The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[egg]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

I think negotiations should have been tougher last year if for no other reason than to dampen enthusiasm for further strikes the following year. The manner of the settlement from last year clearly hasn't solved the problem. 

What does "tougher" mean? Less money so the strikes continued? The same money but make them wait a bit longer for it? You're still not giving an actual answer. 

[hypochondriac]

28 minutes ago, whelk said:

No way they are getting their demands this time. Industrial action is likely to prevail when there is sympathy for their cause. The public will not be tooting their horns in support. They lose pay by striking of course so always a two way battle of who has the stomach for it. 
You seem to think it was complete capitulation that has empowered them. Lots of these unions find out the hard way that workers don’t hold all the power

So what needs to happen now then in your opinion? Face down the unions and prepare for a summer of strikes that were unthinkable last year? Or give the unions more money? Or something else? 

[AlexLaw76]

24 minutes ago, egg said:

What does "tougher" mean? Less money so the strikes continued? The same money but make them wait a bit longer for it? You're still not giving an actual answer. 

Presumably , the government are about to get a little more tough with them.

[egg]

10 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

So what needs to happen now then in your opinion? Face down the unions and prepare for a summer of strikes that were unthinkable last year? Or give the unions more money? Or something else? 

Cheeky sod! You still won't say what they should have done last time apart from to have been"tougher", which is vaguer than vague. 

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Cheeky sod! You still won't say what they should have done last time apart from to have been"tougher", which is vaguer than vague. 

FFS. You spend the entire time refusing to answer questions. You've done it on other threads too. I'm not party to individual negotiations, I believe the government were not tough enough in negotiations because they largely gave them what they were asking for last year and all that's done is encourage the people to to try again this year. I would have offered less last year and tried to come to agreements to give more security for the future but im not giving you minute detail of individual negotiations because that's ridiculous. 

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Presumably , the government are about to get a little more tough with them.

Presumably the government aren't just going to give them what they ask for this year. Amazingly it seems like they are going to be tougher! We don't know the specific details of the negotiation though so apparently that's not a valid answer! 

Edited July 9 by hypochondriac

[Gloucester Saint]

Junior doctors are greedy sods - it’s always been the case that they start on decent wages but sharp increases as they establish themselves.

If the country wasn’t obsessed with immigration, I’d replace them with better practitioners and attitudes from elsewhere, going by the so-so vs outstanding care my family members have received over the years. Our culture is not built on caring. 

BMA are up there with the RMT for the most self-serving union who don’t give a toss about the people who fund them. 

[egg]

56 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

FFS. You spend the entire time refusing to answer questions. You've done it on other threads too. I'm not party to individual negotiations, I believe the government were not tough enough in negotiations because they largely gave them what they were asking for last year and all that's done is encourage the people to to try again this year. I would have offered less last year and tried to come to agreements to give more security for the future but im not giving you minute detail of individual negotiations because that's ridiculous. 

Ha! An answer, of sorts, thank you. 

The choice, I suspect, was cash or strikes. You favoured more strikes, I get that. I favoured a deal. 

Where I suspect we agree is the deal seemingly not looking beyond the next 12 months wasn't wise. 

 

[Gloucester Saint]

1 minute ago, egg said:

Ha! An answer, of sorts, thank you. 

The choice, I suspect, was cash or strikes. You favoured more strikes, I get that. I favoured a deal. 

Where I suspect we agree is the deal seemingly not looking beyond the next 12 months wasn't wise. 

 

Multi-year deal had to be the way with that Union. Thought Streeting would’ve had more sense. The only aspect I agree with him on is that the public won’t stand for it and they’re in for a shock. In their young and naive minds they have the same halo as the senior consultants - but that has to be earned. At least the RMT know the public doesn’t like them.

[egg]

11 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Multi-year deal had to be the way with that Union. Thought Streeting would’ve had more sense. The only aspect I agree with him on is that the public won’t stand for it and they’re in for a shock. In their young and naive minds they have the same halo as the senior consultants - but that has to be earned. At least the RMT know the public doesn’t like them.

Agreed. I think they'll have little or no sympathy this time. Hearing the union spokeswoman yesterday saying how the public won't be happy that doctors are earning £x per hour misses the rather obvious point that they settled for it last year. Dinlo's. 

[hypochondriac]

27 minutes ago, egg said:

Ha! An answer, of sorts, thank you. 

