news & politics:discussion

[steviewevie]

1 hour ago, maelzoid said:

Yes, of course, but surely he can announce any policy changes ahead of making them law (a process which usually takes a few weeks at least). Isn't that the whole point? He does need to be specific, even if he  plans to make no policy changes, he should say that.

I mean, if he planned to raise VAT, he should announce it, rather than wait for us all to be surprised at the checkout in Sainsbury's.

any policies like that will be in the budget in a few weeks.

[Ozanne]

There are other policies the PM could have announced instead of economic ones, if he had any that is. 

[MrZigster]

22 hours ago, tigger123 said:

Always wanted to see them but never got round to it. What does their live act entail?

21 hours ago, crazyfool1 said:

A video back drop of a video mixed with a bit of music and a couple of people dressed up dancing about and a bit of interactive booing At times … it’s a fun .. although maybe I’ve not sold it well 😂

21 hours ago, balthazarstarbuck said:

Great fun. A bloke with a cardboard cassette on his head and a lot of references to Alan Sugar. And as @crazyfool1 says, a lot better than that sounds.

If they’re back next year, I’ll be there.

...and the PC/projector malfunctioning at least once every year.

[Gingerfish79]

Why would Johnson announce detailed policy when he is under absolutely no pressure from the opposition? I know the obvious answer is 'because it's his job', but that isn't his strength or his style. So until somebody offers a credible challenge, he can continue to go full 'Boris' and stick to the buster and rhetoric - which, incidentally, is what the voters love. 

[Ozanne]

Double standards. If a Labour PM did what Johnson did yesterday they would have been torn apart but a Tory PM can be excused.

The Tories are in government and should be announcing policies for the remaining part of the Parliament because they are actually in government so can change things. 

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Gingerfish79 said:

Why would Johnson announce detailed policy when he is under absolutely no pressure from the opposition? I know the obvious answer is 'because it's his job', but that isn't his strength or his style. So until somebody offers a credible challenge, he can continue to go full 'Boris' and stick to the buster and rhetoric - which, incidentally, is what the voters love. 

you could argue that Starmer doesn't need to announce detailed policy this far away from an election either, he just needs to show who he is and what labour would do for this country...not easy as Bojo has kind have ditched Thatcherism and gone left on economics.

[Gingerfish79]

10 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Double standards. If a Labour PM did what Johnson did yesterday they would have been torn apart but a Tory PM can be excused.

The Tories are in government and should be announcing policies for the remaining part of the Parliament because they are actually in government so can change things. 

I don't disagree with your point, in a fair and even world the media and general public would be hammering the gov right now. But they're not and there is no point complaining about double standards, its just the way it is in the UK and it wont be changing anytime soon. It's very hard to be in opposition under our system, and even harder for Labour. They have to be bold, dynamic and relentless.

So the way I see it, you have two choices in opposition - 1) you either elect an opposition leader with huge charisma and star quality, get buy-in from the party, and offer a grand vision of a better way (a vision, not policy) that the masses will buy into, or 2) you try to appear respectful and competent and wait for the gov to royally mess things up. 

Unfortunately for Labour, their leader isn't 1), and as for 2), I'm not sure how much worse the last 18 months could have been for the gov, but their polling has been materially dented. 

[Ommadawn]

2 hours ago, maelzoid said:

Yes, of course, but surely he can announce any policy changes ahead of making them law (a process which usually takes a few weeks at least). Isn't that the whole point? He does need to be specific, even if he  plans to make no policy changes, he should say that.

I mean, if he planned to raise VAT, he should announce it, rather than wait for us all to be surprised at the checkout in Sainsbury's.

Those type of changes are announced in budget.

53 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

There are other policies the PM could have announced instead of economic ones, if he had any that is. 

Isn't that what the Queen's speech is for - setting out the Government's plans for the year?

32 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Double standards. If a Labour PM did what Johnson did yesterday they would have been torn apart but a Tory PM can be excused.

The Tories are in government and should be announcing policies for the remaining part of the Parliament because they are actually in government so can change things. 

I think Sir keir should have given the type of rousing speech Boris did yesterday. Send people back to their constituances buoyed up and with some hope.

