The future of the UK under Labour

[cambridgeshire canary 6,799]

So based on all the current polls and projecations it's fair to assume the time a GE rolls around Labour will win, and it will most likely be a landslide win for them with the Tories being wiped out and Keir being elected Prime Minister.

But I suppose the question is.. How do you see this working out? Provided Labour and Keir can hold onto power what kind of things do you expect them to do in the next say, one, two, three, four, five plus years?

[Fen Canary 866]

Nothing will change

[sonyc 5,541]

1 hour ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

So based on all the current polls and projecations it's fair to assume the time a GE rolls around Labour will win, and it will most likely be a landslide win for them with the Tories being wiped out and Keir being elected Prime Minister.

But I suppose the question is.. How do you see this working out? Provided Labour and Keir can hold onto power what kind of things do you expect them to do in the next say, one, two, three, four, five plus years?

I will try and say more than Fen because your question was broad and deserves more of an answer.

I think it will be about trying to put out a lot of fires: Waiting lists for major operations, A&E, GP appointments, dental service access, the rail strikes, border controls, class sizes, school and hospital buildings, sewage, legal aid, local government finance, the hospitality sector, road maintenance, boarded up high streets in industrial hinterland towns, policing and increasing crime rates, the backlogs in the justice system...and so on.

That's before looking at poverty and inequality  (food bank usage is now something that people in full time jobs have to use occasionally. Over half of people on benefits are in full time work) and the increasing problem in social care.

The UK has been stripped bare (it feels like) and we need serious investment to improve or drive productivity.The laissez faire economics of the past 40 years (as well as Brexit of course) has left us without much of a direction or story about what the UK might be. The  kind of rubbish we've heard about "world beating" is plain deception. 

What is Labour's vision? I'm not very sure I know. But, we may see more emerge after the election. Starmer has had to be very careful leading up to it for all the reasons discussed here before. Some things can be more easily forecast: No doubt Labour will be criticised by the right wing press barons within a few months of power. Culture wars will continue. The Labour movement will again split and there will be factions. I believe there will be a closer relationship with Europe (and maybe more alignment?). We were, after all, greater as a nation being part of Europe (even though it has it's own problems). I realise this is very divisive. We need to build trust though and reputation again on the world stage but especially with our nearest neighbours. It would make sense economically.

In short, you've asked a huge question. If all that happens is putting out some fires and there are plans to tackle others then maybe that's the best kind of start we might expect. We've travelled a long way down and it's a long way back. Maybe it's even a lost cause but that's more an emotional response because you need something to begin in a positive sense for the country first and that becomes a catalyst for trust and people becoming outward looking again. The Tories in this administration and shape have destroyed so much and there have been very few good stories. Perhaps if we were to look really hard we would find them because all the news is of worsening problems in many areas of life. 

We need investment in skills for new workforces and some major infrastructure plans. I doubt we can afford them. People are correct in blaming the pandemic and the war in Ukraine and Brexit and Tory ineptitude. A bad mix.

We need more policies that are based on preventative measures (none more so than in health which is a ticking time bomb - to use that cliché).

Hopefully some posters can offer a more hopeful vision than I'm able to.

Edited April 27 by sonyc

[DraytonBoy 162]

Unless they become quickly unpopular they'll be in power for at least the next two parliaments such is the dire state of the Tories.

To start with there'll be no noticeable change whilst they settle in but you can expect lots of 'tinkering' with tax (VAT on private school fees etc) which won't actual increase the overall tax take much, in addition they'll reverse daft Tory policies (Rwanda etc). It's going to be many years before Joe public will see any real results such as an improved NHS and even that will depend on how the economy performs but perhaps the most visible thing will be the lack of scandal and sleaze coming out of Westminster.  

[Fen Canary 866]

9 minutes ago, sonyc said:

I will try and say more than Fen because your question was broad and deserves more of an answer.

I think it will be about trying to put out a lot of fires: Waiting lists for major operations, A&E, GP appointments, dental service access, the rail strikes, border controls, class sizes, school and hospital buildings, sewage, legal aid, local government finance, the hospitality sector, road maintenance, boarded up high streets in industrial hinterland towns, policing and increasing crime rates, the backlogs in the justice system...and so on.

