors of failing water companies, ban hereditary peers, ban conversion therapy, pledge 1.5 million homes and force councils to hit targets

That's all in a few months tax rises, Rwanda, private school tax alone show that anyone saying they are right of the tories either doesn't know much about politics or has another motivate imo. They are a centrists government similar to the SNP, that's unfortunate as there isn't any left wing uk main political choices


Surely it's more important where those tax rises occur and so far there's none reported that'll reduce inequality apart from maybe a pittance from Nom Doms. There's reports which are so far not being ruled out that single person council tax discount is going to end, that'll hurt widowed pensioners again along with single parent families. The Rwanda scheme was a no brainer but as of yet there's no "Immigration task force" promised and 1185 people in boats have arrived since the election with a reported 427 just on Monday alone. Nationalise the railways? They're taking back contracts as they end, hardly radical considering they'll own nothing, rolling stock will be rented. Hereditary Peers? They also said they'll put an age limit of 80 on all Peers only to appoint Margaret Hodge days later who was 80 five days ago. The example you give of taxing private schools shows they're not right wing? In reality they've taxed out the middle class from private education, the self employed joiners with a couple of vans on the road, the electricians, the plumbers, shopkeepers, you surely don't think people like Jacob Reese Mogg will bat an eyelid at having to pay VAT for his kids private education, I'd bet he'd welcome it to get rid of some of the riff raff. There's also the problem occurring now where kids with special needs who need specialised schooling are being priced out, it's not all Tarquins and Hyasenths being taxed here it's normal working class people being priced out who have a real need for specialised private education.

Austerity is favouring the wealthiest in society, not people on £100k a year but people with £millions/billions and Labour have signed up to the same old Tory monetary framework that has been proven not to work when you look at the inequalities in a country which is meant to be the 6th richest in the world.

When you get a minute have a watch of this, I don't think there's much of an argument over any of it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFCHFFbTMlE

[Stairway 2 7]

Surely it's more important where those tax rises occur and so far there's none reported that'll reduce inequality apart from maybe a pittance from Nom Doms. There's reports which are so far not being ruled out that single person council tax discount is going to end, that'll hurt widowed pensioners again along with single parent families. The Rwanda scheme was a no brainer but as of yet there's no "Immigration task force" promised and 1185 people in boats have arrived since the election with a reported 427 just on Monday alone. Nationalise the railways? They're taking back contracts as they end, hardly radical considering they'll own nothing, rolling stock will be rented. Hereditary Peers? They also said they'll put an age limit of 80 on all Peers only to appoint Margaret Hodge days later who was 80 five days ago. The example you give of taxing private schools shows they're not right wing? In reality they've taxed out the middle class from private education, the self employed joiners with a couple of vans on the road, the electricians, the plumbers, shopkeepers, you surely don't think people like Jacob Reese Mogg will bat an eyelid at having to pay VAT for his kids private education, I'd bet he'd welcome it to get rid of some of the riff raff. There's also the problem occurring now where kids with special needs who need specialised schooling are being priced out, it's not all Tarquins and Hyasenths being taxed here it's normal working class people being priced out who have a real need for specialised private education.

Austerity is favouring the wealthiest in society, not people on £100k a year but people with £millions/billions and Labour have signed up to the same old Tory monetary framework that has been proven not to work when you look at the inequalities in a country which is meant to be the 6th richest in the world.

When you get a minute have a watch of this, I don't think there's much of an argument over any of it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFCHFFbTMlE

People on 100k are the top 3%. If you can afford to send your kid to a 10k per year school when most in Britain are toiling then you are rich. It's the same when people said SNP rasing the top tax rate is just punishing the middle class for working hard, it's nonsense.

The tax rises rumoured are from fuel duty which is fabulous, we simply need less car miles driven. SNP are wanting 30% less which is great, Labour is non committal so far but this is a good start. The biggest part of the money is meant to come from inheritance tax and pension relief tax. These both will mostly come from the top 7.5% of the population.

You can dismiss the Rwanda policy but the people it would effect its life changing, as for the amount still coming in boats I'm not that fussy they are mostly young and we are an aging population, I'd put out welcome mats.

You can say non dom status is a pittance but I don't think £2.8 billion is a pittance. £2.6 billion from the oil and gas windfall tax isn't a pittance either. Regardless of how the tax rises come it's the opposite of austerity

You missed ending fire rehire, zero hour contracts, no fault evections, onshore wind farm ban,bill to check every water outlet and charge directors of failing water companies, ban conversion therapy and planning change and 1.5 million homes target.

It's not one thing it's multiple things in 3 months. They are very different from the Tories. They aren't left wing but Corbyn is the only left wing Labour leader in my life, the norm for me is Blair and Brown and Starmer is similar, but that seems to be electable

[Paul1642]

How about the rumoured single single council tax discount ending. That’s a proper hard hitter on many of society’s worst off.

I appreciate not ruling it out isn’t the same as implementing it but that’s pretty concerning imo.

[lapsedhibee]

How about the rumoured single single council tax discount ending. That’s a proper hard hitter on many of society’s worst off.

I appreciate not ruling it out isn’t the same as implementing it but that’s pretty concerning imo.

Little old ladies with broad shoulders.

[Stairway 2 7]

How about the rumoured single single council tax discount ending. That’s a proper hard hitter on many of society’s worst off.

I appreciate not ruling it out isn’t the same as implementing it but that’s pretty concerning imo.

Would be terrible imo although it's a rumour I suppose like all the tax rises.

Ending the blanket winter fuel allowance was correct from Labour and SNP though. Notice its been announced the full pension will raise by £460, hundreds above inflation so panic over

[Bostonhibby]

They've taken over a **** show, but that argument will only hold up so long but I'm willing to bide my time.Yep, where I am, to expect any incoming government that wasn't the same gang, to come in and say the outgoing government was telling us the truth on the economy or anything else is bonkers-they were lead by Bozo and his chums.

That said they have to do more radical things to rectify the shortfall. Much of that money found it's way to Tory donators, tory loyalists and people who had plenty warning to offshore or otherwise hide their share of the booty.

Taxing further up the line is overdue as a means of recovering at least some of the plunder. If they really do want to move offshore with their money rather than pay as uk based or resident taxpayers fine, many of the super rich currently enjoy the best of both worlds.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[jamie_1875]

How about the rumoured single single council tax discount ending. That’s a proper hard hitter on many of society’s worst off.

I appreciate not ruling it out isn’t the same as implementing it but that’s pretty concerning imo.

Wouldn't this be a decision for the councils in Scotland? Would Labour have the power to remove that from Edinburgh council?

[Paul1642]

Wouldn't this be a decision for the councils in Scotland? Would Labour have the power to remove that from Edinburgh council?

I don’t know for sure but I assume your right, however Labour doing it would give SNP and easy financial win at a time when councils are strapped and I think they would follow suit and blame Labour.

I personally agree with the ending of winter fuel allowance although think the cut off should have been a bit higher. The removal of single occupancy would however be a huge double whammy for those already affected and I genuinely just don’t think it makes any sense. A since occupant should logically pay less, pure and simple.