The choice, I suspect, was cash or strikes. You favoured more strikes, I get that. I favoured a deal. 

Where I suspect we agree is the deal seemingly not looking beyond the next 12 months wasn't wise. 

 

I favoured a tougher deal. Are you going to answer any of my questions now then? 

[egg]

3 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I favoured a tougher deal. Are you going to answer any of my questions now then? 

What questions? 

[hypochondriac]

On 08/07/2025 at 18:08, hypochondriac said:

OK so now they've come back again a year later promising more damaging strikes and demanding more money. Presumably we need to settle once again. How do we deal with it in a way that doesn't give them even more money or encourage them to simy strike yet again in a years time?

@egg

So what needs to happen now then in your opinion? Face down the unions and prepare for a summer of strikes that were unthinkable last year? Or give the unions more money? Or something else? 

goodness me you think you'd be able to find it for yourself given that I asked you this yesterday and you still haven't answered it. You're the very thing you accuse me of 

[egg]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

@egg

So what needs to happen now then in your opinion? Face down the unions and prepare for a summer of strikes that were unthinkable last year? Or give the unions more money? Or something else? 

goodness me you think you'd be able to find it for yourself given that I asked you this yesterday and you still haven't answered it. You're the very thing you accuse me of 

I thought you meant answer something I haven't answered. I've addressed this. You can repackage it all you like, but the answer is still to have a deal. The government can be tough too, whatever the fuck that means. 

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

I thought you meant answer something I haven't answered. I've addressed this. You can repackage it all you like, but the answer is still to have a deal. The government can be tough too, whatever the fuck that means. 

So should there be a deal in the next two weeks to prevent strike action? Or do we accept some strikes in order to get a better deal? 

[Wade Garrett]

Those Junior Doctors are a bunch of cunts.  So what if their pay is 20% less in real terms than in 2008.  After the banking crisis and COVID, so are most peoples.

Government did a good deal with them, and have offered more than inflation now.  Would like Keir U-Turn to actually tough this one out.

Fucking wankers.

 

Edited July 9 by Wade Garrett

[egg]

12 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

So should there be a deal in the next two weeks to prevent strike action? Or do we accept some strikes in order to get a better deal? 

Ooh, I can't be specific Hypo. Just be tough. 

In all seriousness, how can any of us say how negotiations will go. Obviously we want it sorted asap on the best terms. 

[hypochondriac]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

Ooh, I can't be specific Hypo. Just be tough. 

In all seriousness, how can any of us say how negotiations will go. Obviously we want it sorted asap on the best terms. 

Right so you criticised me for saying I wanted the government to be tougher but you've essentially given the same answer for this round of negotiations! You can't tell me whether you'd be prepared for some strikes this year or not and if you are happy with that then why were strikes so unacceptable last year? 

Given that the doctors have just waited a year and then threatened more strikes, I'd have preferred a tougher stance last year which may have meant they hadn't given up so much last year so they could have maybe been a bit more generous this year. Maybe that would have meant some industrial action last year but all we've really done is delayed the industrial action a year. With how much was given last year there's very little left to concede from the government side short of giving even more money which will be hideously unpopular with the electorate. 

Edited July 9 by hypochondriac

[hypochondriac]

8 minutes ago, Wade Garrett said:

Those Junior Doctors are a bunch of cunts.  So what if their pay is 20% less in real terms than in 2008.  After the banking crisis and COVID, so are most peoples.

Government did a good deal with them, and have offered more than inflation now.  Would like Keir U-Turn to actually tough this one out now.

Fucking wankers.

 

I agree. Their problem was thinking that the union were reasonable people last year rather than the money grabbing cunts they are. 

[rallyboy]

Tories had the right idea, talk tough, look strong, refuse compromise, repeat hollow soundbites, offer nothing, preside over chaos - and definitely don't plan anything in the budget for the inevitable agreement.

 

[egg]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Right so you criticised me for saying I wanted the government to be tougher but you've essentially given the same answer for this round of negotiations! You can't tell me whether you'd be prepared for some strikes this year or not and if you are happy with that then why were strikes so unacceptable last year? 

Given that the doctors have just waited a year and then threatened more strikes, I'd have preferred a tougher stance last year which may have meant they hadn't given up so much last year so they could have maybe been a bit more generous this year. Maybe that would have meant some industrial action last year but all we've really done is delayed the industrial action a year. With how much was given last year there's very little left to concede from the government side short of giving even more money which will be hideously unpopular with the electorate. 

