Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Youngian wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 2:53 pm Unfortunately not, Dan here is parroting Glasman's Sun piece in the Mail. If I understand him we need a 1950s type national industrial arms economy to lead in Europe although the days of international co-operation are over so I'm not sure what he wishes to lead on. He'd do well to ask why these kind of nationalist dreams of Edwardian born post war politicians were abandoned in the 60s in favour the economy of scale that international projects bought (Concord for eg). And it's all Blair's fault Labour is disconnected from the working class, I'd take Labour's C2 vote under Sir Tone any day of the week.

Oh, for crying out loud!!!
Labour need to learn lessons from their election debacle. At least one MP has publicly admitted that the government are not delivering on the ground. If people feel things aren't changing, then Reform will win power at the next election and most of us will be screwed. That will be Starmer's legacy.

"Not delivering on the ground" within 6 weeks of their first budget period?

The mistakes of the Tories include not investing. Labour's budgets are much better on that. Shame that actual Labour MP, Dan Carden, couldn't be bothered to notice.

NevTheSweeper wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 3:29 pm

Youngian wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 2:53 pm Unfortunately not, Dan here is parroting Glasman's Sun piece in the Mail. If I understand him we need a 1950s type national industrial arms economy to lead in Europe although the days of international co-operation are over so I'm not sure what he wishes to lead on. He'd do well to ask why these kind of nationalist dreams of Edwardian born post war politicians were abandoned in the 60s in favour the economy of scale that international projects bought (Concord for eg). And it's all Blair's fault Labour is disconnected from the working class, I'd take Labour's C2 vote under Sir Tone any day of the week.

Oh, for crying out loud!!!
Labour need to learn lessons from their election debacle. At least one MP has publicly admitted that the government are not delivering on the ground. If people feel things aren't changing, then Reform will win power at the next election and most of us will be screwed. That will be Starmer's legacy.

I'd rather Labour took a hit now than come into power spending money like a drunk sailor on shore leave to cheer everyone up. Because we know where that leads. Have you actually read cheerful chappy Nige's spending pledges? It's Argentina level clown car economics. If you think Starmer should replicate it you need your head examining.
That said, the government's ability to communicate good news is severely lacking. And they look like unhappy rabbits in the headlight still carrying the ming vase instead of radiating confidence with their power.

NevTheSweeper wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 3:29 pm

Youngian wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 2:53 pm Unfortunately not, Dan here is parroting Glasman's Sun piece in the Mail. If I understand him we need a 1950s type national industrial arms economy to lead in Europe although the days of international co-operation are over so I'm not sure what he wishes to lead on. He'd do well to ask why these kind of nationalist dreams of Edwardian born post war politicians were abandoned in the 60s in favour the economy of scale that international projects bought (Concord for eg). And it's all Blair's fault Labour is disconnected from the working class, I'd take Labour's C2 vote under Sir Tone any day of the week.

Oh, for crying out loud!!!
Labour need to learn lessons from their election debacle. At least one MP has publicly admitted that the government are not delivering on the ground. If people feel things aren't changing, then Reform will win power at the next election and most of us will be screwed. That will be Starmer's legacy.

I thought you were going to vote Reform Trig?

Youngian wrote: ↑Tue May 06, 2025 4:32 pm
I'd rather Labour took a hit now than come into power spending money like a drunk sailor on shore leave to cheer everyone up. Because we know where that leads. Have you actually read cheerful chappy Nige's spending pledges? It's Argentina level clown car economics. If you think Starmer should replicate it you need your head examining.
That said, the government's ability to communicate good news is severely lacking. And they look like unhappy rabbits in the headlight still carrying the ming vase instead of radiating confidence with their power.

The Budget actually tried to be reasonably long term in the amount it set aside for investment as opposed to day to day spending. Whether that will survive day to day political pressures, I remain to be convinced. There may be further the government can go on capital investment in near the future, that's certainly the logic of Reeves' rules, but borrowing rates are now high. It doesn't help the Government that a load of people seem to think we're still in Osborne territory of turning down cheap money because "neoliberalism".

I see Blue Labour want to scrap the fiscal rules, on the grounds they say that they depend on "faulty OBR forecasts" which lead to decisions being taken against "economic sense". Reeves didn't need to react to the March OBR forecast like she did, but scrapping fiscal rules is a bad idea. Funny how straight talking populists end up with Argentina economics, isn't it?

There's a whole page of stuff here.

https://www.bluelabour.org/home/what-is-to-be-done

Couple of good ideas, but mostly "be really socially conservative and chuck a load of money about which we don't say how to raise".

They're also going to raise billions from not having useless managers and consultants. This Blue Labour 'manifesto' stuff are Glasman's fag packet lists that keep being regurgitated. Where's the house building labour going to come from with so many employed in newly opened arms factories in Bolton?
Glasman might have to hire some expert consultants to do the serious hard work that turns brain farts into practical propositions.

What's happened to John Mann's Brexit EV manufacturing plants? Or Caroline Flint's 'plan' to turn Doncaster into a steel making superpower.

The Government also ran on getting rid of consultants. I'm sure some of it is of dubious quality and overpriced, but they do exist for a reason. Government has lots of discrete projects, and there's not always the expertise you need in house. They also made a silly promise on Spads. A Spad doesn't have to be Nick Timothy or Steve Hilton, it can be Sam Freedman or Giles Wilkes, who both worked for the Coalition.

Talking of Timothy, I did respect his plan to pay for care from house prices, and it deserved better than to be written off as Dementia Tax and blow the election. But I wonder if he's telling his West Suffolk constituents this now?

