The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[hypochondriac]

31 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Well they are, this is the thing, it's a pretty low bar. How many MPs are likable and talk sense? You could probably count them on one hand. Maybe because the country is such a mess and they're always getting a grilling whenever they speak in public it's that effect where they never get the chance to appear remotely likeable or competent because everything they do and say is scrutinised to the tiniest detail by social media and the press. Or maybe 99% of them are just cocks.

Yes I agree. If the financial incentive was better though you might get a better class of politician. Regardless of left or right, what I'd like is competent and skilled people making good decisions to make the country more successful. What we get is short term focus grouped decisions that tinker around the edges and do little for my life other than making me pay more taxes whilst everything gets worse. 

[Turkish]

9 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Yes I agree. If the financial incentive was better though you might get a better class of politician. Regardless of left or right, what I'd like is competent and skilled people making good decisions to make the country more successful. What we get is short term focus grouped decisions that tinker around the edges and do little for my life other than making me pay more taxes whilst everything gets worse. 

The public dont help either though, this view that their side is the right side and everything the other one does is bad, rather than actually just cracking on with it. It's definitely got worse the last 10 years or so, mainly due to social media with everyone quick to jump on what the other side say, in a hurry to be outraged or right.

[whelk]

I don’t think it is just the salaries but the wider appeal of putting yourself forward to just get dog’s abuse for not sorting everyone’s lives out. Made much worse with instant communication 

[Gloucester Saint]

8 minutes ago, whelk said:

I don’t think it is just the salaries but the wider appeal of putting yourself forward to just get dog’s abuse for not sorting everyone’s lives out. Made much worse with instant communication 

Can be worse than abuse too - e.g. David Amess, Jo Cox and Nigel Jones’s office manager.

[whelk]

18 minutes ago, Turkish said:

The public dont help either though, this view that their side is the right side and everything the other one does is bad, rather than actually just cracking on with it. It's definitely got worse the last 10 years or so, mainly due to social media with everyone quick to jump on what the other side say, in a hurry to be outraged or right.

I posted similar at same time but would respect an MP if they came back on social media to be abusive at the some of public. Like “Fuck off you moany old cunt”

[hypochondriac]

29 minutes ago, Turkish said:

The public dont help either though, this view that their side is the right side and everything the other one does is bad, rather than actually just cracking on with it. It's definitely got worse the last 10 years or so, mainly due to social media with everyone quick to jump on what the other side say, in a hurry to be outraged or right.

Absolutely. Also much of the public expecting the government to do everything for everyone. We'd be much better off with the government stopping trying to give stuff to everyone for free. 

[hypochondriac]

30 minutes ago, whelk said:

I don’t think it is just the salaries but the wider appeal of putting yourself forward to just get dog’s abuse for not sorting everyone’s lives out. Made much worse with instant communication 

Yep. Unfortunately with my job I've had to deal with people from all walks of life. There is a particular type of person who isn't very intelligent and so their response to anything is to get angry, shouty and sometimes abusive because they don't have any skills to deal with things differently. You have to treat these people a certain way and understand that they aren't doing it personally at you but they are incapable of doing things differently. I would imagine this is similar for some MPs where you have to represent everyone in your constituency including people who really are best ignored in other situations. I wouldn't want to have to deal with that on a daily basis. 

Lot of MPs are still pricks of course but for that aspect of it they get my sympathy. 

[Gloucester Saint]

54 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Absolutely. Also much of the public expecting the government to do everything for everyone. We'd be much better off with the government stopping trying to give stuff to everyone for free. 

That would rely on some markets being a lot more efficient and customer-focused. Monopolies happen unless curbed and a tax is still a tax when you’re paying for something captive where there’s effectively no choice - be that water, energy, rail/bus for people who can’t drive, or public services. Governments have to keep giving out fuel allowances and getting into a pickle because we’ve given control of our energy away and French/Norwegian/Chinese civil service pensions are doing very nicely as a result when our population loses out.

Also, if you’ve had to deal with likes of British Gas 🤬

Railways are a sore point for me - fed up with many of the firms being asset stripped for massive dividends from BVI and other tax havens on the one hand, and led appallingly, but unions getting good pay rises last year, clinging onto outdated practices and striking at the drop of a hat (Cross Country and the RMT this time). 