I've given a far more comprehensive answer than your vague answer. The issue last year wasn't that we weren't "tougher" (a bollox vague term), but that it wasn't a multi year deal, and that the door was left open. As I've said, not tying that up was a failure. 

[hypochondriac]

45 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

Tories had the right idea, talk tough, look strong, refuse compromise, repeat hollow soundbites, offer nothing, preside over chaos - and definitely don't plan anything in the budget for the inevitable agreement.

 

Nope. Neither party had the best approach. 

[hypochondriac]

27 minutes ago, egg said:

I've given a far more comprehensive answer than your vague answer. The issue last year wasn't that we weren't "tougher" (a bollox vague term), but that it wasn't a multi year deal, and that the door was left open. As I've said, not tying that up was a failure. 

Bollocks did you! Your "answer" such as it was was that you want it sorted ASAP on the best terms. Zero detail on how to achieve that, zero idea about whether you'd accept some strike action or if it needed to be sorted I bthe next two weeks, no idea about whether you'd accept more taxpayer money given to junior doctors. Comprehensive answer my arse. 

[egg]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Bollocks did you! Your "answer" such as it was was that you want it sorted ASAP on the best terms. Zero detail on how to achieve that, zero idea about whether you'd accept some strike action or if it needed to be sorted I bthe next two weeks, no idea about whether you'd accept more taxpayer money given to junior doctors. Comprehensive answer my arse. 

"Be tougher". Yeah, that clarifies what they should have done. Nice detail mate👏

I'm glad you're irritated. It comes from people giving the kind of half arsed answers that you specialise in. 

 

[hypochondriac]

Just now, egg said:

"Be tougher". Yeah, that clarifies what they should have done. Nice detail mate👏

I'm glad you're irritated. It comes from people giving the kind of half arsed answers that you specialise in. 

 

More deflection. You accuse me of not answering a question and then you quite clearly refuse to answer in any detail the questions I asked. Simply pathetic. 

[hypochondriac]

Seems like 2022 reeves was mightily concerned with the economy dropping 0.1%. Not so much today though...

[hypochondriac]

I actually think this is a half decent idea. Lots of praise to Streeting if he could actually get that to stick. 

[AlexLaw76]

This is one of those AI generated videos… right?

 

[east-stand-nic]

Pure virtue signalling. But you are right, they are a danger but sadly the saturation point was reached years ago. Next step in the plan, lots of clashes between the men of fighting age from the boats vs. edl sorts. Perfect for the government to then introduce limits on numbers in a public gathering, a bit of Marshall law for a while, and some curfews thrown in. The perfect plan for population controlling. It's coming soon. 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

5 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

This is one of those AI generated videos… right?

 

To her credit, by volunteering to invite as many asylum seekers until saturation point at her own property, she's saving the taxpayer on hotel costs.

[LuckyNumber7]

6 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

This is one of those AI generated videos… right?

 

Scary, yet not at all surprising.

[whelk]

10 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

This is one of those AI generated videos… right?

 

Mad woman should be kicked from the party - need to join Corbyn’s mob

[whelk]

9 hours ago, east-stand-nic said:

Pure virtue signalling. But you are right, they are a danger but sadly the saturation point was reached years ago. Next step in the plan, lots of clashes between the men of fighting age from the boats vs. edl sorts. Perfect for the government to then introduce limits on numbers in a public gathering, a bit of Marshall law for a while, and some curfews thrown in. The perfect plan for population controlling. It's coming soon. 

Still ill and pissing your pants I see. Toughen up you weak man

[badgerx16]

10 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

This is one of those AI generated videos… right?

 

It's real, but apparently 10 years old.

Edited Monday at 15:12 by badgerx16

[whelk]

22 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

It's real, but apparently 10 years old.

Yeah but Hitler….

[tdmickey3]

10 hours ago, east-stand-nic said:

Pure virtue signalling. But you are right, they are a danger but sadly the saturation point was reached years ago. Next step in the plan, lots of clashes between the men of fighting age from the boats vs. edl sorts. Perfect for the government to then introduce limits on numbers in a public gathering, a bit of Marshall law for a while, and some curfews thrown in. The perfect plan for population controlling. It's coming soon. 

