Labour party, first 100 days in office.

[L.A.T.1961]

6 minutes ago, Setton said:

Actually the prevailing assessment in the run up to the invasion was that invasion was imminent.

Again, great talking point for those "tired of experts", falls down when faced with reality.

I'm afraid you're just out of your depth when it comes to assessments and forecasting. I don't have time to educate you.

If you believe a review is the equivalent to a crystal ball then carry on.  

But I do note that your response now takes on me and not the point I make, a typical leftwing approach when losing the argument.

Edited July 12 by L.A.T.1961

[Setton]

54 minutes ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

If you believe a review is the equivalent to a crystal ball then carry on.  

But I do note that your response now takes on me and not the point I make, a typical leftwing approach when losing the argument.

I mean, I did open by pointing out your assertion was wrong, but do feel free to ignore that. A typical right wing approach when losing the argument.

Anyway, that's exactly my point. I can't explain it to someone with no background in assessments in the time I have available.

It's not an attack, or because I'm somehow "losing", just a fact of the situation. If you want to go and read up on how assessments and forecasts are made, I'll more than happily discuss it with you.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

I think it is a new level of the depths the uncaring Liebour party go to when they suggest subjecting pensions to tax.

Those people who saved, planned and did so from contributing to the workforce to now face swingeing tax payments at a point in their lives when they can do little about their situation.

Liebour is abhorrent and disgusting.

Despicable treating honest retired people love something they trod in on the streets after all they did to grow the country.

Grossly inept.

[Setton]

49 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

I think it is a new level of the depths the uncaring Liebour party go to when they suggest subjecting pensions to tax.

Those people who saved, planned and did so from contributing to the workforce to now face swingeing tax payments at a point in their lives when they can do little about their situation.

Liebour is abhorrent and disgusting.

Despicable treating honest retired people love something they trod in on the streets after all they did to grow the country.

Grossly inept.

Pensions are already taxed.

[pellinore]

On 7/11/2024 at 9:54 PM, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Today, Liebour want to release 20,000 prisoners early!!! 

One of the reasons why Sunak called the election early is because he could have been taken to court over his inaction over the prison crisis. Labour inherited a serious crisis in the prison service along with many other crises:

Rishi Sunak was warned by senior civil servants a week before he called the election that he was at risk of breaching his legal responsibilities if he failed to take action over the prison overcrowding crisis, a leaked document reveals.

The advice, sent to the former prime minister on 15 May, said that failing to make an urgent decision on prison capacity would mean the criminal justice system in England and Wales reaching the point of “critical failure”.

The Cabinet Office memo, seen by the Guardian, warned that the administration of justice would become “untenable” to the point that the police and judiciary would no longer be able to exercise their legal duties.

Senior civil servants felt that the prisons overcrowding crisis was so severe over the following weeks that the cabinet secretary, Simon Case, chaired emergency Cobra meetings himself on how to respond.

Rishi Sunak ‘risked breaching legal responsibilities over prison crisis’ | Prisons and probation | The Guardian

Edited July 17 by pellinore

[pellinore]

1 hour ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

I think it is a new level of the depths the uncaring Liebour party go to when they suggest subjecting pensions to tax.

I've been paying tax on my occupational pension since I took early retirement 10 years ago, and I feel no sense of injustice.

When Farage retires, he'll get the equivalent of £77k per year in today's money, and Liz Truss is reported to be lined up for £144k per year. Do you think they should be exempt from tax because they will be pensioners? I don't.

[Setton]

8 minutes ago, pellinore said:

One of the reasons why Sunak called the election early is because he could have been taken to court over his inaction over the prison crisis. Labour inherited a serious crisis in the prison service along with many other crises:

Rishi Sunak was warned by senior civil servants a week before he called the election that he was at risk of breaching his legal responsibilities if he failed to take action over the prison overcrowding crisis, a leaked document reveals.

The advice, sent to the former prime minister on 15 May, said that failing to make an urgent decision on prison capacity would mean the criminal justice system in England and Wales reaching the point of “critical failure”.

The Cabinet Office memo, seen by the Guardian, warned that the administration of justice would become “untenable” to the point that the police and judiciary would no longer be able to exercise their legal duties.

Senior civil servants felt that the prisons overcrowding crisis was so severe over the following weeks that the cabinet secretary, Simon Case, chaired emergency Cobra meetings himself on how to respond.

Rishi Sunak ‘risked breaching legal responsibilities over prison crisis’ | Prisons and probation | The Guardian

So once again, @OpenMindedSceptic takes a problem entirely created by the Tories over 14 years of mismanagement and tries to blame it on a Labour government in office for less than two weeks.