[grunt]

Starmer should reverse Brexit or explain why not and how he's going to hit his growth targets without it. If he reverses Brexit I may well become a labour voter*.

*I won't, but I'd look kindly on his premiership.

[Stairway 2 7]

I don’t know for sure but I assume your right, however Labour doing it would give SNP and easy financial win at a time when councils are strapped and I think they would follow suit and blame Labour.

I personally agree with the ending of winter fuel allowance although think the cut off should have been a bit higher. The removal of single occupancy would however be a huge double whammy for those already affected and I genuinely just don’t think it makes any sense. A since occupant should logically pay less, pure and simple.

Agree with all of this including the WFA should have been higher. They also need to get a way of getting the 800,000 who can apply for pension benefit to claim.

The single occupancy makes no sense, surely they are clearly using less council services and have a higher chance of a lesser income

[Bostonhibby]

Starmer should reverse Brexit or explain why not and how he's going to hit his growth targets without it. If he reverses Brexit I may well become a labour voter*.

*I won't, but I'd look kindly on his premiership.I sort of see where you are coming from but I think the only way he could do it is in a Tory sort of " not privatising the NHS" way.

Align ourselves much more to Europe and let a different generation have the ultimate vote. Just doing it without a vote probably won't work, we have a generation right now who regard the one moment in time Brexit vote as final and irrevocable-in our democracy.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Andy Bee]

Here's a novel idea, give all pensioners, without means testing and over 70 free electric and means test pensioners below that age to see if they may qualify. If they don't qualify then give them an £850 winter fuel allowance.

[Paul1642]

Here's a novel idea, give all pensioners, without means testing and over 70 free electric and means test pensioners below that age to see if they may qualify. If they don't qualify then give them an £850 winter fuel allowance.

The only problem with that’s would be free electricity = using it without consideration.

[Bostonhibby]

Here's a novel idea, give all pensioners, without means testing and over 70 free electric and means test pensioners below that age to see if they may qualify. If they don't qualify then give them an £850 winter fuel allowance.Great idea, there's a place for it if it can be funded but a starting point has to be a benefits system that addresses the needs of the most needy, from the bottom up like it was meant to.

We need to do a much better job of getting it to the existing group of pensioners who are still eligible but haven't worked out how to claim and maintain it for those that still do qualify.





Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Paul1642]

I sort of see where you are coming from but I think the only way he could do it is in a Tory sort of " not privatising the NHS" way.

Align ourselves much more to Europe and let a different generation have the ultimate vote. Just doing it without a vote probably won't work, we have a generation right now who regard the one moment in time Brexit vote as final and irrevocable-in our democracy.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

We had a good deal before and should never have left. Joining on worse terms isn’t necessarily the answer though

[Andy Bee]

The only problem with that’s would be free electricity = using it without consideration.


Great idea, there's a place for it if it can be funded but a starting point has to be a benefits system that addresses the needs of the most needy, from the bottom up like it was meant to.

We need to do a much better job of getting it to the existing group of pensioners who are still eligible but haven't worked out how to claim and maintain it for those that still do qualify.





Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk


It's a tried, tested and up and running policy already in Ireland although slightly misleading. It's called the Free Electricity Allowance and can also be for gas in which every pensioner in Ireland over 70 gets 35 Euro a month for energy and under certain circumstances under 70 yr olds receive it including carers. They're also about to vote on giving 1000 euros to all pensioners, non tested as a Winter Fuel Payment.

[Bostonhibby]

It's a tried, tested and up and running policy already in Ireland although slightly misleading. It's called the Free Electricity Allowance and can also be for gas in which every pensioner in Ireland over 70 gets 35 Euro a month for energy and under certain circumstances under 70 yr olds receive it including carers. They're also about to vote on giving 1000 euros to all pensioners, non tested as a Winter Fuel Payment.You won't find me disagreeing [emoji106]

You could go further and look at Norway, for example, but they tended not to blow their sovereign wealth.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

We had a good deal before and should never have left. Joining on worse terms isn’t necessarily the answer though[emoji106]

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

16% of pensioners are in relative poverty which is terrible but 30% of children. Why does sir Tom Farmer need more money. Benefits should be means tested so the 16% of pensioners and 30% of children get it, it's just bad use of finances to do anything else.

Unlimited energy is also bad when we have a climate emergency and need to cut usage

[grunt]

We had a good deal before and should never have left. Joining on worse terms isn’t necessarily the answer though
I realise this is probably not the thread for a Brexit discussion, but who is talking about "worse terms"? I'd like Starmer to start talking about *any* terms. Until we start talking about it, discussions about better / worse terms are just conjecture.

[Stairway 2 7]

It would need to go to a referendum it would be Trump January 6th to end a decision millions voted for. I'd slip in more and more things the dolts don't care about Erasmus, trade, regulation, science ect to make it easier.

Although I'd doubt Labour wins the next election on a rejoin mandate, too many seats were tight.

[Paul1642]

It would need to go to a referendum it would be Trump January 6th to end a decision millions voted for. I'd slip in more and more things the dolts don't care about Erasmus, trade, regulation, science ect to make it easier.

Although I'd doubt Labour wins the next election on a rejoin mandate, too many seats were tight.

They might. Of the 52% of leave voters now many were a protest vote and how many have changed their vote? That’s before you factor in how many people didn’t vote because they though remain was a foregone conclusion.

I think Labour have probably started to hemorrhage votes already and budget will be a big hit. A rejoin mandate might be what they need to gain / borrow votes from those who would go to Lib Dem, Green and Independents as the more hardcore leave oriented voters will return to Tory or go for Reform.

[grunt]

I think Labour have probably started to hemorrhage votes already and budget will be a bigger hit. A rejoin mandate might be what they need to gain / borrow votes from those who would go to Lib Dem, Green and Independents as the more leave oriented voters will return to Tory or go for Reform.You'll maybe tell me it's too much to ask, but I want Starmer to start the rejoin process because it's the right thing to do, not simply because he thinks it will garner him more votes. But I guess I'm just a dreamer.

[Paul1642]

You'll maybe tell me it's too much to ask, but I want Starmer to start the rejoin process because it's the right thing to do, not simply because he thinks it will garner him more votes. But I guess I'm just a dreamer.

It is too much to ask. Politicians of all parties care only about elections. The right thing a very much an afterthought.

[lapsedhibee]

Notice its been announced the full pension will raise by £460, hundreds above inflation so panic over

AND I believe they still get £10 from the Government to lavish on their family every Christmas.

[Stairway 2 7]

They might. Of the 52% of leave voters now many were a protest vote and how many have changed their vote? That’s before you factor in how many people didn’t vote because they though remain was a foregone conclusion.

I think Labour have probably started to hemorrhage votes already and budget will be a big hit. A rejoin mandate might be what they need to gain / borrow votes from those who would go to Lib Dem, Green and Independents as the more hardcore leave oriented voters will return to Tory or go for Reform.

Nah I'm sure Labour have done plenty polling on the subject. Labour won't win by picking up from the left but they will lose if the middle goes to the right. Labour played an absolute blinder at the election they used strategists and they said ignore all funding to your safe and left seats and use all the budget on target seats, it gave them a landslide.