Balance is wrong - in 1970 the state did too much, after about 1989 it’s not done enough in the right areas and tinkered in others without the regulatory reforms to make a genuine difference to most of the public.

For profits are meant to be for-profits as opposed to be a high volume public service like the above, theory is they’re if very good they get repeat custom and grow, I’ve been on that cycle myself and great whilst lasts. But hard for them to plan when national policy zig zags and global instability and tariffs deter investment and commercial borrowing. A new factory or premises is often at least a 10-30 year investment for a lot of firms.

Edited June 16 by Gloucester Saint

[Gloucester Saint]

All four parties need to sort this out though, if true/guilty. They have all had issues with type of behaviour which isn’t acceptable in work or social places these days https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g7g1858rpo

[AlexLaw76]

Smashing the gangs going well

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c39zk7pp29ko

[Gloucester Saint]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Smashing the gangs going well

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c39zk7pp29ko

To some extent it is - record 28k migrants trying to come by boat stopped and scrotes like this banged up with an immediate deportment order https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce399l1329lo

His wife and kids should be deported imminently as well, they’ve profited from his activities and don’t seem to either be oppressed nor possess skills we need economically. They can all have a lovely reunion later in Egypt. Italy doesn’t want them either. Get them gone. If the lawyers want to play the appeals system, they can fund their return passage from Egypt themselves.

In terms of overall numbers, French Border Force needs to up the interception rate up considerably from 58%. That means more of the more robust policing seen very recently in that BBC article e.g tear gas and batons, frustrating that the inflatables are still taking to sea. Surely there’s a way of puncturing those boats from a distance before they sail?

No option but to collaborate with the French on this topic though regardless of who is in power.

Edited June 17 by Gloucester Saint

[whelk]

27 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

To some extent it is - record 28k migrants trying to come by boat stopped and scrotes like this banged up with an immediate deportment order https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce399l1329lo

His wife and kids should be deported imminently as well, they’ve profited from his activities and don’t seem to either be oppressed nor possess skills we need economically. They can all have a lovely reunion later in Egypt. Italy doesn’t want them either. Get them gone. If the lawyers want to play the appeals system, they can fund their return passage from Egypt themselves.

In terms of overall numbers, French Border Force needs to up the interception rate up considerably from 58%. That means more of the more robust policing seen very recently in that BBC article e.g tear gas and batons, frustrating that the inflatables are still taking to sea. Surely there’s a way of puncturing those boats from a distance before they sail?

No option but to collaborate with the French on this topic though regardless of who is in power.

We should have some boats waiting for them. Put them all back on and ship back to France.

Also deploy some troops to the French beaches with instructions to destroy any dingy that is being run by traffickers.

Cannot believe this is so difficult to resolve but need French co-operation of course

[Gloucester Saint]

8 minutes ago, whelk said:

We should have some boats waiting for them. Put them all back on and ship back to France.

Also deploy some troops to the French beaches with instructions to destroy any dingy that is being run by traffickers.

Cannot believe this is so difficult to resolve but need French co-operation of course

It’s a demanding situation against highly organised criminals but yes, the French Border Force ought to be doing better for what they were paid under the 2023 arrangement.

[AlexLaw76]

1 hour ago, Gloucester Saint said:

To some extent it is - record 28k migrants trying to come by boat stopped and scrotes like this banged up with an immediate deportment order https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce399l1329lo

His wife and kids should be deported imminently as well, they’ve profited from his activities and don’t seem to either be oppressed nor possess skills we need economically. They can all have a lovely reunion later in Egypt. Italy doesn’t want them either. Get them gone. If the lawyers want to play the appeals system, they can fund their return passage from Egypt themselves.

In terms of overall numbers, French Border Force needs to up the interception rate up considerably from 58%. That means more of the more robust policing seen very recently in that BBC article e.g tear gas and batons, frustrating that the inflatables are still taking to sea. Surely there’s a way of puncturing those boats from a distance before they sail?

No option but to collaborate with the French on this topic though regardless of who is in power.

