Starmer’s chronicles

Originally Posted by Chris

The ‘principle’ was deliberately oversimplified and misrepresented to justify a tax that was intended to expose Labour-run councils that tended to charge more. The adults who previously had paid one sixth of the rate on a house, now forced to pay an equal share to their sole-occupant neighbour, were meant to blame the Labour council and vote Tory instead. To make matters worse, the tax was deliberately misrepresented as a ‘community charge’, a payment for services, which was supposed to justify it being the same flat rate paid by all, with a few exceptions who were eligible for a discount.

The problems (for the Tories) were first, people saw through it and didn’t blame their local council for the level of the charge, they blamed the government for badly-constructing the system and, second, when you’re compelled to pay a public authority a contribution to its entire operating costs regardless of how much or little you use it, you aren’t paying for services, you’re paying a tax. People understood that, and looked to this new tax to behave equitably. And by design, it did not.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

This is a terrible idea, it will create a two tier benefit system

Agreed. They should bin it all, and think again..

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Agreed. They should bin it all, and think again..

they've done a u turn to show they care about todays sick and disabled[we all know they don't], and now prove they don't give a shyte about the future sick and disabled, two tier kier is nothing short of evil.

Originally Posted by Mr K

Agreed. They should bin it all, and think again..

Or rip it up and start again … has more of a ring to it

Originally Posted by papa smurf

they've done a u turn to show they care about todays sick and disabled[we all know they don't], and now prove they don't give a shyte about the future sick and disabled, two tier kier is nothing short of evil.

Speaking of u-turns, good to see you speaking up on behalf of the sick and disabled, when you previously thought that the vast majority are lead swingers…

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Speaking of u-turns, good to see you speaking up on behalf of the sick and disabled, when you previously thought that the vast majority are lead swingers…

Feel free to <removed>

.

[Itshim]

Originally Posted by Chris

There’s a pretty monumental difference between a policy born of hubris in the 3rd term of the most consequential post-war prime minister of this country’s history (and which brought her down), thereby narrowly rescuing a general election 2 years later than nobody thought the Tories would win and, on the other hand, a government less than 12 months old, sitting on an epoch-defying majority of 156.

Thatcher and her party had by 1987 come to think they could do no wrong and Labour was gifting them permanent power by sticking with Neil Kinnock. It was obvious the poll tax was unpopular but they pressed on because they had drunk their own kool aid, bought their own propaganda, etc etc etc.

Starmer has no such excuses. He has a majority, he’s fresh in the job, and if this wasn’t merely the latest in a string of un-forced errors he would have a pile of political goodwill at his disposal. For him to mess up this badly, this soon, and to have to be seen appeasing backbenchers as if he thinks losing the vote is a serious possibility despite his massive majority … that’s mismanagement on a catastrophic scale.

He has no political capital left now. There’s no way he can lead Labour into the next election. I’ll not be remotely surprised if he’s out of No.10 a year from now.

Bet opposition hope him and his Chancellor stay put, what apair of losers

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Itshim

Bet opposition hope him and his Chancellor stay put, what apair of losers

I suspect Badenoch fears that Starmer will eventually learn from his mistakes whereas a Rookie PM could well make the same ones.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Itshim

Bet opposition hope him and his Chancellor stay put, what apair of losers

And what's your ' dream team ' ? A country full of retirees and benefit claimants, expecting something for nothing from youngsters that have seen better opportunities. The buck stops with whichever fwits voted for it.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Mr K

And what's your ' dream team ' ? A country full of retirees and benefit claimants, expecting something for nothing from youngsters that have seen better opportunities. The buck stops with whichever fwits voted for it.

don't forget the winter fuel allowance

[papa smurf]

Impact of PM's welfare U-turn revealed ahead of pivotal vote

MPs will vote on the prime minister's welfare reforms on Tuesday - with a Labour rebellion against the measures still likely. Modelling undertaken by the government says that even with changes to the reforms forced by rebels, the legislation will still push 150,000 people into poverty.


oh dear it's not getting much better is it

https://news.sky.com/story/politics-...abour-12593360

[thenry]

My local MP isn't having any of it

Have now heard what the new PIP deal is.

It's for others to disclose and every MP must make up their own mind, but to me it's insufficient when better options have repeatedly been put forward and ignored.

I will be voting for the amendment/against the bill, alone if necessary.

twitter/x url

Its not going to get better, since its removing payments to people (by design).
So unless they kill it completely, its obviously going to have a negative effect on someone.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Impact of PM's welfare U-turn revealed ahead of pivotal vote

MPs will vote on the prime minister's welfare reforms on Tuesday - with a Labour rebellion against the measures still likely. Modelling undertaken by the government says that even with changes to the reforms forced by rebels, the legislation will still push 150,000 people into poverty.


oh dear it's not getting much better is it

https://news.sky.com/story/politics-...abour-12593360

The benefits aren't supposed to exist to simply give everyone more free money. They will still get as much as others not receiving those extra benefits.

[peanut]

Seems to be the mental health of the today's youth and young adults that's causing the issue / costs. Till they get to grips with that, as it stands it seems to be the easiest route to benefits.

This needs to be addressed properly before anything gets better. Such as GPs do need to crack down on this themselves by not giving out anti-depressants within 5 minutes of a consultation thereby anyone can then claim benefits on the back of it.