Regardless I think it needs a referendum regardless if we hate the outcome. They would maybe get away with it if they said the public clearly wants a referendum so we'll give them it. Problem is joining the EU means free movement. I don't think many European parties want a mandate that says massively increasing immigration.

[Pretty Boy]

16% of pensioners are in relative poverty which is terrible but 30% of children. Why does sir Tom Farmer need more money. Benefits should be means tested so the 16% of pensioners and 30% of children get it, it's just bad use of finances to do anything else.

Unlimited energy is also bad when we have a climate emergency and need to cut usage

One of the overriding principles of the Labour movement for generations was universalism. It was a key driver of the creation of the shamefully dropped Clause IV. The concept behind the ideals of universalism was and is simple: 'The universal enforcement of a national minimum of services, the requisites of healthy life and worthy citizenship'. It was a principle that built the welfare state in the late 1940s and was a largely accepted cross party principle until Thatcherism bulldozed it in the 1980s. We used to be believe in pooling of resources for the common good regardless of ability to pay.

The preceding neoliberal consensus that has existed since Thatcher and Reagan has created a society that scoffs at 'free stuff'. It was long the belief of the Labour Party that society as a whole was elevated when the state provided an adequate and comfortable minimum for everyone. The concept of the means tested safety net was seen as an inherently conservative (small or large c whatever you prefer, it applies to both) belief whilst the idea of something for everyone was the principle of the left. The former belief is something we have been conditioned to believe in for 40 years: taking responsibility for services once provided by the state is a societal good, something to be proud of because you have helped ease the burden on the treasury. On one side you get people saying 'why should I pay for other people to have children' and on the other you have 'access to basic services for the rich is regressive and a subsidy to wealth'.

It's an alien concept in the UK now because believing in universalism involves rejecting perceived wisdom. It's not as controversial elsewhere. Parents in the Netherlands get free childcare from when their children are 6 weeks old, free social care for the elderly exists in parts of Scandinavian and in Scotland we have the joint wonders of free higher education and prescriptions.

Universalism creates a better quality of service because everyone has a stake in it. It removes stigma, it creates a society we all participate in, it's often proven to be more efficient in terms of delivery and cost and ultimately the rich don't get 'a freebie'; they pay more in taxation for an improved and expanded service. It's not about returning to the clunky, stagnant and centralised services of the 70s; the Catalan parliament has funded many dynamic community led groups to deliver public improvement initiatives.

We need to move on from the idea that there is no such things as a society. Almost 2 decades of so called austerity has decimated public services. People would do well to remember that in it's most basic form universalism is the provision of the means for people to help themselves.

[Stairway 2 7]

One of the overriding principles of the Labour movement for generations was universalism. It was a key driver of the creation of the shamefully dropped Clause IV. The concept behind the ideals of universalism was and is simple: 'The universal enforcement of a national minimum of services, the requisites of healthy life and worthy citizenship'. It was a principle that built the welfare state in the late 1940s and was a largely accepted cross party principle until Thatcherism bulldozed it in the 1980s. We used to be believe in pooling of resources for the common good regardless of ability to pay.

The preceding neoliberal consensus that has existed since Thatcher and Reagan has created a society that scoffs at 'free stuff'. It was long the belief of the Labour Party that society as a whole was elevated when the state provided an adequate and comfortable minimum for everyone. The concept of the means tested safety net was seen as an inherently conservative (small or large c whatever you prefer, it applies to both). It's been something we have been conditioned to believe for 40 years: taking responsibility for services once provided by the state is a societal good, something to be proud of. On one side you get people saying 'why should I pay for other people to have children' and on the other you have 'access to basic services for the rich is regressive and a subsidy to wealth'.

It's an alien concept in the UK now because believing in universalism involves rejecting perceived wisdom. It's not as controversial elsewhere. Parents in the Netherlands get free childcare from when their children are 6 weeks old, free social care for the elderly exists in parts of Scandinavian and in Scotland we have the joint wonders of free higher education and prescriptions.

Universalism creates a better quality of service because everyone has a stake in it. It removes stigma, it creates a society we all participate in, it's often proven to be more efficient in terms of delivery and cost and ultimately the rich don't get 'a freebie'; they pay more in taxation for an improved and expanded service. It's not about returning to the clunky, stagnant and centralised services of the 70s; the Catalan parliament has funded many dynamic community led groups to deliver public improvement initiatives.

We need to move on from the idea that there is no such things as a society. Almost 2 decades of so called austerity has decimated public services. People would do well to remember that in it's most basic form universalism is the provision of the means for people to help themselves.

Labour isn't the party of the 40s just as SNP aren't tartan tories they are what they are now. Childcare is different as having children should be encouraged, we need children to become adults to pay pensions especially in an aging nation.

I'd be half alright if the money went directly on the gas and electric bill. It doesn't it's just an untargeted cash benefit to a certain age group. I'm happy for the bus pass that goes directly to the card for example. Why don't we just give everyone between 50 and 60 £200 in cash in June and tell them to buy food.

We can't give everyone everything in a stagnant economy we need to pick and choose it would be far down my list when we have 30% of kids in poverty in the uk and £145,000 kids homeless in the UK

[Pretty Boy]

Labour isn't the party of the 40s just as SNP aren't tartan tories they are what they are now. Childcare is different as having children should be encouraged, we need children to become adults to pay pensions especially in an aging nation.

I'd be half alright if the money went directly on the gas and electric bill. It doesn't it's just an untargeted cash benefit to a certain age group. I'm happy for the bus pass that goes directly to the card for example. Why don't we just give everyone between 50 and 60 £200 in cash in June and tell them to buy food.

We can't give everyone everything in a stagnant economy we need to pick and choose it would be far down my list when we have 30% of kids in poverty in the uk and £145,000 kids homeless in the UK

The economy is stagnant in part because a not insignificant number of people have no money to spend after paying for food and shelter. Removing and/or means testing the supposed safety nets doesn't help resolve that.

If we haven't learned that austerity doesn't work by now then we probably never will.

[Andy Bee]

One of the overriding principles of the Labour movement for generations was universalism. It was a key driver of the creation of the shamefully dropped Clause IV. The concept behind the ideals of universalism was and is simple: 'The universal enforcement of a national minimum of services, the requisites of healthy life and worthy citizenship'. It was a principle that built the welfare state in the late 1940s and was a largely accepted cross party principle until Thatcherism bulldozed it in the 1980s. We used to be believe in pooling of resources for the common good regardless of ability to pay.

The preceding neoliberal consensus that has existed since Thatcher and Reagan has created a society that scoffs at 'free stuff'. It was long the belief of the Labour Party that society as a whole was elevated when the state provided an adequate and comfortable minimum for everyone. The concept of the means tested safety net was seen as an inherently conservative (small or large c whatever you prefer, it applies to both) belief whilst the idea of something for everyone was the principle of the left. The former belief is something we have been conditioned to believe in for 40 years: taking responsibility for services once provided by the state is a societal good, something to be proud of because you have helped ease the burden on the treasury. On one side you get people saying 'why should I pay for other people to have children' and on the other you have 'access to basic services for the rich is regressive and a subsidy to wealth'.