If I’m honest their social care plans were always relatively decent, it always came up against the hard of thinking party faithful.

There was a joke in the seventies that local government reorganization was a shortcut to political death. Now it's any sort of serious social care reform. Cameron stuffed Brown in 2010 with "Labour's Death Tax". May would have never gone near it if she'd not underrated Corbyn as a campaigner. Bozo didn't do that- he just promised everything for free, which was better politically than what May did.

I don't like Streeting, but one advantage he might have is that his profile makes it harder for the Right to duck out of social care talks. Having said that, he'll probably put his own side off by being unnecessarily obnoxious, like he usually does.

As a tangent, there doesn't seem to have been much of a backlash against Rayner's local government organisation so far. I think the attachment of eg Surrey to its 11 district/borough councils may not be that high. I don't really see why it should be any different to Buckinghamshire which already has a unitary. It gets more controversial when there's a fairly large city in a rural county. But it's one thing to say "we'll all be run by alien metropolitan lefties from Norwich". Quite another to say "we'll all be run by High Wycombe/ Guildford"

Did you see the bleating about cancelling elections like Walter Ulbricht had taken over, local newspapers didn’t cover themselves in glory on that.

Mostly from Lib Dems and Reform, wasn't it?

They'd have been complaining about waste if they'd gone ahead.

Wankers will be wankers

Blue Labour group urges ministers to ‘root out DEI’ to win over Reform voters

Faction influencing No 10 says government
should legislate against DEI in hiring, sentencing and ‘wherever else’

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... orm-voters

Do these cunts really have any influence in Downing Street? It's like they're trying to force people like me into voting Lib Dem or Green. If I wanted this right-wing shite I'd have voted for the fucking Tories.

I thought it was ED&I in the UK, but hey.

Yes, I saw that in yesterday's Grauniad: I just rolled my eyes and carried on.

I think that socially conservative streak has always existed within Labour though: when we were approaching the 1983 GE my then head of sixth form canvassed for Labour in the city centre. Quite often he'd hear the same thing repeatedly: "of course I'll vote Labour, I always have done - but when are you going to kick the P***s out?"

Boiler wrote: ↑Tue Jun 03, 2025 9:49 am I thought it was ED&I in the UK, but hey.

Yes, I saw that in yesterday's Grauniad: I just rolled my eyes and carried on.

I think that socially conservative streak has always existed within Labour though: when we were approaching the 1983 GE my then head of sixth form canvassed for Labour in the city centre. Quite often he'd hear the same thing repeatedly: "of course I'll vote Labour, I always have done - but when are you going to kick the P***s out?"

The fash always did better in working-class areas than in Surrey.

It's not a question of do they exist. We know they do. The question is how much influence do they have over the Prime Minister and the direction the government is taking? Because the impression I'm getting is that the government are terrified of a limited company with 5 MPs out of 650 and 677 councillors out of thousands, and are constantly letting the chief executive of that company call the shots. This is not a good look, and only serves to hand ammunition to the frog-faced traitor. Every time they appear to be doing something to woo back the dyed-in-the-wool racists (who most probably aren't ever coming back to Labour anyway) they alienate natural Labour supporters.

A lot of this impression may well be generated by the shite quality of political journalism in tbis country, but the government themselves are not helping.

Yug wrote: ↑Tue Jun 03, 2025 10:22 am It's not a question of do they exist. We know they do. The question is how much influence do they have over the Prime Minister and the direction the government is taking? Because the impression I'm getting is that the government are terrified of a limited company with 5 MPs out of 650 and 677 councillors out of thousands, and are constantly letting the chief executive of that company call the shots. This is not a good look, and only serves to hand ammunition to the frog-faced traitor. Every time they appear to be doing something to woo back the dyed-in-the-wool racists (who most probably aren't ever coming back to Labour anyway) they alienate natural Labour supporters.

A lot of this impression may well be generated by the shite quality of political journalism in tbis country, but the government themselves are not helping.

You'd think with the majority they have, Labour could plough on with whatever they want - were the tables turned and it was Badenoch with a 170 majority you could guarantee they would: but it would also leave them open to accusations of "not listening", a serious crime these days. Yes, political journalism is shite in the UK, no doubt about it, driven by clicks and views now - BBC, I'm looking at you in particular, I expected better.

However... there is no doubt that politics is being widely manipulated by a charismatic cunt, a vajazzle of a man. After the Death Clown, we all wanted a quiet managerial sort as PM but I'm afraid Starmer is utterly devoid of personality even though he's clearly better than he was: "personality counts"*, as has been said and we do live in an increasingly shallow society of 'influencers' and Lord alone knows what else. Are the beliefs of "Blue Labour" popular in those "Red Wall" seats? I know not.

It does seem that given the publicity afforded to Farage et al by the media - the Guardian included - that he enjoys considerable influence way above his true status and that is regrettable; worse still, he doesn't get challenged about it. It being exam season at the moment, "show us your working" should be shouted every time he and his millionaire chums come out with some shite about spending.

I remember a time when the newly-formed "Independent" newspaper made a conscious effort not to include any coverage of the Royal family; if only one would blank Farage in a similar way.

* I'll leave Andy to say where that quote is from.

Not listening. There's no need to listen when they're just repeating the same old bollocks they've been spouting for over 70 years. "Stop the boats" of the 2020s is "There ain't no black in the Union Jack" of the 1970s is the "No blacks, no Irish, no dogs" of the 1950s. The message is always the same: "Wogs out". If they're not being listened to it's because they're a minority of cunts who are mentally incapable of changing the record. It's a record that wasn't worth listening to 70 years ago and it still isn't worth listening to today.