news & politics:discussion

[Neil]

24 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

yes, he may get asked how he is planning on doing that (and I expect they're working on an answer...Reeves already suggesting certain things...modern supply side economics or something.

But if the tories have growth by then they attack by saying Labour will kill it off 

Edited July 25, 2022 by Neil

[steviewevie]

30 minutes ago, Neil said:

But if the tories have growth by then they attack by saying Labour will kill it off 

yes, true. Then they will have to adapt, talk about investing in public services more or green stuff or something. You can only deal with what you have in front of you, and at moment the economy is fucked and the cost of living is probably the number one problem facing voters.

To be honest I think we have big problems and not sure economy is going to be in too good a shape by the next election.

[fraybentos1]

No doubt this will be met with Ozanne crying 'Tory' at this as a means of deflection. But I genuinely don't see how anyone can accept Starmer just lying his way through the leadership election and then reneging on all the things he agreed to. Like total 180s on so many things.

 

[steviewevie]

 

 

[Neil]

7 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

No doubt this will be met with Ozanne crying 'Tory' at this as a means of deflection. But I genuinely don't see how anyone can accept Starmer just lying his way through the leadership election and then reneging on all the things he agreed to. Like total 180s on so many things.

 

own goal if they did. would immediately be strikes for better pay, with support for the govt taking the hit for bad feeling.

[Ozanne]

26 minutes ago, Neil said:

own goal if they did. would immediately be strikes for better pay, with support for the govt taking the hit for bad feeling.

I imagine Labours internal polling shows this isn’t a massive vote winner compared to other policies. If there was massive demand for it then they would surely back it. 

[fraybentos1]

26 minutes ago, Neil said:

own goal if they did. would immediately be strikes for better pay, with support for the govt taking the hit for bad feeling.

Potentially. My point isn't about whether renationalising utilities is good or bad, but I think everyone can agree that saying X to get elected then reversing your position once elected is shocking.

[fraybentos1]

Just now, Ozanne said:

I imagine Labours internal polling shows this isn’t a massive vote winner compared to other policies. If there was massive demand for it then they would surely back it. 

Nothing to say about Starmer being a liar? Not shocked.

Some deflection about Tories or Sweden coming up no doubt....

[steviewevie]

Starmer...live and direct

 

[steviewevie]

 

[Ozanne]

Just now, steviewevie said:

 

Makes sense and is kinda my point. I assume they see that nationalising the rail is a key issue for many voters when compared to water/energy. Plus Labour need to have this tough fiscal rules otherwise the media claim they are irresponsible with money. So they do these types of things to change peoples perception to get into power.  

[steviewevie]

5 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Makes sense and is kinda my point. I assume they see that nationalising the rail is a key issue for many voters when compared to water/energy. Plus Labour need to have this tough fiscal rules otherwise the media claim they are irresponsible with money. So they do these types of things to change peoples perception to get into power.  

Yeah, I don't know maybe people think utilities are ran ok (apart from too flipping expensive at moment), whereas most people agree the trains are shit and expensive. I actually think that essential utilities should be state owned, trains not so bothered, just need to be better/cheaper...

[steviewevie]

I'm listening to Starmer...he's so passionate and exciting etc...but also he has been banging on about his plans for growing the economy...and is now talking modern supply side economics...

[Neil]

30 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

Nothing to say about Starmer being a liar? Not shocked.

he also promised to win a general election, its unlikely the two things can stand together.

how come your take can bin off one of his promises. and not expect come-back for it.

[steviewevie]

he's finished now. To be honest I didnt' really listen properly, but he said a lot of words.

[Neil]

14 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

 put energy into public ownership.

what people hear for that is free energy.

[Neil]

16 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

while the fat cats profit.

while pensions get paid.

[steviewevie]

Starmer's plan...

First we will be financially responsible.

Second, we will be distinctively British.

Third, we will work in partnership with business.

Fourth, we will re energise communities and spread economic power.

Fifth, we will refocus our investment on boosting productivity.

Distinctively British 🤪

Edited July 25, 2022 by steviewevie

[Ozanne]

11 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Yeah, I don't know maybe people think utilities are ran ok (apart from too flipping expensive at moment), whereas most people agree the trains are shit and expensive. I actually think that essential utilities should be state owned, trains not so bothered, just need to be better/cheaper...

That’s pretty much it, people are much more invested in public ownership of rail as the system has been dreadful for a while now. So if renationalising the rail fits in with Labours fiscal rules and is a big vote winner then they’ll go for it.

Plus times have changed so given everything that’s happened renationalising water isn’t a massive issues for most people which is probably why Starmer will have changed his mind on that policy. 

[steviewevie]

Q: What is your positon on nationalisation of energy and water firms?

Starmer says he takes a pragmatic approach. He agrees with what Rachel Reeves said about this in an interview this morning.

His priority is growth, he says.

He is pragmatic, not ideological.

[steviewevie]

Q: Some members of the shadow cabinet say Labour remains committed to public ownership of rail. Are they right?

Starmer starts by saying he knows what train journeys in the north of England are like. He has travelled by train in the region many, many times. He understands why people feel let down.

But he wants to be “pragmatic, not ideological”, he says.

He says some Labour metro mayors have been providing a good example, by focusing on prices for passengers, not ownership.

[Neil]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Q: What is your positon on nationalisation of energy and water firms?

Starmer says he takes a pragmatic approach. He agrees with what Rachel Reeves said about this in an interview this morning.

His priority is growth, he says.

He is pragmatic, not ideological.

IF question asker wants energy and water nationalised, what's the rational for it, ande what would be different for the customer?

[Neil]

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Q: Some members of the shadow cabinet say Labour remains committed to public ownership of rail. Are they right?

Starmer starts by saying he knows what train journeys in the north of England are like. He has travelled by train in the region many, many times. He understands why people feel let down.

But he wants to be “pragmatic, not ideological”, he says.

He says some Labour metro mayors have been providing a good example, by focusing on prices for passengers, not ownership.

rail is already publicly owned, just need a plan of what to do with that public ownership?

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, Neil said:

IF question asker wants energy and water nationalised, what's the rational for it, ande what would be different for the customer?

easier for state to intervene and act to keep prices down when get supply side issues such as now? Helps as we move towards net zero?

[Neil]

5 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

easier for state to intervene and act to keep prices down when get supply side issues such as now? Helps as we move towards net zero?

so there we go, free energy??