It's an alien concept in the UK now because believing in universalism involves rejecting perceived wisdom. It's not as controversial elsewhere. Parents in the Netherlands get free childcare from when their children are 6 weeks old, free social care for the elderly exists in parts of Scandinavian and in Scotland we have the joint wonders of free higher education and prescriptions.

Universalism creates a better quality of service because everyone has a stake in it. It removes stigma, it creates a society we all participate in, it's often proven to be more efficient in terms of delivery and cost and ultimately the rich don't get 'a freebie'; they pay more in taxation for an improved and expanded service. It's not about returning to the clunky, stagnant and centralised services of the 70s; the Catalan parliament has funded many dynamic community led groups to deliver public improvement initiatives.

We need to move on from the idea that there is no such things as a society. Almost 2 decades of so called austerity has decimated public services. People would do well to remember that in it's most basic form universalism is the provision of the means for people to help themselves.


You should run for MSP PB, I'd vote for you. :greengrin

[Stairway 2 7]

The economy is stagnant in part because a not insignificant number of people have no money to spend after paying for food and shelter. Removing and/or means testing the supposed safety nets doesn't help resolve that.

If we haven't learned that austerity doesn't work by now then we probably never will.

There is a £22 billion shortfall. The rumour is most of this will come from tax rises, isn't that literally the opposite of austerity. Baring in mind £9.4 billion of that figure is from great well above inflation public sector wage rises, em also the opposite of austerity no. Oh and sorry £1.4 billion in stopping the Rwanda scheme

[MKHIBEE]

One of the overriding principles of the Labour movement for generations was universalism. It was a key driver of the creation of the shamefully dropped Clause IV. The concept behind the ideals of universalism was and is simple: 'The universal enforcement of a national minimum of services, the requisites of healthy life and worthy citizenship'. It was a principle that built the welfare state in the late 1940s and was a largely accepted cross party principle until Thatcherism bulldozed it in the 1980s. We used to be believe in pooling of resources for the common good regardless of ability to pay.

The preceding neoliberal consensus that has existed since Thatcher and Reagan has created a society that scoffs at 'free stuff'. It was long the belief of the Labour Party that society as a whole was elevated when the state provided an adequate and comfortable minimum for everyone. The concept of the means tested safety net was seen as an inherently conservative (small or large c whatever you prefer, it applies to both) belief whilst the idea of something for everyone was the principle of the left. The former belief is something we have been conditioned to believe in for 40 years: taking responsibility for services once provided by the state is a societal good, something to be proud of because you have helped ease the burden on the treasury. On one side you get people saying 'why should I pay for other people to have children' and on the other you have 'access to basic services for the rich is regressive and a subsidy to wealth'.

It's an alien concept in the UK now because believing in universalism involves rejecting perceived wisdom. It's not as controversial elsewhere. Parents in the Netherlands get free childcare from when their children are 6 weeks old, free social care for the elderly exists in parts of Scandinavian and in Scotland we have the joint wonders of free higher education and prescriptions.

Universalism creates a better quality of service because everyone has a stake in it. It removes stigma, it creates a society we all participate in, it's often proven to be more efficient in terms of delivery and cost and ultimately the rich don't get 'a freebie'; they pay more in taxation for an improved and expanded service. It's not about returning to the clunky, stagnant and centralised services of the 70s; the Catalan parliament has funded many dynamic community led groups to deliver public improvement initiatives.

We need to move on from the idea that there is no such things as a society. Almost 2 decades of so called austerity has decimated public services. People would do well to remember that in its most basic form universalism is the provision of the means for people to help themselves.

Excellent post which, for me, highlights what’s wrong with society and the people who are charged with overseeing it.

[Paul1642]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8djply3z18o

“Sir Keir Starmer may have broken parliamentary rules in failing to declare clothes bought for his wife by Labour donor Lord Waheed Alli”

My issue with this isn’t necessarily with Starmer and this individual instance. The tories and plenty other politicians are at it equally as bad.

My issue is why are politicians allowed to accept gifts full stop? It’s weird at best and corrupt at worst. There is simply no good reason for it IMO.

[lapsedhibee]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8djply3z18o

“Sir Keir Starmer may have broken parliamentary rules in failing to declare clothes bought for his wife by Labour donor Lord Waheed Alli”

My issue with this isn’t necessarily with Starmer and this individual instance. The tories and plenty other politicians are at it equally as bad.

My issue is why are politicians allowed to accept gifts full stop? It’s weird at best and corrupt at worst. There is simply no good reason for it IMO.

Even worse the justification I heard on the radiobox this morning, by a Labour spokesman if I caught it correctly, that the reason for accepting the gifts was that the Starmers 'wanted to look their best'. Not just corrupt at worst, but corrupt full stop. Johnson was hounded for this sort of stuff, and Starmer should be too, until he puts a stop to it by changing the rules for everyone.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8djply3z18o

“Sir Keir Starmer may have broken parliamentary rules in failing to declare clothes bought for his wife by Labour donor Lord Waheed Alli”

My issue with this isn’t necessarily with Starmer and this individual instance. The tories and plenty other politicians are at it equally as bad.

My issue is why are politicians allowed to accept gifts full stop? It’s weird at best and corrupt at worst. There is simply no good reason for it IMO.

He is also one of the worst offenders in the commons for accepting freebies from corporate companies for sports events, concerts etc.
They will want their payback soon.

SNP got investigated for misuse of stamps. Since proven to be BS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[McD]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8djply3z18o

“Sir Keir Starmer may have broken parliamentary rules in failing to declare clothes bought for his wife by Labour donor Lord Waheed Alli”

My issue with this isn’t necessarily with Starmer and this individual instance. The tories and plenty other politicians are at it equally as bad.

My issue is why are politicians allowed to accept gifts full stop? It’s weird at best and corrupt at worst. There is simply no good reason for it IMO.


It’s especially odd given there is legislation that specifically talks about the use of gifts in the realms of bribery.


Joe bloggs in his workplace would be hauled over the coals, potentially dismissed and potentially prosecuted for some of the ‘gifts’ that are handed out to MPs

[jamie_1875]

It’s especially odd given there is legislation that specifically talks about the use of gifts in the realms of bribery.


Joe bloggs in his workplace would be hauled over the coals, potentially dismissed and potentially prosecuted for some of the ‘gifts’ that are handed out to MPs

It's incredibly naive of them, and where are the army of no doubt highly paid special advisors who you think would say "hang on this doesn't look very good, maybe it's not a good idea"

I think at my work we have to declare any kind of gift or gesture that's over £10.

[Ozyhibby]

It's incredibly naive of them, and where are the army of no doubt highly paid special advisors who you think would say "hang on this doesn't look very good, maybe it's not a good idea"

I think at my work we have to declare any kind of gift or gesture that's over £10.

It’s not naive. He knows what he’s doing. He loves the good life.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jamie_1875]

It’s not naive. He knows what he’s doing. He loves the good life.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Niave means lack of judgement, that's exactly what it was.