[pellinore]

On 7/10/2024 at 7:08 PM, OpenMindedSceptic said:

He has literally been on Radio 4 an hour ago saying they haven't opened the books. 

Do you really think a PM puts on his reading glasses and reads through the country's accounts, like a housewife totting up the supermarket bills at the end of the week? Do you really think there are A5 handwritten books called " Defence Spending", " Prison Spending", and "Sandwiches and Coffee for Meetings Expenses" that he tots up with a pencil at the end of day?

 

[pellinore]

12 minutes ago, Setton said:

So once again, @OpenMindedSceptic takes a problem entirely created by the Tories over 14 years of mismanagement and tries to blame it on a Labour government in office for less than two weeks.

I warned him in another thread about this very thing. Wasting my time, ofc.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

43 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Do you really think a PM puts on his reading glasses and reads through the country's accounts, like a housewife totting up the supermarket bills at the end of the week? Do you really think there are A5 handwritten books called " Defence Spending", " Prison Spending", and "Sandwiches and Coffee for Meetings Expenses" that he tots up with a pencil at the end of day?

 

A competent government would have read all pertinent details during the time available. Liebour fail.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

Still in the first 100 days.

Clive Lewis (Liebour) has to take the oath to serve as an MP twice.

Just doesn't seem to understand what he was standing for.

Clueless.

[pellinore]

1 minute ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

A competent government would have read all pertinent details during the time available. Liebour fail.

So you are still running with the line that Labour should be able to correct all the failings and mismanagement of the Tories over 14 years in just one week?

[OpenMindedSceptic]

1 hour ago, Setton said:

Pensions are already taxed.

Not as part of IHT.

Screw the families, take thebtax on already taxed money.

Diabolical Liebour.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

Just now, pellinore said:

So you are still running with the line that Labour should be able to correct all the failings and mismanagement of the Tories over 14 years in just one week?

No, that's not my line at all.

It's the 14 years of digesting the information that is readily available but failing to do so that makes Liebour so incompetent.

The inexperience is shining through.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

The FTSE 100 fell during the Kings Speech.

The market feels motivated is not a plan for growth.

 

[Setton]

53 minutes ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

Not as part of IHT.

Screw the families, take thebtax on already taxed money.

Diabolical Liebour.

What are you blathering about? Inheritance tax and tax on pensions are totally different things.

Edited July 17 by Setton

[pellinore]

When @L.A.T.1961 started this thread, I honestly thought it was to be a celebration of finally getting some grownups into No 10! Instead, it seems to have a negative tone.

Let's all get behind the govt and support them in making success of Britain! Labour had a landslide victory; it is obviously what the people wanted, so let's accept we live in a democracy and get behind the majority: change; change for the better!

It seems unpatriotic to start running Britain down and criticising them from Day 1. Most of us couldn't have been happier with the election result.

[pellinore]

2 hours ago, OpenMindedSceptic said:

No, that's not my line at all.

It's the 14 years of digesting the information that is readily available but failing to do so that makes Liebour so incompetent.

The inexperience is shining through.

What is it you expect them to do? What have they failed at? We've just today had the King's Speech to outline future plans- they can't start implementing change without due process.

[L.A.T.1961]

Some of the changes to Labour policy from electioneering to the Kings speech. 

Votes at 16 - Starmer’s manifesto included a commitment to extend the vote to 16 and 17-year old's in all elections.

But Starmer has since admitted that this policy isn’t much of a priority — and it did not make it into the king’s speech.

 Probably the interest by the teen's in the Reform party has influenced this decision 😉 

 

Defense spending hike -

Starmer has long promised an increase in U.K. defense spending to 2.5 percent of GDP

But Starmer has refused to put a timetable on that spending pledge.

Therefore while the king’s speech did include a commitment to a “strong defense based on” NATO values, it did not include Starmer’s defense spending pledge.

Labour’s manifesto promised - to support the development of the Artificial Intelligence sector and to introduce regulation on companies developing the most powerful AI models. But some expectations of an explicit AI bill in the king’s speech did not come to pass.

Gender reform 

Amid the thorny debate about balancing transgender rights and the pushback from so-called gender critical activists, Labour promised during the election campaign to “modernize, simplify and reform” the process behind legally changing gender.

That pledge to overhaul the Gender Recognition Reform Act did not make it into the king’s speech as a new bill, however, and was not mentioned at all.

