Shit! Closer than I had expected…
1 Like
Yep. This would be a great legacy, regardless of what shite follows.
FactCheck Q&A: Which party has a better track record on the economy? – Channel 4 News
Its closer than I thought yep, and only goes back to 91, but I had in mind, Wilson and Callaghan tenures also.
Is that a mark of how skint the country is ?
Just read this piece on Guardian
This part really made me cringe
My fate was leaked to the press before I found out, and I knew I had to get my side of the story out quickly. One of my first thoughts when I realised this could be the end of my political career was: “Please don’t ruin my life. Don’t make it so I can never get another job again.”
1 Like
Pretty much. Absolutely nothing to do with Tory mismanagement of the economy, of course.
4 Likes
Honestly, even as a foreigner, I don’t see how Labour can lose this upcoming elections unless the Conservatives conjure up some voodoo magic or Labour screw themselves by something they do or say.
However, one thing that Labour cannot say is ‘there is not much we can do to reverse the damages done by Conservatives in one term.’ While that is as factual and a reality, that should never be articulated by a Labour government. That would come across as negative and not forward looking. I would think that even if Labour don’t win by an overwhelming majority, it would be by a significant majority. And when that kind of results do eventually happen in a country that has been dominated by the Conservatives for so long, then you will know that people are voting in the Labour not just because they are angry with the Conservatives but they now want to see hope in a Labour government. The Labour government should rush out of the block eager to share their mandates and policies, after all, they should have been so ready every single moment.
Thus, they cannot diminish the hope by a, while factual statement, telling people that ‘hey, we are only here to stop the bleeding.’ Don’t expect more.
Of course they cannot reverse much in one term. But they can present their top priorities that can be achieved in the first term. Milestones, tangible ones. If a certain number of affordable housing for citizens and refugees are needed, then the first term should be focused on giving people a peep into how those numbers can be achieved in the coming years and how it would look like at the end of the first term, They should present by the end of the first term, what they can achieve in terms of bringing NHS waiting time down and how. The more specifics they can present and deliver along the term, the lesser they leave it to perception when it comes to reelection time. They need to be very clear what are the top priorities and the numbers they want to achieve in the first term and not be seen as all over the place.
The more the citizens hope can be proven in tangible ways, the higher chance they have to stay on as the government or else the next elections the Conservatives will just use emotions and perceptions as the main weapon to create doubts whether Labour has done anything of worth.
Starmer will never do that.
While in a PR system Labor and its allies(?) would almost always be well-placed to form a government, it would mean Labor would have to work with partners with differences in opinions/policies. Starmer would rather wager on FPTP to go alone.
1 Like
That’s not the real issue. PR is not popular amongst a sizeable chunk of the electorate as it is seen as leading to weak forms of government.
1 Like
I really don’t understand this notion. True, sometimes it takes weeks to cobble together a coalition and sometimes the coalition doesn’t last long. But the vast majority of the democracies are some form of Proportional Representation and it’s not like that those countries are suffering form instability or uncertainty.
2 Likes
It worked for the Tories for 14 years!
5 Likes
It’s part familiarity and nationalism and two parts spin. We learn at school for example about the rise of Nazism in Germany and Fascism in Italy being caused in part through the parliamentary systems. I don’t read papers as much as I used to but it was common to see stories about governments collapsing in Europe written in a way that put PR in a poor light, or allow the growth of extremist parties.
Look at the reaction last year when Gordon Brown came out with a report suggesting changes to the House of Lords introducing PR to elect its members. Starmer appeared to be initially warm to the proposals but it attracted a lot of press and negativity because of the PR aspect and he had to distance himself.
For the UK to adopt PR it would require a sizeable period of time to promote the positives and gain support for a good version of it, that would enable confidence in taking it into an election as part of the manifesto and to be able to take on the entrenched interests that would be against it (we had PR in the london Mayoral elections until this year as the conservatives felt they had a better chance of winning under a FPTP system).
1 Like
And it’s still their go to argument as to why you should vote Conservative 
4 Likes
Maybe thats the shit they have been regurgitating for so long that they are now in a position to lose badly in the next elections
It’s a variation of new manager phrases bingo. “Well, the economy has been so badly mismanaged that there’s little we can do for the first term” read “Well, I’m surprised at the player’s fitness levels, until they improve substantially we’ll have a rocky period” And 36 different variations incoming. Would be refreshing to hear Starmer say “The past is exactly that, what’s done is done. I expect the new opposition to be more competent than they were in government (although I won’t hold my breath) however we’re in charge now and we’re going to fix what’s broken and drive the country forward without resorting to excuses and finger pointing.”. Zero chance of that though.
Me neither, but it is what the public tend to believe.
We had a referendum in 2011 on AV - an alternative vote system whereby you rank the candidates in order rather than just pick one (so if you naturally lean towards the Greens you could, for example, vote Green 1, Labour 2, Lib Dem 3 and Tory 4) it was voted against about 70/30, on two main arguments put forward by the Tory’s.
-
You stupid fucking proles wouldn’t be able to cope with putting things in order, rather than just picking the one you want
-
It would lead to weak governments where parties would have to cooperate, compromise and understand each other to get legislation through, rather than strong partisan government who can just force through whatever they want on a minority vote share.
Crackers, but the British public lapped it up.
5 Likes
I think all the European democracies have PR system. Germany, Ireland, the Scandinavian countries have PR system and they are the ones with most robust economies and social & political stability.
Just read Mascot’s post, it’s just sad.
2 Likes
If we had had PR since say 1990, would there have been any material difference to who was elected as Executive? I don’t know Im just asking the Q.
First thing in my book apart from starting somehow on the numerous repair jobs that are needed is to address the following:
Tol of my head.
- Non dom tax rules
- MP’s and second jobs. Stop this consultancy shit that allows MPs to effectively line their pockets.
- Lobbying rules.
- Tightening up on parliamentary behaviour and speech.
- Purge Westminster of the vile behaviour thats allowed to run unchallenged for years.
- Further tightening of MP expenses
- Sort the shit show that peerages has become.
- Procurement that is linked to MPs.
PR would be nice and I believe people are slowly warming to it but it isnt happening. Parties are too power hungry.
6 Likes
I not sure the Brexit referendum would have happened if we we had PR.
Rwanda would never have been an option.
7 Likes