[DaveF]

Niave means lack of judgement, that's exactly what it was.

At least he's enjoying himself at all the gigs and football games, even if his, erm, judgement is somewhat lacking.

[jamie_1875]

At least he's enjoying himself at all the gigs and football games, even if his, erm, judgement is somewhat lacking.

All allowed under the current rules if you like it or not, the buying of clothes for his wife from a third party when he is already a rich man is extremely poor judgement.

[Stairway 2 7]

Labour fighting the serious issues in its ban on junk food advertising. Some of the things that won't be able to advertise flavoured yoghurt, protein bars, porridge, granola, fruit juices, smoothes, scones, probiotic yoghurt, chewing gum and more 🙄

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp3d33l53r9o

[Pretty Boy]

The issue is that some people will dismiss it as 'just a couple of suits', 'just a ticket to a concert' or 'just a flight' but then you get the then shadow and now incumbent health secretary taking £175K from a donor with links to private healthcare firms and it doesn't seem quite so harmless.

All the trivial things add up and it's an in for the lobbyists. £175K is nothing when you know hundreds of millions in government contracts are on the way.

[Ozyhibby]

https://x.com/saulstaniforth/status/1835279589821616293?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JimBHibees]

The issue is that some people will dismiss it as 'just a couple of suits', 'just a ticket to a concert' or 'just a flight' but then you get the then shadow and now incumbent health secretary taking £175K from a donor with links to private healthcare firms and it doesn't seem quite so harmless.

All the trivial things add up and it's an in for the lobbyists. £175K is nothing when you know hundreds of millions in government contracts are on the way.

Absolutely makes no sense this is allowed to happen. There will be an agenda behind the gift and it will be that they will receive favourable treatment in future. Joke. Was there not a huge review of all mps expenses when that system was abused not that long ago

[Ozyhibby]

Absolutely makes no sense this is allowed to happen. There will be an agenda behind the gift and it will be that they will receive favourable treatment in future. Joke. Was there not a huge review of all mps expenses when that system was abused not that long ago

As a general rule, when another bloke is plying your wife with gifts and dressing her, he is usually after something on return.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240916/c77e869bcaf000d9ca07915e486234a8.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JimBHibees]

As a general rule, when another bloke is plying your wife with gifts and dressing her, he is usually after something on return.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240916/c77e869bcaf000d9ca07915e486234a8.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Man of the people

[cabbageandribs1875]

Sir Tory at the races (1) Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/reel/559135513214031)

[Moulin Yarns]

Sir Tory at the races (1) Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/reel/559135513214031)

Thanks, enjoyed that.

[Stairway 2 7]

Alex Baker was harassed by edl when having lunch in the pub with her daughters. Weirdos think it's ok to harass MPs in public. We laugh at America but we've had 2 MPs murdered this decade, this group should be treated like those abusing police last month

https://x.com/REWearmouth/status/1835418252182270053

[Ozyhibby]

https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1835747298996851007?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

I’m shocked.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy Bee]

Alex Baker was harassed by edl when having lunch in the pub with her daughters. Weirdos think it's ok to harass MPs in public. We laugh at America but we've had 2 MPs murdered this decade, this group should be treated like those abusing police last month

https://x.com/REWearmouth/status/1835418252182270053

So if said MP votes for a policy that will kill 4000 pensioners minimum is it OK? Asking for an old wrinkly friend.

[Stairway 2 7]

So if said MP votes for a policy that will kill 4000 pensioners minimum is it OK? Asking for an old wrinkly friend.

Why would that be OK that doesn't make sense. I disagree with everything the tories stand for but if a female MP was in private with her two young daughters I'd be a creep if me and a bunch of guys were shouting in her face, especially if some are shouting we are EDL like the video.

Thankfully the policy won't kill any pensioners due to two years of above inflation triple lock rises. That means every pensioner will be financially better off next year than this and better off this than last. Maybe Labour shouldn't have kept the triple lock when there is double the percentage of children in poverty than pensioners but I'm glad they chose to pay it. The junior doctors agreeing they pay deal will add another £2 billion to the budget and the £9 billion public sector pay rises previously agreed to Labour almost guarantees that the pension will rise above inflation in 2026 too. Increased finances for pensioners in the last few years and going forward, despite what Farage and the Tory press feed people

[Ozyhibby]

https://x.com/alexwickham/status/1835739940669247664?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Why would that be OK that doesn't make sense. I disagree with everything the tories stand for but if a female MP was in private with her two young daughters I'd be a creep if me and a bunch of guys were shouting in her face, especially if some are shouting we are EDL like the video.

Thankfully the policy won't kill any pensioners due to two years of above inflation triple lock rises. That means every pensioner will be financially better off next year than this and better off this than last. Maybe Labour shouldn't have kept the triple lock when there is double the percentage of children in poverty than pensioners but I'm glad they chose to pay it. The junior doctors agreeing they pay deal will add another £2 billion to the budget and the £9 billion public sector pay rises previously agreed to Labour almost guarantees that the pension will rise above inflation in 2026 too. Increased finances for pensioners in the last few years and going forward, despite what Farage and the Tory press feed people

Removing the WFA means, before April 2025, in other words, winter, pensioners will be £300 worse off. Those who survive will be £160 a month better off after April due to the removal of the WFA.

[Stairway 2 7]

Removing the WFA means, before April 2025, in other words, winter, pensioners will be £300 worse off. Those who survive will be £160 a month better off after April due to the removal of the WFA.

Your ignoring the pension rise in March. The full pension went up £902 from April this year so there will be less pensioners freezing this winter than previous. It will rise again this April so a £1360 rise in the pension in two years, reading the Tory press you'd think pensions are worse off than a few years when they are massively up.

Also inflation hit home owners far less than renters. Household nflation for renters was 4.2% last year but home owners inflation was 1.3%. 90% of poorest pensioners own their home, the ones that don't are still entitled to WFA

https://www.ft.com/content/5c383479-7c83-4db7-b75d-4f14c7f1c6a0

[lapsedhibee]

Your ignoring the pension rise in March. The full pension went up £902 from April this year so there will be less pensioners freezing this winter than previous. It will rise again this April so a £1360 rise in the pension in two years, reading the Tory press you'd think pensions are worse off than a few years when they are massively up.

You're aware that adding 5 or 10% on to not very much still gives you not very much, right?

[Stairway 2 7]

You're aware that adding 5 or 10% on to not very much still gives you not very much, right?

I'm saying the rhetoric about people freezing because this 200-300 is just daft when the rise in pension over this year and next is hundreds above that after inflation. About 12% of the budget goes on pensions £170 billion. IFS reckon that will rise to 21.2% by 2050 due to our aging population going to need over £130 billion if this poor growth continues.

The best thing the tories did was make joining a workplace pension compulsory. Many countries in Europe like Germany and France the state pensions comes from a percentage of your wages pay as you go

[lapsedhibee]

I'm saying the rhetoric about people freezing because this 200-300 is just daft when the rise in pension over this year and next is hundreds above that after inflation. About 12% of the budget goes on pensions £170 billion. IFS reckon that will rise to 21.2% by 2050 due to our aging population going to need over £130 billion if this poor growth continues.