That's before looking at poverty and inequality  (food bank usage is now something that people in full time jobs have to use occasionally. Over half of people on benefits are in full time work) and the increasing problem in social care.

The UK has been stripped bare (it feels like) and we need serious investment to improve or drive productivity.The laissez faire economics of the past 40 years (as well as Brexit of course) has left us without much of a direction or story about what the UK might be. The  kind of rubbish we've heard about "world beating" is plain deception. 

What is Labour's vision? I'm not very sure I know. But, we may see more emerge after the election. Starmer has had to be very careful leading up to it for all the reasons discussed here before. Some things can be more easily forecast: No doubt Labour will be criticised by the right wing press barons within a few months of power. Culture wars will continue. The Labour movement will again split and there will be factions. I believe there will be a closer relationship with Europe (and maybe more alignment?). We were, after all, greater as a nation being part of Europe (even though it has it's own problems). I realise this is very divisive. We need to build trust though and reputation again on the world stage but especially with our nearest neighbours. It would make sense economically.

In short, you've asked a huge question. If all that happens is putting out some fires and there are plans to tackle others then maybe that's the best kind of start we might expect. We've travelled a long way down and it's a long way back. Maybe it's even a lost cause but that's more an emotional response because you need something to begin in a positive sense for the country first and that becomes a catalyst for trust and people becoming outward looking again. The Tories in this administration and shape have destroyed so much and there have been very few good stories. Perhaps if we were to look really hard we would find them because all the news is of worsening problems in many areas of life. 

We need investment in skills for new workforces and some major infrastructure plans. I doubt we can afford them. People are correct in blaming the pandemic and the war in Ukraine and Brexit and Tory ineptitude. A bad mix.

We need more policies that are based on preventative measures (none more so than in health which is a ticking time bomb - to use that cliché).

Hopefully some posters can offer a more hopeful vision than I'm able to.

Unfortunately to me that reads more like a wish list rather than things you genuinely believe will happen.

I want to see immigration (legal and illegal) severely reduced, I want to see more houses built so young families can have some security. I want an end to the “market knows best” approach to every political decision. I want policy to be made in parliament rather than farmed out to unaccountable technocrats and quangos. I want some semblance of an industrial strategy and a realist approach to foreign policy and our place/power in the world. I want a health service that functions.

Do I believe I’ll get any of it? Unfortunately not, I think we’ll just see the same slow decline of the last 40 years carrying on as before. I’ve no idea what Starmer stands for, I’m not sure he even knows.

I’m not sure I’ve ever been as disillusioned with the political system as I am these days. I used to laugh at the miserable old b@st@tds who said if voting made a difference they wouldn’t let you do it, now I’m starting to believe their cynicism was bang on

[Mr Angry 1,571]

If big improvements aren't under way after the first month people will start to complain, unfortunately that's the way that things are these days. 

[Yellow Fever 3,833]

40 minutes ago, Mr Angry said:

If big improvements aren't under way after the first month people will start to complain, unfortunately that's the way that things are these days. 

That's really a sad reflection of populist politics where politians now follow not lead.

[Yellow Fever 3,833]

1 hour ago, sonyc said:

I will try and say more than Fen because your question was broad and deserves more of an answer.

I think it will be about trying to put out a lot of fires: Waiting lists for major operations, A&E, GP appointments, dental service access, the rail strikes, border controls, class sizes, school and hospital buildings, sewage, legal aid, local government finance, the hospitality sector, road maintenance, boarded up high streets in industrial hinterland towns, policing and increasing crime rates, the backlogs in the justice system...and so on.

That's before looking at poverty and inequality  (food bank usage is now something that people in full time jobs have to use occasionally. Over half of people on benefits are in full time work) and the increasing problem in social care.

The UK has been stripped bare (it feels like) and we need serious investment to improve or drive productivity.The laissez faire economics of the past 40 years (as well as Brexit of course) has left us without much of a direction or story about what the UK might be. The  kind of rubbish we've heard about "world beating" is plain deception. 

