I actually agree on the partisanship and tribalism, and it’s often something that I’ve been harping on in this thread.
If the Conservatives were to propose a universal basic income, I’d be all for it. I don’t care who proposed it, it could even be Reform for all I care.
If Labour proposed the Rwanda bullshit, and continue the policy of not offering a safe route to asylum, then I’ll call them out for it.
But you have to distinguish between partisanship/tribalism and politics, where you need to find a way to weigh the evidence, and the values of people across the country, to determine common goals and how to get there. Politics is necessary for that.
I would argue that Labour did provide a clear vision. Better funding and management of the public sector, delivering green energy and building more homes to help spur economic growth.
The problem is there are too many people knee jerking about a Labour government raising taxes, or reversing Brexit for Labour, or not being left wing enough for the party to really go much further or explicit with its policies ahead of an election to have proper public discourse.
In short the problem isnt the party or leaders lacking vision. Its people out of fear or spite wanting to paint them as such.
I can understand the Arsenal box thing, as it was pointed out that it would cost the government more if he was just to keep using his season ticket owing to security and all that.
I’ve not caught up on the rest so I’m reluctant to comment yet. But still, not a good look when you’ve been criticising the previous government for precisely that.
I knew the press would go after the new government but i’ve been shocked at how much and how far they’re going. Have Labour given them treads to pull? Yes. Were they put in a trap onbthe economy? Probably.
“After 25 years of PFI, there is still little evidence that it delivers enough benefit to offset the additional costs of borrowing money privately,” she said. “Many local bodies are now shackled to inflexible PFI contracts that are exorbitantly expensive to change.
“I am concerned that [the] treasury has relaunched PFI under new branding, without doing anything about most of its underlying problems. We need more investment in our schools and hospitals but if we get the contracts wrong, taxpayers pay the price,” she said.
Auditors examined PFI deals drawn up over 25 years under Tory and Labour governments, as well PF2, introduced as improved public-private financing deals set up under David Cameron’s premiership.”
So after 25 years of Tory and Labour governments….
Mate, I’m not disagreeing with the inequality in the UK but you seem to think it’s a UK only problem.
You proudly stated that you earn a good salary, so surely you are benefiting from the UK’s system….if you are that offended by it, move back to your native country and throw stones from a far. Can you not see how much of a hypocrite you are?
Iv tried to be polite in our exchanges, but all you have been is aggressive, dismissive and speculative with your information.
They had been criticising for undeclared conflicts of interest, not things openly on the members register.
If Starmer has any sense, he would demand that all MPs are independently audited and the conflicts of interest made public. It would be really interesting to see which MPs storm off in a huff.
One of the few things that I’ve read about this whole affair (I genuinely haven’t read much about it though) is that he failed to declare some of these on time. Not that he didn’t declare it anyway, but that he failed to declare it on time.
Sure, it’s a minor nitpick, but also I feel that he should be hypervigilant that given the tone of his campaign, he really cannot be seen to be having any of these problems. It might be unfair, the press coverage might be overblown, but at the same time this is also in a way a problem of his own making.
Agree on the audits though.
EDIT:
Surely a good guideline for him would be that anything that was inappropriate for a DPP would be inappropriate for a PM too?
While I’m sympathetic about the fairness of coverage, I also have an important point to make:
We can’t complain about the low standards that the Conservatives were held to and not demand the appropriate standards that we think Labour should be held to. We just have to be consistent and demand it from the government, regardless of party. The key issue for me wasn’t that the Conservatives were doing x,y, or z. It was that the government was doing those things.
Where there is little debate, is tens of thousands needlessly died, and hundreds of millions if not billions have been wasted, or worse subject to corruption.
Case in point Michelle Mone (Tory peer) got 200M for setting up a new company and supplying the NHS with gowns and masks that were not fit for purpose. Or 40M that went to Hancocks pub landlord. Again setting up a new company supplying equipment not fit for purpose. £1.6 billion were awarded to those with known political connections to Conservative Party. Approx. 20% of all contracts award have been flagged for potential corruption (£3.7 billion)
Many lined their own pockets, fucked their mistresses, and mistakenly when looking for tractors instead found porn sites (twice) while in the house of commons. Got largely brushed under the carpet, but should be a national embarrassment that Farage/Johnson etc took Russian money/donations. Millions through either Russia Today or holidays (in Italy with former Russian Spy). Ignoring the aspects connected to Brexit.
Its not in the same league, but Labour need to be whiter than white. I dont view this as corruption or anything similar to the Tories. However its an embarrassment.
I didn’t tell you to go back from where you came from, I suggested it as an option if you were unhappy. Everything you have said about the UK is negative, people bending the knee, deference, worshipping people born with a silver spoon, etc. all opinion.
If you feel I am spouting nonsense then convince me otherwise…
I have questioned the information you have used to support your opinion but you chose to dismiss, be little it, rather than answer it. Just like my response to your last post.
You were so quick to mock me and celebrate your post that you actually failed to read the article and what it actually said. Further more, you speculate about who is benefiting from the governments monies and their relationship to MPs.
We all know that certain companies benefited from preferably decisions made by the Government but it is not the first time or the last irrespective of the Party. But to suggest £200bn went to companies with Tory interests is as factually incorrect as the figures displayed on the side of a big red bus.