The best thing the tories did was make joining a workplace pension compulsory. Many countries in Europe like Germany and France the state pensions comes from a percentage of your wages pay as you go

The rhetoric about the state pension increases being incredibly generous is also daft. There's plenty of very well off pensioners, but none of them became, or will become, well off because of the size of the state pension.

[Stairway 2 7]

The rhetoric about the state pension increases being incredibly generous is also daft. There's plenty of very well off pensioners, but none of them became, or will become, well off because of the size of the state pension.

£1360 increase in two years is generous when . Like most of Europe our state pension should also come from money saved from work. I think some people think the pension should be the same as a wage 25k or so. That would be 42% of all government spending in 25 years it would be nice but fantasy. There shouldn't be anyone old or young in the uk in poverty but I've not seen a party with a plan that stops that, Labour and the SNP certainly won't

[Moulin Yarns]

£1360 increase in two years is generous when . Like most of Europe our state pension should also come from money saved from work. I think some people think the pension should be the same as a wage 25k or so. That would be 42% of all government spending in 25 years it would be nice but fantasy. There shouldn't be anyone old or young in the uk in poverty but I've not seen a party with a plan that stops that, Labour and the SNP certainly won't

£3300 pay rise for the lowest level of junior doctors, I don't grudge them it for the job they do, but compared to the pension which people have worked 45-50 years for??

This government is screwing both the old and young!!

[CropleyWasGod]

£1360 increase in two years is generous when . Like most of Europe our state pension should also come from money saved from work. I think some people think the pension should be the same as a wage 25k or so. That would be 42% of all government spending in 25 years it would be nice but fantasy. There shouldn't be anyone old or young in the uk in poverty but I've not seen a party with a plan that stops that, Labour and the SNP certainly won't

That hasn't happened in reality, though.

The 2008 crash, and the after-effects of 9/11, both combined to adversely affect the values of private pensions. It's the generation who are at SP age now who are less well-off than they should have been through no fault of their own.

And that's just those who could afford to finance their own pensions. There will be many more who couldn't do that. And also the self-employed who didn't, and still don't, have the luxury of an employer sharing the load.

[Stairway 2 7]

£3300 pay rise for the lowest level of junior doctors, I don't grudge them it for the job they do, but compared to the pension which people have worked 45-50 years for??

This government is screwing both the old and young!!

They haven't put money in a pot it's a benefit given each year. How much would you have it at it's going to take up 21% of all government spending in 25 years, double it, 50% higher?

People like to compare ours to countries like France. What they don't say is the French government takes a percentage out your wages each month and the state pension is pay as you earn.

I'd prefer to go that way as it's not sustainable as is

[Stairway 2 7]

That hasn't happened in reality, though.

The 2008 crash, and the after-effects of 9/11, both combined to adversely affect the values of private pensions. It's the generation who are at SP age now who are less well-off than they should have been through no fault of their own.

And that's just those who could afford to finance their own pensions. There will be many more who couldn't do that. And also the self-employed who didn't, and still don't, have the luxury of an employer sharing the load.

They are less off than they should have been. A private pension is an investment it could go up or down. You make a good point about people not paying in particularly self employed. That's why I'd make it compulsory

[grunt]

They are less off than they should have been. A private pension is an investment it could go up or down. You make a good point about people not paying in particularly self employed. That's why I'd make it compulsory
That sounds pretty callous. No one would invest in private pensions if they only went down. Your espousal of auto-enrolment would look pretty evil if the stock market was to have a sustained fall.

[Stairway 2 7]

That sounds pretty callous. No one would invest in private pensions if they only went down. Your espousal of auto-enrolment would look pretty evil if the stock market was to have a sustained fall.

It's not callous It's on the first line of any private pension. This investment isn't guaranteed it could go up or down, it's pretty simple as all all investments like stocks or savings accounts ect.

France, Germany, Holland Belgium Switzerland ect but be evil to you as auto enrolled. I knew you'd find something Britain does best. I disagree though, I'd prefer state pension like the continent that comes from wages. From 1950 pensions are now 3 times the amount of public spending adjusted for inflation, it's going to double in 25 years. That's not sustainable without more investment

[Hibrandenburg]

They haven't put money in a pot it's a benefit given each year. How much would you have it at it's going to take up 21% of all government spending in 25 years, double it, 50% higher?

People like to compare ours to countries like France. What they don't say is the French government takes a percentage out your wages each month and the state pension is pay as you earn.

I'd prefer to go that way as it's not sustainable as is

Same or similar in Germany, social security (health, pension, nursing care, unemployment benefit) are all deducted from my wages at source and then my employer has to match those payments. I receive a statement annually from the German government telling me how much my pension is going to be if I continue paying in the amount I pay in until I reach pension age. It's definitely not cheap but it will provide me with reasonable security when I'm older and that's quite comforting.

[Jack]

They haven't put money in a pot it's a benefit given each year. How much would you have it at it's going to take up 21% of all government spending in 25 years, double it, 50% higher?

People like to compare ours to countries like France. What they don't say is the French government takes a percentage out your wages each month and the state pension is pay as you earn.

I'd prefer to go that way as it's not sustainable as is

You mean National Insurance, that's taken from your wages, isn't 'sold' as that's for your old age pension?

And your NI record isn't used to calculate what State Pension you're due?

[Moulin Yarns]

They are less off than they should have been. A private pension is an investment it could go up or down. You make a good point about people not paying in particularly self employed. That's why I'd make it compulsory

I think it is compulsory. PAYE takes tax and NI on earnings above a threshold that tax and NI helps fund government spending, including on the state pension.

[CropleyWasGod]

It's not callous It's on the first line of any private pension. This investment isn't guaranteed it could go up or down, it's pretty simple as all all investments like stocks or savings accounts ect.

France, Germany, Holland Belgium Switzerland ect but be evil to you as auto enrolled. I knew you'd find something Britain does best. I disagree though, I'd prefer state pension like the continent that comes from wages. From 1950 pensions are now 3 times the amount of public spending adjusted for inflation, it's going to double in 25 years. That's not sustainable without more investment

A state-enrolled pension would be exactly the same, no? The Government would be investing in the market, wouldn't they?

[Moulin Yarns]

A state-enrolled pension would be exactly the same, no? The Government would be investing in the market, wouldn't they?

Wheest man, it's actually like you know what you're talking about. 😉

[grunt]

France, Germany, Holland Belgium Switzerland ect but be evil to you as auto enrolled. I knew you'd find something Britain does best. I disagree though, I'd prefer state pension like the continent that comes from wages. From 1950 pensions are now 3 times the amount of public spending adjusted for inflation, it's going to double in 25 years. That's not sustainable without more investment
I dont understand a word of this.

[Stairway 2 7]

A state-enrolled pension would be exactly the same, no? The Government would be investing in the market, wouldn't they?

Yes they manage it fine in the continent. In general bar a few dips the market usually rises so it would be good for the nation to get the profit rather than big pension companies

[Stairway 2 7]

I dont understand a word of this.