What is Labour's vision? I'm not very sure I know. But, we may see more emerge after the election. Starmer has had to be very careful leading up to it for all the reasons discussed here before. Some things can be more easily forecast: No doubt Labour will be criticised by the right wing press barons within a few months of power. Culture wars will continue. The Labour movement will again split and there will be factions. I believe there will be a closer relationship with Europe (and maybe more alignment?). We were, after all, greater as a nation being part of Europe (even though it has it's own problems). I realise this is very divisive. We need to build trust though and reputation again on the world stage but especially with our nearest neighbours. It would make sense economically.

In short, you've asked a huge question. If all that happens is putting out some fires and there are plans to tackle others then maybe that's the best kind of start we might expect. We've travelled a long way down and it's a long way back. Maybe it's even a lost cause but that's more an emotional response because you need something to begin in a positive sense for the country first and that becomes a catalyst for trust and people becoming outward looking again. The Tories in this administration and shape have destroyed so much and there have been very few good stories. Perhaps if we were to look really hard we would find them because all the news is of worsening problems in many areas of life. 

We need investment in skills for new workforces and some major infrastructure plans. I doubt we can afford them. People are correct in blaming the pandemic and the war in Ukraine and Brexit and Tory ineptitude. A bad mix.

We need more policies that are based on preventative measures (none more so than in health which is a ticking time bomb - to use that cliché).

Hopefully some posters can offer a more hopeful vision than I'm able to.

Agree with most of that.

I think the summary of the first part 'to put out fires' is simply to stop digging ever deeper holes.

What we all want is competent rational government.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,594]

5 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

That's really a sad reflection of populist politics where politians now follow not lead.

Does that mean the complaints about Brexit that began days after leaving count as populist politics?

Labour are going to have a stonking majority. As such, they'll have up to five years to make substantial inroads.

Edited April 27 by littleyellowbirdie

[sonyc 5,541]

50 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Unfortunately to me that reads more like a wish list rather than things you genuinely believe will happen.

I want to see immigration (legal and illegal) severely reduced, I want to see more houses built so young families can have some security. I want an end to the “market knows best” approach to every political decision. I want policy to be made in parliament rather than farmed out to unaccountable technocrats and quangos. I want some semblance of an industrial strategy and a realist approach to foreign policy and our place/power in the world. I want a health service that functions.

Do I believe I’ll get any of it? Unfortunately not, I think we’ll just see the same slow decline of the last 40 years carrying on as before. I’ve no idea what Starmer stands for, I’m not sure he even knows.

I’m not sure I’ve ever been as disillusioned with the political system as I am these days. I used to laugh at the miserable old b@st@tds who said if voting made a difference they wouldn’t let you do it, now I’m starting to believe their cynicism was bang on

The list isn't of a wish list variety, more and indication of the deterioration we've witnessed in many areas. And I would hope any new government (a different one) would have an understanding and serious plans. They're going to be asked about them (and more) on the doorstep after all. 

Much though I understand your cynicism I also don't think it's that fair that you can be so dismissive of a party that hasn't been in power for over 14 years. But then, you've stated before you don't know where you are politically and feel utterly bereft and disenfranchised. In that respect, I see where you're coming from even if not agreeing.

[Mr Angry 1,571]

11 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

That's really a sad reflection of populist politics where politians now follow not lead.

No, it's a sad reflection of how people have become total @rseholes

[sonyc 5,541]

19 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Labour are going to have a stonking majority. As such, they'll have up to five years to make substantial inroads.

And probably nowhere near long enough to make big change. But agree, it might be a start (as stated putting out some fires...a good thing in itself if not generative or very productive).

All this being said, I have to admit here I will be watching through the whole of the night on election day to enjoy some MPs being kicked out. I suppose that's churlish but I'm just being honest. I've not disliked such a fair few of Tories than in this current administration. Never felt like that before quite as strongly.

Edited April 27 by sonyc

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

Frictionless trade deals around the world

Taking back control on immigration

Make our own laws

The Union will be stronger

Food will be cheaper

Gas and electricity will be cheaper

The fishing industry will go from strength to strength

 

 

[Mello Yello 2,303]

Under Labour?.....Utopia and Unicorns....

[Barbe bleu 832]

Nothing will change 

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

Tony Blair will be appointed Foreign Secretary.

Edited April 27 by A Load of Squit

[BroadstairsR 2,205]

Apparently the last Labour Govt. left the country "skint" whatever that means?

The same dilemna will face Reeves as has faced Hunt, either squeeze the taxpayer further, one way or another, or increase the National Debt (bonds, gilts etc.)

We might well at first see a reversal of the traditional with Labour reducing taxes in general (along with fringe tax increases for non-doms, private schools etc.) and following France, Italy and the rest of Southern Europe in increasing debt.

However, when Dennis Healy 'squeezed the rich 'til the pips squeaked' it led to a decrease in tax revenue.

It remains a difficult balancing act and that now, much derided, word 'growth,' must underpin a necessary path whilst improving business confidence is vital.

I would like to see a reduction in I/T by 1p and a reduction in Corporation tax to increase spending power and to stimulate big business. Tread carefully though, as the last clumsy attempt in this direction by Kwasi Kwarteng (which included £45b of unfunded tax cuts for the rich based upon a spurious expectation of growth) led to a run on sterling, gilt market free fall and spooked international investment as well as a spurt in mortgage rates and inflation.

By all accounts, the last Queen was more on top of things than the hapless Truss.  

Starmer's Govt will not have it easy, but they will have a marvellous opportunity of redressing much of the harm caused by the current government(s) and before as long as they manage to keep the looney left at bay.

[Yellow Fever 3,833]

4 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Apparently the last Labour Govt. left the country "skint" whatever that means?

The same dilemna will face Reeves as has faced Hunt, either squeeze the taxpayer further, one way or another, or increase the National Debt (bonds, gilts etc.)

We might well at first see a reversal of the traditional with Labour reducing taxes in general (along with fringe tax increases for non-doms, private schools etc.) and following France, Italy and the rest of Southern Europe in increasing debt.

However, when Dennis Healy 'squeezed the rich 'til the pips squeaked' it led to a decrease in tax revenue.

It remains a difficult balancing act and that now, much derided, word 'growth,' must underpin a necessary path whilst improving business confidence is vital.

I would like to see a reduction in I/T by 1p and a reduction in Corporation tax to increase spending power and to stimulate big business. Tread carefully though, as the last clumsy attempt in this direction by Kwasi Kwarteng (which included £45b of unfunded tax cuts for the rich based upon a spurious expectation of growth) led to a run on sterling, gilt market free fall and spooked international investment as well as a spurt in mortgage rates and inflation.

By all accounts, the last Queen was more on top of things than the hapless Truss.  

Starmer's Govt will not have it easy, but they will have a marvellous opportunity of redressing much of the harm caused by the current government(s) and before as long as they manage to keep the looney left at bay.

They will have huge amount of goodwill.

[Midlands Yellow 4,079]

I’ll stop up to watch all the Tory carnage and humiliation on election night. It’s going to be comedy gold. 

Edited April 27 by Midlands Yellow

[littleyellowbirdie 2,594]

4 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

Tony Blair will be appointed Foreign Secretary.

That would be a lovely bit of satire if he hadn't already been the UN's Middle East Peace Envoy in real life.

[Fen Canary 866]

7 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

That's really a sad reflection of populist politics where politians now follow not lead.

By populist politics do you mean following the wishes of the electorate? How have we got to the stage whereby doing what the public asks is derided as populist? 

[Fen Canary 866]

7 hours ago, sonyc said:

The list isn't of a wish list variety, more and indication of the deterioration we've witnessed in many areas. And I would hope any new government (a different one) would have an understanding and serious plans. They're going to be asked about them (and more) on the doorstep after all. 

Much though I understand your cynicism I also don't think it's that fair that you can be so dismissive of a party that hasn't been in power for over 14 years. But then, you've stated before you don't know where you are politically and feel utterly bereft and disenfranchised. In that respect, I see where you're coming from even if not agreeing.