Just curious, where did you get the stat that 28k have been stopped by coming across the Channel?

[Gloucester Saint]

3 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Just curious, where did you get the stat that 28k have been stopped by coming across the Channel?

Third para from the base of the BBC article from today you shared - 940 boats intercepted in the same period with 28k migrants on them. That’s an average of roughly 29 a boat - more sinkings are on the cards sadly as they aren’t meant to hold anywhere near that number. 

[The Kraken]

Q: Where did you get that figure?

A: It was in the link you just posted.

 Lol. Couldn’t even read past a headline 

[AlexLaw76]

6 hours ago, The Kraken said:

Q: Where did you get that figure?

A: It was in the link you just posted.

 Lol. Couldn’t even read past a headline 

😅 

[Weston Super Saint]

9 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Third para from the base of the BBC article from today you shared - 940 boats intercepted in the same period with 28k migrants on them. That’s an average of roughly 29 a boat - more sinkings are on the cards sadly as they aren’t meant to hold anywhere near that number. 

The third and fourth para from the bottom of that article state :

Quote

But Channel crossings have hit 40,000 since Labour took office in July 2024 - a 21% increase on the same period the year before.

Over the same period, 940 boats have been intercepted - stopping nearly 28,000 migrants from reaching the UK.

It does beg the question of what happened to the 28,000 migrants that were 'stopped' if 40,000 still crossed?

Presumably their 'stoppage' was only temporary before they were let on their way - I assume waiting on a beach isn't technically illegal in France, so there would have been no reason for any of the 28,000 to be detained.

It's a bit of a nonsense figure to claim 28,000 migrants have been stopped from reaching the UK if they were free to try again the following day, presumably a majority of the 28,000 that were previously 'stopped' are also included in the 40,000 that made it?

[Gloucester Saint]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

The third and fourth para from the bottom of that article state :

It does beg the question of what happened to the 28,000 migrants that were 'stopped' if 40,000 still crossed?

Presumably their 'stoppage' was only temporary before they were let on their way - I assume waiting on a beach isn't technically illegal in France, so there would have been no reason for any of the 28,000 to be detained.

It's a bit of a nonsense figure to claim 28,000 migrants have been stopped from reaching the UK if they were free to try again the following day, presumably a majority of the 28,000 that were previously 'stopped' are also included in the 40,000 that made it?

Inevitably a few of the 28k will have turned up on other crossings but the sheer scale of escalation from the smugglers and new boarding tactics https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpd1l6p8vw9o means the Gendarme will need 1) more licence to intercept and arrest at sea, 2) help from both Navies to accomplish this and 3) immunity from prosecution if something goes wrong unless they literally drown someone with their bare hands. The inflatables are being so overloaded that a sinking soon is inevitable if we get a more choppy/windy day in the Channel. 

[Weston Super Saint]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx240n632z3o

Third u-turn this month!

Sir Keir is earning himself a reputation!

Quote

First, there was the slow-motion change of mind on the winter fuel payment for millions of pensioners.

Then there was the decision to hold a statutory inquiry into grooming gangs, having previously said one wasn't necessary.

And now this on benefits.

 

[hypochondriac]

40 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx240n632z3o

Third u-turn this month!

Sir Keir is earning himself a reputation!

 

Even his most ardent supporters surely admit this isn't a good way to run things. 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

48 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx240n632z3o

Third u-turn this month!

Sir Keir is earning himself a reputation!

 

Just continuing the long list of flip flopping and u turns that got him leadership and elected.

https://www.politico.eu/article/keir-starmer-labour-party-uk-election-u-turns/

[AlexLaw76]

Dreadful PM and Government

[egg]

50 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx240n632z3o

Third u-turn this month!

Sir Keir is earning himself a reputation!

 

Embarrassingly weak. Leaves Reeves sums in tatters. Tax rises incoming. Vat? Income tax? Mess. 

[AlexLaw76]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Embarrassingly weak. Leaves Reeves sums in tatters. Tax rises incoming. Vat? Income tax? Mess. 

