Diane Abbot has been reinstated back into the Labour Party.
Some really good points here. Thanks. And we are all unqualified, aren't we? Just trying to help each other out!I do think one area that Liz Truss was fundamentally right on is the need to ‘go for growth’, her execution however, tragic.
People feel poorer because the tax burden is the highest it’s been since World War Two. Governments are spending too much and it’s us that foot the bill. The Tories talk about wanting to cut taxes yet have frozen the tax thresholds and when inflation is running close to 10% last year, that’s a massive tax hike in reality.
The housing market too has become dysfunctional on the Tories watch. Record low interest rates, a dysfunctional planning system, record highs of immigration coupled with failed house building targets has made the cost of a mortgage barely affordable.
In my unqualified view, people are just fed after 14 years of one party rule and just want an alternative. Compared to previous (post-war) Labour election winners; Atlee, Wilson and Blair, Starmer is a pretty weak politician and uninspiring. There is no real policy programme (yet) and in public it seems like he speaks in platitudes wishing to offend no one. Sunak does something v similar, regularly labels himself as a ‘Thatcherite’ to appeal to true blue Tories whilst in government hasn’t been Thatcherite at all - for better or worse.
Back to polling, there are some general rules and recent assumptions that may or may not be wrong:
1) Typical Tory voters have stayed away from local / by-elections and expect to come back for the GE
2) there’s an incumbency ‘benefit’ to the government/office holder come polling day
3) voters tend to ‘punish’ a party that is miles ahead in polls on election day. Would-be voters either stay at home or they vote for smaller parties (Lib Dem / Green / Reform)
4) the ‘shy Tory’ phenomenon
5) Higher turnout apparently tends to favour the Conservatives for whatever reason
These are v high level and of course have a margin for error. The major polls in the last 2-3 elections have been dead wrong on the scale of the victories.
Some really good points here. Thanks. And we are all unqualified, aren't we? Just trying to help each other out!
I think the higher turnout favours the Conservatives because of the opinion polls missing the older population who might tend to be more likely to be Tory.
For me, I struggle with Starmer's appeal and the length of time he has been in opposition but has yet to put forward any tangible policies (other than parroting that policy X by the Tories is the sign of a desperate party in chaos).
I don't like her as a politician because her views are too extreme for my tastes but I do have sympathy for the way she has been treated.
The disciplinary process was - no doubt deliberately - dragged out for a very long time. She is then offered a token gesture of having the Labour whip restored to her.
What does that mean? It means she can sit in the Commons as a Labour MP again. Oh, Parliament has been prorogued and won't sit again until 9th July. She can't sit as a Labour MP then because they have barred her from standing as a Labour candidate.
Starmer described himself as "ruthless" the other day, no doubt thinking this would be regarded as an attractive trait which in my opinion it certainly isn't. I suspect the Abbott process is intended to prove this.
I think Abbott deserves more dignity and respect than she has been shown.
… because he’s a weak politician who has a desire to be liked by everyone rather than make strong decisions that may make him unpopular in some quarters.Given some of the shit they've let slide it's a pisstake really.
Considering they let someone who tried to influence the judge in a rape trial cross the floor the other week.
Given some of the shit they've let slide it's a pisstake really.
Considering they let someone who tried to influence the judge in a rape trial cross the floor the other week.
The weakness with Abbott was waiting until now to reinstate her given the inquiry was apparently completed in December and also the decision to not let her stand at the GE. It shows an inability to make decisions to have let it drag on so long when you clearly only had 2 options, either let her back in or don’t and then justify your decision.
The VAT on private schools costing the taxpayer is nonsense. The majority of pupils in UK private education are foreign nationals, by not charging VAT we’re actually giving tax cuts to foreigners. As for the people claiming that they can’t afford the private education if it has VAT on it, sorry but that’s tough. I have more sympathy with dozens of other groups of people who deserve taxpayer assistance first. Nurses using food banks, first time buyers who can’t get on the housing market, people who can’t afford to insulate their homes correctly etc etc. To quote a former Tory MP, maybe they should cancel their Netflix subscription, stop going to Costa and stop eating avocados on toast, start eating 30p meals. Besides , according to the Telegraph they’re all going to Spanish boarding schools instead anyway and let’s be honest, schools are already crumbling and failing as it is and that’s not due to the number of pupils in school so a few more numbers isn’t going to change that.
I think Labour have pledged planning reforms to kickstart house building
The weakness with Abbott was waiting until now to reinstate her given the inquiry was apparently completed in December and also the decision to not let her stand at the GE. It shows an inability to make decisions to have let it drag on so long when you clearly only had 2 options, either let her back in or don’t and then justify your decision.
The VAT on private schools costing the taxpayer is nonsense. The majority of pupils in UK private education are foreign nationals, by not charging VAT we’re actually giving tax cuts to foreigners. As for the people claiming that they can’t afford the private education if it has VAT on it, sorry but that’s tough. I have more sympathy with dozens of other groups of people who deserve taxpayer assistance first. Nurses using food banks, first time buyers who can’t get on the housing market, people who can’t afford to insulate their homes correctly etc etc. To quote a former Tory MP, maybe they should cancel their Netflix subscription, stop going to Costa and stop eating avocados on toast, start eating 30p meals. Besides , according to the Telegraph they’re all going to Spanish boarding schools instead anyway and let’s be honest, schools are already crumbling and failing as it is and that’s not due to the number of pupils in school so a few more numbers isn’t going to change that.