You are actually deranged 

[sadoldgit]

16 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

You are actually deranged 

This is the same nutty nic who claims that he is not a conspiracy theorist.

😜

[Gloucester Saint]

1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

It's real, but apparently 10 years old.

Whilst I’m up for criticising Corbynite MPs for stupidity, dragging that up from 10 years is really desperate stuff. Plenty of fresh stuff to criticise rather than a from a hard left opposition who never won power (and were never going to).

[Gloucester Saint]

2 hours ago, whelk said:

Mad woman should be kicked from the party - need to join Corbyn’s mob

She was part of it at the time. Desperate for it to be trawled up now a decade later. It’s like Whelk or Dark Munster producing a clip of Dorries getting pissed and saying something stupid in 2015. It’s hardly applicable to Badenoch now or even as a minister when she was in power even.

[AlexLaw76]

41 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

This is the same nutty nic who claims that he is not a conspiracy theorist.

😜

And he’s back - been circling this thread for days, and now strikes

[Gloucester Saint]

13 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

And he’s back - been circling this thread for days, and now strikes

You love it though Alex. Like that cat who was taking a cheeky 💩 on your lawn.

Edited Monday at 17:32 by Gloucester Saint

[hypochondriac]

This seems like bollocks to me but goodness if that is even close to true. 

[Gloucester Saint]

No chance that’s accurate, offshoot of GB News for a start. Lib Dem’s at 9% and Corbyn new party at 15%? Nah. We were getting more than that even post-tuition fees and with Swinney’s disasterous reign.

Reform farvtoo high at 34%, been dropping towards mid-20s recently in most polls. Tories look about right at 17% if slightly high.

Edited Monday at 19:59 by Gloucester Saint

[egg]

20 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

No chance that’s accurate, offshoot of GB News for a start. Lib Dem’s at 9% and Corbyn new party at 15%? Nah. We were getting more than that even post-tuition fees and with Swinney’s disasterous reign.

Reform farvtoo high at 34%, been dropping towards mid-20s recently in most polls. Tories look about right at 17% if slightly high.

No chance the Corbyn figure is correct, but I don't doubt that Reform are there or thereabouts. The masses are backing them, sadly. 

[AlexLaw76]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

No chance the Corbyn figure is correct, but I don't doubt that Reform are there or thereabouts. The masses are backing them, sadly. 

All Labour have to do is “smash the gangs” and put a tighter lead on the lunatic that is Ed Milliband, and they easily win the next election 

they don’t look like doing either of those. 

[Gloucester Saint]

10 minutes ago, egg said:

No chance the Corbyn figure is correct, but I don't doubt that Reform are there or thereabouts. The masses are backing them, sadly. 

They’ve been dropping back a bit recently, not loads but 30% is their peak. Unless places like Tiverton, Gloucestershire, Oxfordshire and Cornwall have become hotbeds of Corbynism, which of course they haven’t, I wouldn’t take that poll remotely seriously. Corbyn et al might win the odd seat in North London but they’ll be useless outside of the M25. Think Kim Rose on Southampton ballot papers in the 90s and 00s. Lib Dem’s just won 70 seats last year and the Greens are polling around 10% in most recent polls and hold as many seats as Reform remember. But they don’t have the likes of Paul Marshall and Murdoch bankrolling them. 

These non-doms and toffs who run these stations are lunatics. See Rupert Lowe for example. 

Edited Monday at 20:31 by Gloucester Saint

[Turkish]

3 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

And he’s back - been circling this thread for days, and now strikes

He’s had a few pops on the main board as well. Let’s remember it’s been a tough time for SOG as no one mentioned him when he didn’t post for a few weeks. That’ll have hurt 

Edited Monday at 20:57 by Turkish

[egg]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

All Labour have to do is “smash the gangs” and put a tighter lead on the lunatic that is Ed Milliband, and they easily win the next election 

they don’t look like doing either of those. 

Nobody from this side of the channel is stopping boats coming across open water and people claiming asylum. 

[AlexLaw76]

7 hours ago, egg said:

Nobody from this side of the channel is stopping boats coming across open water and people claiming asylum. 

This and not keeping a lid on Milliband will likely mean he will lose the next election as leader of the Labour Party (if he makes it that far)

[east-stand-nic]

14 hours ago, whelk said:

Still ill and pissing your pants I see. Toughen up you weak man

Still obsessed with your superiors I see. Come on, man up. Get out doors and make something of yourself.