Her and the maniac that is Ed Milliband are probably the worst of a bad bunch.

starmer is very bland and pretty weak, but I like Raynor, Streeting, Healy and a few others. They appear to have a bit of conviction with common sense 

[Turkish]

37 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Dreadful PM and Government

Worse than the Tories? Certainly seems like it at the moment

[egg]

27 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Her and the maniac that is Ed Milliband are probably the worst of a bad bunch.

starmer is very bland and pretty weak, but I like Raynor, Streeting, Healy and a few others. They appear to have a bit of conviction with common sense 

Agreed. I've been slow to criticise as they inherited a mess and the world has gone a bit sideways since January. However, it's a year next week, and they've had a shocker. Even if your policies are unpopular/stupid, have the conviction to see them through. 

Don't get me going on Milliband, although I'll be delighted when they climb down from net zero and come to their senses. 

 

[egg]

1 minute ago, Turkish said:

Worse than the Tories? Certainly seems like it at the moment

No. Dithering doesn't make them worse than the awful 14 years that lot gave us and the mess they have left us in.  No party could clear up that mess. 

[trousers]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx240n632z3o

Third u-turn this month!

Sir Keir is earning himself a reputation!

 

Good to see a politician who listens and is flexible enough to adjust their policies when required...

 

[hypochondriac]

55 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Worse than the Tories? Certainly seems like it at the moment

Not sure about that. Tories were a lot more disappointing whereas I expected a lot of shit from Labour. Admittedly they have been slightly worse than I expected. I'm not sure what kind of politician Starmer is. He isn't charasmatic or likable, not a conviction politician, seems to be led by his chief of staff into saying whatever he thinks is popular with focus groups and flip flops on the economy all the time. 

[rallyboy]

The last few cabinets of the Tory carcrash were the most inept and corrupt in living memory, possibly ever - not just overpromoted chancers, there are former ministers who should be in prison.

Add in the list of absolute idiots and sycophantic morons who destroyed departments under Boris, and you'd have to go some to beat that debacle, so no, Labour aren't worse yet, by a long way.

But I fear they'll give it a try...improvement needed.

 

[egg]

33 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Not sure about that. Tories were a lot more disappointing whereas I expected a lot of shit from Labour. Admittedly they have been slightly worse than I expected. I'm not sure what kind of politician Starmer is. He isn't charasmatic or likable, not a conviction politician, seems to be led by his chief of staff into saying whatever he thinks is popular with focus groups and flip flops on the economy all the time. 

Pretty much my thoughts. Re Starmer, we agree, but I'd add that he's neither a lefty, nor mildly left of centre, and I think his lack of conviction partly flows from that.

When you're unpopular trying to do populism you really are in trouble. 

[hypochondriac]

Just now, egg said:

Pretty much my thoughts. Re Starmer, we agree, but I'd add that he's neither a lefty, nor mildly left of centre, and I think his lack of conviction partly flows from that.

When you're unpopular trying to do populism you really are in trouble. 

I find it odd that he got elected and then junked a lot of the stuff he said prior to getting elected (that's not odd loads of them do that) but then when he wasn't getting the desired results, he got a new chief of staff and then started saying a load of right of centre stuff. I'm not sure who he's trying to appeal to. He's never going to get people on the right to vote for him by being diet Tory or Reform Lite, he's only going to succeed in driving those on the left towards the lib dems and greens. This will only get worse if Corbyn starts a political party. 

He's also gone out of his way to piss off farmers, people who go to private schools, pensioners and now the disabled. A quote from a Labour MP said something like "the public rolled the dice with Brexit, rolled the dice with Labour and then if we don't deliver why would anyone be surprised if they rolled the dice with Reform?"

[whelk]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

Worse than the Tories? Certainly seems like it at the moment

You are fucking joking I hope

[east-stand-nic]

https://www.gbnews.com/politics/keir-starmer-general-election-labour-rebellion-benefits?fbclid=IwY2xjawLKVYJleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHn2O_DzPau9Cxw82N_qfagglTH4cQGyAUnC7dogxjkbkGEKlbrCzOIbeBZ7X_aem_5qsQQaF2vjy0hO3aW7XtFQ&sfnsn=mo

hmm. 👨‍🦽

[rallyboy]

You do know that GB News isn't a news channel?