Look at Hibrandenburgs explanation of Germany. Most other European nations do similar. Your state pension comes from you putting in each month from your wages, more if you earn more but you get greater on retirement. They put in more than we do but they obviously get more back. With an aging population it's the sensible option.

In the UK it's dependent on you having a work pension or putting into a pension company if you want a comfortable retirement

[Stairway 2 7]

You mean National Insurance, that's taken from your wages, isn't 'sold' as that's for your old age pension?

And your NI record isn't used to calculate what State Pension you're due?

No it's not sold as that. Some people assume there is some pension pot but it just comes out of the budget, hence we are going to be facing cuts elsewhere to cover it doubling in the next 25 years.

Going in a workplace pension scheme is now compulsory when you start a new job in the UK, most use NEST. As I say I'd prefer to be like Europe and it was state run

[lapsedhibee]

They haven't put money in a pot it's a benefit given each year. How much would you have it at it's going to take up 21% of all government spending in 25 years, double it, 50% higher?

People like to compare ours to countries like France. What they don't say is the French government takes a percentage out your wages each month and the state pension is pay as you earn.

I'd prefer to go that way as it's not sustainable as is

Maybe national insurance and income tax could be raised from their current low levels? The narrative that the state won't be able to afford state pensions and the state won't be able to provide free health care for all who need it always seems to be a prelude to a Tufton-St-inspired call to the market, ie private providers, to get involved. Nothing inevitable about that.

[Andy Bee]

No it's not sold as that. Some people assume there is some pension pot but it just comes out of the budget, hence we are going to be facing cuts elsewhere to cover it doubling in the next 25 years.

Going in a workplace pension scheme is now compulsory when you start a new job in the UK, most use NEST. As I say I'd prefer to be like Europe and it was state run

There's a separate account at the BoE for National Insurance contributions from employees, employers and self employed. It's used to fund benefits, pensions and sometimes NHS when needed. It isn't a pot as such as payments from workers now are funding the retired workers from before, so it's basically a balancing act and as people are living longer it becomes harder to balance. The answer is more workers and even more so in Scotland, damn Brexit again.

[Stairway 2 7]

There's a separate account at the BoE for National Insurance contributions from employees, employers and self employed. It's used to fund benefits, pensions and sometimes NHS when needed. It isn't a pot as such as payments from workers now are funding the retired workers from before, so it's basically a balancing act and as people are living longer it becomes harder to balance. The answer is more workers and even more so in Scotland, damn Brexit again.

I agree we need to continue the high immigration we've had recently and encourage children perhaps with cheaper state funded childcare and homes for families to buy

[Stairway 2 7]

Maybe national insurance and income tax could be raised from their current low levels? The narrative that the state won't be able to afford state pensions and the state won't be able to provide free health care for all who need it always seems to be a prelude to a Tufton-St-inspired call to the market, ie private providers, to get involved. Nothing inevitable about that.

Raising the top income tax by 5% in England would net them around £1 billion, the recent NI cuts cost £9 billion. Adjusted for inflation it's expected to rise £150 billion in the next 25 years and that's accounting for immigration sitting at 300k per year. That is to keep the pension as it is.

I don't think nationalising all private pension companies and going the European way of the public paying more so we get a better pension is near Tufton street.

[lapsedhibee]

I don't think nationalising all private pension companies and going the European way of the public paying more so we get a better pension is near Tufton street.
No indeed, but we won't be going the European route because Europe baad. We'll be going the private sector route, as with health.

[Stairway 2 7]

No indeed, but we won't be going the European route because Europe baad. We'll be going the private sector route, as with health.

Oh no definitely we'll be doing none of this. Private health care and insurance will be embedded in labour and the Tories. Immigration that could help counter this is bad and the cause of all our troubles. In an independent Scotland we would have a chance to get the good parts of European life

[Jack]

Raising the top income tax by 5% in England would net them around £1 billion, the recent NI cuts cost £9 billion. Adjusted for inflation it's expected to rise £150 billion in the next 25 years and that's accounting for immigration sitting at 300k per year. That is to keep the pension as it is.

I don't think nationalising all private pension companies and going the European way of the public paying more so we get a better pension is near Tufton street.

Why did the torys cut the NI? Twice?

It seems pretty obvious the money was needed to fund the things it is supposed to pay for.

[CropleyWasGod]

Why did the torys cut the NI? Twice?

It seems pretty obvious the money was needed to fund the things it is supposed to pay for.

The old Thatcher Bribe :rolleyes:

[Stairway 2 7]

Why did the torys cut the NI? Twice?

It seems pretty obvious the money was needed to fund the things it is supposed to pay for.

To appeal to the populous, like all tax cuts. Same goes for freezing the council tax up here and not fully costing it and fuel tax freezes, it's getting favour from the voter at a cost to services

[Ozyhibby]

The old Thatcher Bribe :rolleyes:

At least it was her bribing us.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/sep/18/keir-starmer-100000-in-tickets-and-gifts-more-than-any-other-recent-party-leader?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1726634938


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pretty Boy]

At least it was her bribing us.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/sep/18/keir-starmer-100000-in-tickets-and-gifts-more-than-any-other-recent-party-leader?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1726634938


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If he doesn't accept free hospitality to Arsenal games then he can't go at all don't you know?! God forbid he just pay the going rate for tickets to the hospitality area like thousands of others do across the country every week.

I suppose his net worth is only estimated at between £3M and £7M so he's practically on the breadline compared to his predecessor.

[lapsedhibee]

If he doesn't accept free hospitality to Arsenal games then he can't go at all don't you know?! God forbid he just pay the going rate for tickets to the hospitality area like thousands of others do across the week every week.

I suppose his net worth is only estimated at between £3M and £7M so he's practically on the breadline compared to his predecessor.

The justifications offered for all this petty corruption are in some ways worse than the corruption itself. Does the expression 'taking us for fools' ring any sort of bell with anyone? :dunno:

[H18S NX]

Is starmer not on record being an Arsenal season ticket holder?

[grunt]

Is starmer not on record being an Arsenal season ticket holder?
He said he was last year. https://x.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1690322292197179393

[Pretty Boy]

Is starmer not on record being an Arsenal season ticket holder?

He is.

His argument is he can't attend a game as a regular punter because of security which is fair enough. His 2nd argument that the only way he can attend ever again is by taking gifted hospitality is less so.

Starmer has previously insisted his acceptance of hospitality is related to his security requirements of not being able to go into the stands, saying: “If I don’t accept a gift of hospitality, I can’t go to a game. You could say: ‘Well, bad luck.’ That’s why gifts have to be registered. But, you know, never going to an Arsenal game again because I can’t accept hospitality is pushing it a bit far.”

[Ozyhibby]

https://x.com/europeanpowell/status/1836319075456188416?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Can’t wait to see Streetings plans for the NHS. His paymasters will be looking for a return on their investment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

https://x.com/europeanpowell/status/1836319075456188416?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Can’t wait to see Streetings plans for the NHS. His paymasters will be looking for a return on their investment.
I saw this earlier. It's disgusting. Politics for sale.