End the two-child benefit limit -

The first big row of Starmer’s premiership is likely to be on welfare after his government refused to scrap a controversial Conservative welfare policy.

Labour opted not to scrap the two-child limit on benefits, sometimes referred to as the two-child benefit cap in the king’s speech.

 

Some of the above changes in policy are Labour smelling the coffee and I am happy with.

Not giving 16 yrs old the vote is one, the Gender Recognition Reform Act disappearing is another.

Dropping an explicit AI bill will save putting extra costs on AI connected business and will give the UK a boost compared to the EU who have something similar in place already.

https://www.politico.eu/article/kings-speech-keir-starmer-britain-government-charles-labour-united-kingdom/

Edited July 17 by L.A.T.1961

[Setton]

12 minutes ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

Some of the changes to Labour policy from electioneering to the Kings speech. 

Votes at 16 - Starmer’s manifesto included a commitment to extend the vote to 16 and 17-year old's in all elections.

But Starmer has since admitted that this policy isn’t much of a priority — and it did not make it into the king’s speech.

 Probably the interest by the teen's in the Reform party has influenced this decision 😉 

 

Defense spending hike -

Starmer has long promised an increase in U.K. defense spending to 2.5 percent of GDP

But Starmer has refused to put a timetable on that spending pledge.

Therefore while the king’s speech did include a commitment to a “strong defense based on” NATO values, it did not include Starmer’s defense spending pledge.

Labour’s manifesto promised - to support the development of the Artificial Intelligence sector and to introduce regulation on companies developing the most powerful AI models. But some expectations of an explicit AI bill in the king’s speech did not come to pass.

Gender reform 

Amid the thorny debate about balancing transgender rights and the pushback from so-called gender critical activists, Labour promised during the election campaign to “modernize, simplify and reform” the process behind legally changing gender.

That pledge to overhaul the Gender Recognition Reform Act did not make it into the king’s speech as a new bill, however, and was not mentioned at all.

End the two-child benefit limit -

The first big row of Starmer’s premiership is likely to be on welfare after his government refused to scrap a controversial Conservative welfare policy.

Labour opted not to scrap the two-child limit on benefits, sometimes referred to as the two-child benefit cap in the king’s speech.

 

Some of the above changes in policy are Labour smelling the coffee and am happy with.

Not giving 16 yrs old the vote is one, the Gender Recognition Reform Act disappearing is another.

Dropping an explicit AI bill will save putting extra costs on AI connected business and will give the UK a boost compared to the EU who have something similar in place already.

https://www.politico.eu/article/kings-speech-keir-starmer-britain-government-charles-labour-united-kingdom/

Again, the desperation really coming through strong.

Labour's manifesto was for it's time in government (up to five years). The King's Speech sets out the government's priorities for this year.

Did you really expect them to deliver on five years of promises in the first year then just twiddle their thumbs for the next four?

[L.A.T.1961]

Just now, Setton said:

Again, the desperation really coming through strong.

Labour's manifesto was for it's time in government (up to five years). The King's Speech sets out the government's priorities for this year.

Did you really expect them to deliver on five years of promises in the first year then just twiddle their thumbs for the next four?

I would expect them not to change their minds in the time between a few weeks ago and today. 

If this had been a tory kings speech the press would have used the word U turn so often it would have worn out the type set.

[Setton]

1 minute ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

I would expect them not to change their minds in the time between a few weeks ago and today. 

If this had been a tory kings speech the press would have used the word U turn so often it would have worn out the type set.

Again, there's no indication they've changed their mind on anything.

Just that those things aren't what they've chosen to prioritise for year one.

[L.A.T.1961]

Just now, Setton said:

Again, there's no indication they've changed their mind on anything.

Just that those things aren't what they've chosen to prioritise for year one.

That isn't a trick they can keep doing. The clock is ticking.

You must have missed the bit where I agreed with changes.

[Setton]

29 minutes ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

That isn't a trick they can keep doing. The clock is ticking.

You must have missed the bit where I agreed with changes.

Yes, the clock is ticking. Four years, eleven months, two weeks and a couple of days to go. That means four more King's Speeches to deliver their manifesto.

I really couldn't care less how happy or otherwise you are about a change in policy that hasn't actually happened.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

Still in the first 100 days:

The IMF have predicted the UK to grow by 1.5% this year from the work done by the Tories but Liebour's weird kink for green energy will probably scupper that growth with the loss fo £30Bn of investment and an over reliance on foreign energy, costing the UK a minimum of 100,000 jobs and a likely 240,000 and impact on GDP in the region of 0.7%. 

Liebour's inexperience is shining through.