I think that the Labour and Tory conferences have different aims really. When I used to go (albeit a long time ago), the Labour conferences were all about deep and meaningful conversations about policy and how to support or defeat motions to be discussed the next day. The Tory conferences have always been about self congratulation and rousing speeches on how tough they're going to be on crime/unemployment etc etc. I guess that's what comes of Labour having to please and involve so many sections of the party. The Tories don't have to do that so much. 

[Zacko]

Think it was mentioned on a previous page, but I've just started that Blair and Brown documentary. It's absolutely fascinating.

I always forget that Brown was a bit of an intellectual force of nature in his younger days (based on the interviews with others that are shown), especially as he's almost seen as this sad Eeyore type figure by many people these days. 

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, Zacko said:

Think it was mentioned on a previous page, but I've just started that Blair and Brown documentary. It's absolutely fascinating.

I always forget that Brown was a bit of an intellectual force of nature in his younger days (based on the interviews with others that are shown), especially as he's almost seen as this sad Eeyore type figure by many people these days. 

yeah, I watched that last night. Interesting.

[maelzoid]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

any policies like that will be in the budget in a few weeks.

 

24 minutes ago, Ommadawn said:

Those type of changes are announced in budget.

 

Yeah, it was just an example of how policy changes are usually announced in advance of them becoming reality, rather than surprising people by their sudden implementation.

Sounding like a pair of Boris apologists.

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, maelzoid said:

 

 

Yeah, it was just an example of how policy changes are usually announced in advance of them becoming reality, rather than surprising people by their sudden implementation.

Sounding like a pair of Boris apologists.

oh, damn. Err...Boris is a c**t.

Ok?

[mcshed]

3 hours ago, maelzoid said:

Yes, of course, but surely he can announce any policy changes ahead of making them law (a process which usually takes a few weeks at least). Isn't that the whole point? He does need to be specific, even if he  plans to make no policy changes, he should say that.

I mean, if he planned to raise VAT, he should announce it, rather than wait for us all to be surprised at the checkout in Sainsbury's.

Yes there are plenty of opportunities for the Government to announce policy and it'll always be news as it means a change for the population. The Opposition on the other hand are often largely ignored if they make random policy announcements and so the leader's speech at conference is one of the few times opposition policy might be the lead item on the news. This is why Starmer is held to higher account for his conference speech than Boris is, it is genuinely more important for the opposition leader to grasp this opportunity.

[mcshed]

2 hours ago, Ozanne said:

Double standards. If a Labour PM did what Johnson did yesterday they would have been torn apart but a Tory PM can be excused.

The Tories are in government and should be announcing policies for the remaining part of the Parliament because they are actually in government so can change things. 

When we had a Labour PM they were also given an easy ride, PM's conference speech isn't scrutinised in the same way a budget or Queen's speech is.

 

[Ozanne]

31 minutes ago, mcshed said:

When we had a Labour PM they were also given an easy ride, PM's conference speech isn't scrutinised in the same way a budget or Queen's speech is.

 

Blair was to an extent for the first part but towards the end he didn’t get that much leeway, Brown certainly didn’t get this level of leeway that Johnson’s getting. Imagine if Corbyn as PM had given that speech yesterday, he would’ve been torn apart. 
 

I’m not solely talking about the media though, you see it here in and in wider public discourse. Tories get far too much leniency compared to Labour. Starmer was hounded for not giving policies, he now has done and someone has said he actually needs to give a vision instead. He can’t win either way. Whilst Johnson gives nothing at all but jokes and people instead bash Starmer again. There was nothing inspiring in Johnson’s speech at all.

I dare say no matter what Labour/Starmer do it’s not going to be enough, I just wish people would be honest about that. 

Edited October 7, 2021 by Ozanne

[Ozanne]

1 hour ago, Zacko said:

Think it was mentioned on a previous page, but I've just started that Blair and Brown documentary. It's absolutely fascinating.

I always forget that Brown was a bit of an intellectual force of nature in his younger days (based on the interviews with others that are shown), especially as he's almost seen as this sad Eeyore type figure by many people these days. 

It’s a quality documentary and makes you realise how important to each other the pair were. I really enjoyed watching it. 