Total donations to Streeting from private healthcare companies, affiliated subgroups, and shareholders = £192,825

[JimBHibees]

I saw this earlier. It's disgusting. Politics for sale.

How can he possibly be able to accept this sort of money?

[JimBHibees]

Is starmer not on record being an Arsenal season ticket holder?

The same way Blair used to sit on the Gallowgate end when there were no seats 😄

[Stairway 2 7]

https://x.com/europeanpowell/status/1836319075456188416?s=46&t=3pb_w_qndxJXScFNwz8V4A

Can’t wait to see Streetings plans for the NHS. His paymasters will be looking for a return on their investment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reading the detail rather than a twitter post from a random guy, he gets investment from hedge funds who have billions invested in pretty much everything.

It's like saying I'm an investor in arms companies and private health care companies, why because I've got shares in standard life who have a shares in Leonardo and many private healcare companies.

You could and I would argue he and any politician shouldn't take any investment from private or corporate donation and that would be the end of it. Just ban donations all together.

Saying that Streeting is a wee Starmeright creature but that is by the by. We'll never privatise the NHS in the UK as its political suicide. Although places like Germany and Austria have privatisation and everyone from all demographics have better outcomes than their equal here so..

[Stairway 2 7]

He is.

His argument is he can't attend a game as a regular punter because of security which is fair enough. His 2nd argument that the only way he can attend ever again is by taking gifted hospitality is less so.

Starmer has previously insisted his acceptance of hospitality is related to his security requirements of not being able to go into the stands, saying: “If I don’t accept a gift of hospitality, I can’t go to a game. You could say: ‘Well, bad luck.’ That’s why gifts have to be registered. But, you know, never going to an Arsenal game again because I can’t accept hospitality is pushing it a bit far.”

It's the worst excuse ever, millionaire can't go to football without financial help. Same with Lammy saying it's expensive for a prime ministers wife to go to events. It's not compulsory to wear thousand pound get ups, a Labour PM and wife can look like the proletariat, heaven forfend

[Stairway 2 7]

Will split opinion and I don't know how it could possibly be enforced but Labour saying the will make working from home a right as well as the right to switch of from calls and emails after work.


https://12ft.io/proxy

[Paul1642]

Will split opinion and I don't know how it could possibly be enforced but Labour saying the will make working from home a right as well as the right to switch of from calls and emails after work.


https://12ft.io/proxy

Switch off from calls & emails. 100% agree. Quite right and if your employer doesn’t currently let you do this, unless being paid some sort of on call allowance or mega money, then you should be asking serious questions.

Working from home I disagree. An employer paying the wages should have the right to ask their employees to work from and office if that’s what they want. also it’s not much of a right when it’s a physical impossibly for half the work force to do so.

Also very hard to enforce for the above reason.

[Andy Bee]

Reading the detail rather than a twitter post from a random guy, he gets investment from hedge funds who have billions invested in pretty much everything.

It's like saying I'm an investor in arms companies and private health care companies, why because I've got shares in standard life who have a shares in Leonardo and many private healcare companies.

You could and I would argue he and any politician shouldn't take any investment from private or corporate donation and that would be the end of it. Just ban donations all together.

Saying that Streeting is a wee Starmeright creature but that is by the by. We'll never privatise the NHS in the UK as its political suicide. Although places like Germany and Austria have privatisation and everyone from all demographics have better outcomes than their equal here so..


I'd hardly call David Powell a random Twitter guy, the investigative work he's put in against the damage of Freeports or the Brexit debacle is pretty impressive.

It's not the hedge fund, it's the manager of the hedge fund donated £65k to Streeting and the hedge fund he manages owns £500m worth of shares in the biggest private Health Insurance company on the planet. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out why he donated. The other big donator was (and still is as his companies have donated around another £100k since the linked article was written) Peter Hearn again someone who's using the companies he controls to give donations, MPM Connect and OPD Group Ltd consultant recruitment services who's claim to fame is getting Dido Harding into the NHS test and trace. Streetings register of interests reads like a copy of War and Peace, we've got prominent Israel lobbyists like Trevor Chinn the Vice President of the Jewish Leadership Council, a lot of previously Tory donators for example Philip Charles Harris who interestingly sits or used to sit on the Arsenal board. He's got donations for everything from 4 Taylor Swift tickets to hospitality in a Man UTD v Arsenal game. It's all there in plain sight.


https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/f/why-is-peter-hearn-allowed-to-buy-influence-in-the-labour-party

[grunt]

I'd hardly call David Powell a random Twitter guy, the investigative work he's put in against the damage of Freeports or the Brexit debacle is pretty impressive.
:top marks

[Stairway 2 7]

I'd hardly call David Powell a random Twitter guy, the investigative work he's put in against the damage of Freeports or the Brexit debacle is pretty impressive.

It's not the hedge fund, it's the manager of the hedge fund donated £65k to Streeting and the hedge fund he manages owns £500m worth of shares in the biggest private Health Insurance company on the planet. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out why he donated. The other big donator was (and still is as his companies have donated around another £100k since the linked article was written) Peter Hearn again someone who's using the companies he controls to give donations, MPM Connect and OPD Group Ltd consultant recruitment services who's claim to fame is getting Dido Harding into the NHS test and trace. Streetings register of interests reads like a copy of War and Peace, we've got prominent Israel lobbyists like Trevor Chinn the Vice President of the Jewish Leadership Council, a lot of previously Tory donators for example Philip Charles Harris who interestingly sits or used to sit on the Arsenal board. He's got donations for everything from 4 Taylor Swift tickets to hospitality in a Man UTD v Arsenal game. It's all there in plain sight.


https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/f/why-is-peter-hearn-allowed-to-buy-influence-in-the-labour-party

What's 65k going to get you, is he going to privatise the NHS we've been hearing that since the 70s. NHS could do with a severe shake up but no one will do that they will just keep pumping money in with zero positive outcomes. As I say most of western Europe has privatisation and has better outcomes for all percentiles of the population. I'm deeply opposed to privatisation but we need to look at what they are getting right

I'm not sure what money from Jews or has to do with anything, why bring up someone's religion. It's not a crime to be from Israel that sounds a bit antisemitic no

I don't think Streetings got the power or the brains to do anything. Boris and Sunak didn't privatise the NHS and either will Starmer. There will be outsourcing. Scotland’s NHS is run by the SNP so I suppose it doesn't matter to us that much

[Kato]

What's 65k going to get you, is he going to privatise the NHS we've been hearing that since the 70s. NHS could do with a severe shake up but no one will do that they will just keep pumping money in with zero positive outcomes. As I say most of western Europe has privatisation and has better outcomes for all percentiles of the population. I'm deeply opposed to privatisation but we need to look at what they are getting right

I'm not sure what money from Jews or has to do with anything, why bring up someone's religion. It's not a crime to be from Israel that sounds a bit antisemitic no

I don't think Streetings got the power or the brains to do anything. Boris and Sunak didn't privatise the NHS and either will Starmer. There will be outsourcing. Scotland’s NHS is run by the SNP so I suppose it doesn't matter to us that muchHe didn't bring up religion. He brought up Israeli lobbyists.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk