Mailwatch(ed) Forum

“We demand mandatory reselection!”

“…not like that!”

Guardian being very helpful there in making it into "loyalty to Keir Starmer" the key, like it wasn't some people in Merthyr Tydfil making up their own minds.

What were the obstacles?

Or as usual they didn’t mention them?

If the executive voted for it, that doesn't make it undemocratic.

https://labourlist.org/2023/06/gerald-j ... ion-wales/

Winter, the MP for Cynon Valley, accused Welsh Labour’s executive of “undemocratic” behaviour earlier in the contest, taking issue with the fact the executive voted for a process that includes virtual rather than in-person hustings and highlighting that the process did not include the chance for branches and affiliates to make nominations.

Did they complain about any of those things before the vote?

She probably did. They're very hot on process.

Are they? Seem to win seats across the board then get bored of them 6 months in.

The more Starmer hits the back of the Tory net, the less Labour voters (and potential new ones) care about in-fighting on the subs bench.

For fuck's sake.

Was odd to announce such a specific figure so long before the election, but once you've done it, repeated it lots of times, and while it does no harm, at least stick to it.

Actually it's not as bad as it sounds, and there's a sensible point to me made about how effectively the money would be spent if ramped up too fast. And "mess we inherited" and all that.

But this doesn't actually cause too many problems with fiscal rules (except the last one about the debt falling as a percentage of GDP after 5 years, which would be revised, as Tory chancellors have done).

But the fact remains that they announced something popular with lots of their voters and then u-turned, and it'll upset lots of them.

The shadow chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has delayed plans to borrow £28bn a year for a green prosperity fund under a Labour government, as a result of the poor economic backdrop.

Reeves, who is keen to demonstrate fiscal responsibility, said Labour would now “ramp up” to the annual £28bn plan by halfway through a first parliament.

Good thread here

Yes, I saw that. It is good.

There's a lot of this sort of internet rubbish about. Yeah, man, just say there won't be any rules at all, that'll work. From somebody who doubtless thought it was completely different when McDonnell did it.

Wren-Lewis actually likes a fair bit about the fiscal rule, just the part about falling debt, I think.

Co director of Greenpeace in the UK.

Being headquartered in the UK doesn't mean that the profits are the UK's. Agree or disagree with the Labour policy but this is close to misdirection in my view.

You said we would go to the beach today and now it's raining and we can't go. YOU ARE THE WORST MUMMY IN THE WORLD AND I HATE YOU!!!!!!

Dale Vince has rather made the same point as you.

In the meantime, John McDonnell has piped up. Only ratings I can find from the last election campaign had him losing 45-24 to Sajid Javid. But, yeah, the policies were really popular.

Bit harsh on John there maybe. The Driscoll thing didn't exactly help get the benefit of the doubt from people like him.

I have to say I’m rather disheartened by it, I totally get it but Labour probably should have been less ambitious from the start.

If they dump the House of Lords reform I’ll start to wonder what the point is. The university plans are solely focused on the consumer and not the sector, their best policy is the stuff Ashworth is doing on work and benefits.

Yeah, Ashworth has made a couple of good changes. But without some as yet unannounced tax rises, they'll struggle to do even the very basics of uprating at the rate of inflation.

Agree about universities, going to have to be more money put in or else there will be bankruptcies. At least the Tories pretty much tell you they don't care about a university closing in (dunno) Wolverhampton, but that shouldn't be Labour's position.

Of course the Jez stuff economic fantasy- taxes that wouldn't bring in what they said, spending that couldn't possibly be remotely efficient, and a fiscal rule that would have bitten them on the arse too- but you could at least see some revenue there, and set some spending from it.

My hope is it’s a bit more Bidenesque.

Play as a safe pair of hands and then deliver some remarkable stuff.

Biden has the dollar, we don't- see Kwasi Kwarteng. There's a reason our politics s relatively austere, to use an overused word. In Europe, the countries we think of as having their shit together are mostly "you want it, you pay for it, and you pay for it now". Sure, they went much too far in the Eurozone crisis, but its served them well generally. We don't know, the world economy could boom again but without that it's going to be very tight,

I agree with, stuff like Lords reform is vital, or else it will all feel "what was the point?"

I mean on the social stuff.