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, trousers said:

Good to see a politician who listens and is flexible enough to adjust their policies when required...

 

Can't we have just one that gets it right first time?

[tdmickey3]

Glad to here Chardonnay will still be able to get her nails done and Keanu will be able to got to the pub every lunchtime 

[east-stand-nic]

38 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

You do know that GB News isn't a news channel?

I know that ... it does not agree with lefty views or your views and thus is not telling the truth. So Starmer taking 800,000 disabled peoples money is totally fake news. 

[egg]

23 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Glad to here Chardonnay will still be able to get her nails done and Keanu will be able to got to the pub every lunchtime 

Cant agree with that sentiment. It's the right decision.

Sadly piss takers give genuine people a bad rep, and many people don't appreciate why genuine people need the benefit. Example, my eldest has MH issues. Work is vital for her; financially, socially, and to give her a purpose. She can't drive due to her meds, and she cannot use a bus due to her anxiety (people who don't have anxiety or know people who do mistakingly confuse it with worry). Her PiP gets her in a cab to and from work, and helps her work and live independently . That's what PiP is designed for. 

Sifting to needy from the greedy is what's needed, not a blanket withdrawal of the benefit. 

[trousers]

50 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Can't we have just one that gets it right first time?

I get that most of the human race are obsessed with labelling everything as "right" or "wrong".... But maybe, just maybe, there are just different ways of doing stuff, each with their own merits and pitfalls....? 

Edited Friday at 11:52 by trousers

[egg]

4 minutes ago, trousers said:

I get that most of the human race are obsessed with labelling everything as "right" or "wrong".... But maybe, just maybe, there are just different ways of doing stuff, each with their own merits and pitfalls....? 

Taking benefits from people who genuinely need it is wrong. Righting a wrong is right. Nothing wrong with those words. 

[tdmickey3]

20 minutes ago, egg said:

Cant agree with that sentiment. It's the right decision.

Sadly piss takers give genuine people a bad rep, and many people don't appreciate why genuine people need the benefit. Example, my eldest has MH issues. Work is vital for her; financially, socially, and to give her a purpose. She can't drive due to her meds, and she cannot use a bus due to her anxiety (people who don't have anxiety or know people who do mistakingly confuse it with worry). Her PiP gets her in a cab to and from work, and helps her work and live independently . That's what PiP is designed for. 

Sifting to needy from the greedy is what's needed, not a blanket withdrawal of the benefit. 

Totally agree egg, the scroungers i alluded to above are the ones who need it removed not people like your eldest.

Those that need it should always get it, the biggest challenge is worming out those scroungers who don't deserve it

[Weston Super Saint]

35 minutes ago, trousers said:

I get that most of the human race are obsessed with labelling everything as "right" or "wrong".... But maybe, just maybe, there are just different ways of doing stuff, each with their own merits and pitfalls....? 

No arguments there.

Still would be nice to have a PM that makes the 'right' decision first time, without wasting time, effort and money changing their mind....  

[egg]

[Holmes_and_Watson]

2 hours ago, trousers said:

I get that most of the human race are obsessed with labelling everything as "right" or "wrong".... But maybe, just maybe, there are just different ways of doing stuff, each with their own merits and pitfalls....? 

No, you are wrong.

🙂

[AlexLaw76]

Will the moronic evangelist, Ed Milliband, get his teeth into this one?

 

[Baird of the land]

6 hours ago, egg said:

Unfortunately the super rich are tax mobile, so pushing the button on the left has little effect. Unlike addressing the extreme increases of the one on the right

Edited Friday at 19:03 by Baird of the land

[Gloucester Saint]

10 minutes ago, Baird of the land said:

Unfortunately the super rich are tax mobile, so pushing the button on the left has little effect. Unlike addressing the extreme increases of the one on the right

The shrinkage of the economy following a hard Brexit has made those choices more binary. It should be a mix of both reducing welfare, fast-track action on large scale tax evasion, and going further in re-establishing EU trade to get more of the lost pie back. 

[Farmer Saint]

It's been a poor 12 months for Labour, but to even contemplate that it is worse than the Tories is fucking laughable. They had so many u-turns, and the only times they got stuff through they broke the economy.