I hope you’re right and that we do at least start to see improvements across the board, however incremental, and perhaps my cynicism is unfair. I’m willing to give Labour a chance to start fixing the mess they’ll inherit but I’ll admit the way Starmer has already backtracked on almost every promise he made to become leader even before he’s in the messy business of actually governing doesn’t fill me with confidence 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,594]

1 hour ago, Fen Canary said:

By populist politics do you mean following the wishes of the electorate? How have we got to the stage whereby doing what the public asks is derided as populist? 

I think the implication in populism is that it's ideas that sound superficially plausible but don't stand up to scrutiny.

The Rwanda scheme is not populist though, seeing as it is a legal route to removing undocumented migrants from the UK while claims are evaluated, and will serve as a deterrent to people crossing as it becomes clear the risks are greater than the potential reward of crossing the channel for those without a bona fide asylum case. As such, it will save lives.

Edited April 27 by littleyellowbirdie

[Herman 9,824]

The Rwanda debacle is a purely populist scheme. It's 100% populism. It's populism condensed into the purest essence of populism.

A bowl of Pedigree Chum is populism. The dog doo after this is the Rwanda policy.

[Herman 9,824]

Raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens
Bright copper kettles and warm woolen mittens
Brown paper packages tied up with strings
These are a few of my favourite things under a new Labour government.

 

Cream-colored ponies and crisp apple strudels
Doorbells and sleigh bells and schnitzel with noodles
Wild geese that fly with the moon on their wings
These are a few of my favourite things under a new Labour government.

[DraytonBoy 162]

10 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

The Rwanda scheme is not populist though

You mean it's not popular with anyone outside of the extreme right of the Tory party at Westminster.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,594]

1 hour ago, DraytonBoy said:

You mean it's not popular with anyone outside of the extreme right of the Tory party at Westminster.

I could introduce to several people who've voted labour all their lives who support it in the Medway Towns. It's really easy to take a relaxed view about it not being dealt with when it's not your area that has to deal with the social problems and nobody's offering any better ways to deal with it.

And they get really irritated by people gaslighting them as 'far right'. 'Far right' doesn't simply mean stuff lefty SJWs don't like.

Edited April 28 by littleyellowbirdie

[DraytonBoy 162]

3 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

It's really easy to take a relaxed view about it not being dealt with when it's not your area that has to deal with the social problems.

I'm not suggesting that it isn't an issue but flying people to Rwanda at an extraordinary cost isn't the long term solution and IMO is just plain wrong on so many levels. 

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

Angela Rayner will be appointed Minister for Labour Government Opportunities and will immediately ask readers of the Daily Mirror to do her job.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,594]

18 minutes ago, DraytonBoy said:

I'm not suggesting that it isn't an issue but flying people to Rwanda at an extraordinary cost isn't the long term solution and IMO is just plain wrong on so many levels. 

A mate of mine once commented that it would have been cheaper to give every Argentinian soldier who went to the Falklands a million quid to go away than it cost to defend the Falklands. The problem with that logic is that everyone would cue up to join the Argentinian army to go to the Falklands to get their million quid and you'd finish up handing out money forever. You have to have deterrence; right now, crossing the channel is win win if you survive. Even if you don't successfully apply, if you want to resist deportation then it's next door to impossible to be deported, as reflected by 2/3 of failed applicants remaining in the UK.

Government is paralysed on this issue. The boats can't simply be pushed back, we can't just walk away from international law politically (although the way the world's going I'm not sure the value of upholding it is that high any more), we can't ignore international law like other countries do without undermining our gold standard reputation in terms of applying the law impartially? That leaves absolutely no options unless you create them legally yourself, like Rwanda.

In principle, if all people at Calais know that as soon as they're found they'll be on a plane to Rwanda to have applications processed, the attraction will disappear and, in principle crossings should become negligible. Once you're at that point you can then have a conversation about creating safe routes to take people directly from danger areas, but you can't do that until you've addressed the immediate problem of dangerous illegal crossings by making sure there's a stick as well as a carrot involved in getting on a boat across the channel.

The only alternative is do nothing at all, which is not an option. There has to be a downside created to getting on a boat at Calais if you're not a bona fide asylum seeker.

Edited April 28 by littleyellowbirdie