I think Labour have pledged planning reforms to kickstart house building
Those people who can no longer afford private education, where will they go? State schools. Which is a sector already under strain.
The point of the tax is to raise revenue and if people change behaviour (i.e. withdraw from the activity/service) all you have done is put more strain on our state sector - already overcrowded and underfunded.
If anything, a shrewd government will incentivise behaviour that takes the burden away from our public services until we’ve done something to relieve the strain.
Window dressing then?Hardly any foreign nationals attend private schools - its utter nonsense
Campaigning then?Turns out Abbott has not been barred from standing.
CTRL-ALT-DEL ???Why is the slogan CHANGE, surely reset would work better?🫣
Hopefully the electorate then opens up Task Manager and selects "Ends Process" on "Tories.exe".CTRL-ALT-DEL ???
The strain on public services is reduced by spending an adequate amount of money of themThose people who can no longer afford private education, where will they go? State schools. Which is a sector already under strain.
The point of the tax is to raise revenue and if people change behaviour (i.e. withdraw from the activity/service) all you have done is put more strain on our state sector - already overcrowded and underfunded.
If anything, a shrewd government will incentivise behaviour that takes the burden away from our public services until we’ve done something to relieve the strain.
I heard on the Niki Campbell show today a claim that the result was known 5 months ago but Starmer and Streeting said less than a month ago the enquiry was ongoing.
Its all pretty strange
Says she isCampaigning then?
Those people who can no longer afford private education, where will they go? State schools. Which is a sector already under strain.
The point of the tax is to raise revenue and if people change behaviour (i.e. withdraw from the activity/service) all you have done is put more strain on our state sector - already overcrowded and underfunded.
If anything, a shrewd government will incentivise behaviour that takes the burden away from our public services until we’ve done something to relieve the strain.
These are v high level and of course have a margin for error. The major polls in the last 2-3 elections have been dead wrong on the scale of the victories.
Those people who can no longer afford private education, where will they go? State schools. Which is a sector already under strain.
The point of the tax is to raise revenue and if people change behaviour (i.e. withdraw from the activity/service) all you have done is put more strain on our state sector - already overcrowded and underfunded.
If anything, a shrewd government will incentivise behaviour that takes the burden away from our public services until we’ve done something to relieve the strain.
Yeah, Im with Clint in terms of sentiment but the repercussions for many and the wider economy would be huge (people feel poorer, stop spending, economy unravels)
The solution is build a lot more houses than the net migration numbers require. Not happened for years, probably ever, though
JL Partners are a Tory thinktank. They started out as Theresa May's research team. Wouldn't trust any of JLP's data for a balanced view, but to my recollection YouGov's polls haven't been particularly accurate either.
Thanks for the explanations about the methods used for polling, but i think the "silent majority" that they may well miss will have more impact than people recognise.
The polls were pretty accurate in 2019, but there were several previous elections where the polls as a whole were not a good guide to the result.
The strain on public services is reduced by spending an adequate amount of money of them
There’s no way you’re looking at a 30% fall in prices from building. You’d need to build more than the industry could manage, millions a year.
Most places that liberalise planning to allow more homes instead see rents and prices either mildly deflating or staying roughly the same.
The way out of you hold house price increases below wage increases for a while. Shake the investors out expecting huge returns along the way.
That’s such a low resolution response. How do you that?
The IMF is already saying we need more spending cuts and tax raises. With interest rates being relatively higher there’s a looming debt crisis. Liz Truss sparked a near economic crisis by suggesting relatively inexpensive tax cuts and the cap on energy prices.
Your response to everything seems to be ‘just throw more money at it’ which isn’t a sustainable solution, is it?
You realise the £1.7bn extra money is after expected side effects right? It’s already taking into account some movement to state.
People genuinely believe they’ve thought of stuff in their spare time that analysts and data scientists haven’t don’t they?
Agreed. It’s impossible to catch up sufficiently to significantly reduce prices in the short to medium term. Increasing housing stock will stabilise prices over time though
Only thing that would drive prices down is a deep recession whereby unemployment increases significantly. None of us want that happening though
edit - my point was nobody would want house prices dropping by 30% anyway though due to the repercussions throughout wider economy
Have you watched the TV show ‘In The Thick of It?’
If not, you should because it’s a great show. Secondly, there’s a plot where the main character tells the minister to ‘find an expert’ who agrees with government policy. The takeaway here is that anyone can find an expert who justifies their policy.
Experts are only giving their best guess based on assumptions they make that goes into their analysis.
As a generic rule of thumb, a proposed new tax rarely generates the revenue a government expects. People change their behaviours to circumvent the regulations.
Not sure I take Starmer saying 'no decision had been taken' as the green light for Abbot to stand given that he's been saying for months that no decision had yet been made with regard to her returning to the party and that's turned out to not exactly be true.Turns out Abbott has not been barred from standing.
The IMF said the same back in 2010, the programme that followed is disastrous. It is not sustainable to pretend that a sovereign currency issuer must balance its income and expenditure.
The austerity programme has caused myriad problems that will cost a great deal to fix, it is not sustainable to ignore those problems with more austerity.
Every penny the government spends goes into the private sector including paying wages, every penny taken in tax takes money out of the private sector. Are you suggesting the government should be actively removing even more money and demand from the economy?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?