[steviewevie]

56 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Blair was to an extent for the first part but towards the end he didn’t get that much leeway, Brown certainly didn’t get this level of leeway that Johnson’s getting. Imagine if Corbyn as PM had given that speech yesterday, he would’ve been torn apart. 
 

I’m not solely talking about the media though, you see it here in and in wider public discourse. Tories get far too much leniency compared to Labour. Starmer was hounded for not giving policies, he now has done and someone has said he actually needs to give a vision instead. He can’t win either way. Whilst Johnson gives nothing at all but jokes and people instead bash Starmer again. There was nothing inspiring in Johnson’s speech at all.

I dare say no matter what Labour/Starmer do it’s not going to be enough, I just wish people would be honest about that. 

Johnson has had some criticism for policy lite nonsense speech, but at moment he reigns supreme and can do what the fuck he likes. This won't be the case in a year or two if things still shit.

[Ozanne]

 

[not worthy]

[Ozanne]

8 minutes ago, not worthy said:

CON +10

[steviewevie]

2 hours ago, Ozanne said:

It’s a quality documentary and makes you realise how important to each other the pair were. I really enjoyed watching it. 

Like Lennon and McCartney apparently.

[mattiloy]

Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were like Lennon and McCartney
 

The shit you read on the internet 🙃

[eFestivals]

On 10/6/2021 at 12:15 PM, Ozanne said:

That’s not the case at all, Johnson isn’t really saying anything at all. It’s all bluster with jokes aplenty. If Starmer had said this many jokes people would be in uproar that he’s not taking things seriously. Johnson isn’t really offering anything, there’s nothing tangible that he’s saying they will do for people.

Remember the Conservatives have been in power for 11 years, all the issues he’s outlining are caused by them. There’s no vision here just pretending that they haven’t been in power for the last decade. 
 

But how dare Starmer for talking about his Dad.

the division starmer is dealing with are  people talking about division, while being divisive, check out owen jones, any week, to see how much milage there is in this self serving bollocks

[Ryan1984]

Question Time tonight (in my Leave-loving, bizarrely  Tory majority hometown) found the Tories getting barracked from all sides. Spaffer’s speech did not go down well.

[mcshed]

15 hours ago, Ozanne said:

Blair was to an extent for the first part but towards the end he didn’t get that much leeway, Brown certainly didn’t get this level of leeway that Johnson’s getting. Imagine if Corbyn as PM had given that speech yesterday, he would’ve been torn apart. 
 

I’m not solely talking about the media though, you see it here in and in wider public discourse. Tories get far too much leniency compared to Labour. Starmer was hounded for not giving policies, he now has done and someone has said he actually needs to give a vision instead. He can’t win either way. Whilst Johnson gives nothing at all but jokes and people instead bash Starmer again. There was nothing inspiring in Johnson’s speech at all.

I dare say no matter what Labour/Starmer do it’s not going to be enough, I just wish people would be honest about that. 

I genuinely can't remember a single instance of a PM's conference speech being widely criticized for a lack of policy detail it simply isn't something that happens.

Whilst I agree that in general the Tory commentariat are more inclined to remain positive about their leader than Labour I really don't think that is the huge handicap you seem to think it is.  Johnson is still broadly popular in the country at large thanks to getting Brexit done and a decent vaccine roll out, with that as the background it's unsurprising that nobody cares if his speech is his usual after-dinner waffle. Even if there were more Tories writing in papers saying it lacks substance it just wouldn't have cut through. He'll get a harder time if we have a winter of fuel poverty and empty shelves.

As for nothing Labour do being good enough, I just don't believe that, the reason Starmer gets a lot of shit about policy is because he's been in the job for over a year and the general public doesn't have a scooby what he stands for. This is partly due to the pandemic hovering up most people's current affairs bandwidth but is also because Starmer's basic pitch is he is a sensible lawyer type so is better than Corbyn/Johnson who aren't serious grown up politicians like him now that's fine but when an election comes round it needs to be backed up by a vision for the country that can be sold to those voters who don't pay much attention to politics.

It's worth noting the last Leader of the Opposition who got a lot of shit for not really having any actual policies was Cameron, it meant he went into an election able to pitch his manifesto as fresh new ideas that hadn't been attacked by the Government for months/years. So maybe the Starmer lack of policy will be worth a few whingey articles in The Guardian in the long run.