The question they are debating is whether the Scottish Parliament or Boris Johnson should decide whether there is another referendum. Throwing their lot in with Boris isn't necessarily to Scottish Labour's advantage. This another way of saying the Unionist Alliance is dead. Which is why I think independence will carry if another referendum goes ahead.
But their voters don't want another scottish referendum and they dont want scottish independence, why should they follow them instead of voting for someone else ?
It's like saying that a pro-european pro-second referendum Labour had a chance of winning in Sedgefield.
Which voters? Labour had 40% of the Scottish vote in the 2010 GE and 25% in 2015. What happened between those two elections?
The voters that still remain in Labour.
If you are in favour of independence you already vote for the SNP.
But if you are against independence you either vote Conservative, Liberal or Labour depending on your ideology.
So Labour risks losing all the left anti-independence vote, that 19% will be redistributed to the Liberals and some few to the Conservatives.
Actually that's not the case. Ruth Davidson's success in 2017 was largely due to SNP switchers. As these voted SNP after the independence referendum they are unlikely to be rabid unionists. The Tory natural ceiling is about 25%, while SNP/nationalists have a bedrock of maybe 40%. The rest is fluid.
Wut. Angus is the only seat where you can see evidence of SNP to Con switching in any numbers.
Edit: oh, do you mean AN-to-Lab switchers?
In net swing terms in most of the 2017 Tory seats there was a fall in the SNP vote and an increase in the Tory one. There was also some tactical voting amongst the Unionist parties but the most telling shift was SNP -> Conservative, eg Aberdeen South:
Conservative 42.1% +19.3 SNP 31.5% -10.2 Labour 20.6% -6.2 Liberal Democrats 5.8% +1.2
Majority 4,752 10.6 n/a Turnout 44,556 68.6 -2.7 Conservative gain from SNP Swing +14.8
Yeah, so looking at percentages is what will fool you.
In 2015 the turnout was ~48500 In 2017 the turnout was ~44500
So that's 4000 less voters.
Knock that off the SNP total and that only leaves you with 2000 SNP switchers which can easily be churned into Lab and LD without going straight to the Cons.
If Boris achieves only half of what The Times have set out, Labour face a very long time out of power:
In the Queen’s speech on Thursday he will announce he is enshrining in law the government’s commitment to boost NHS spending by £33.9bn by 2023-24 — the first time a government has made a spending commitment legally binding over several years. An extra £78bn is being earmarked to transform transport in the north of England with a blitz of new roads, bridges and buses.
The prime minister will also spend the Christmas break drawing up plans to make “big changes” to other Whitehall departments. Those in the works include:
● Setting up a department for borders and immigration separate from the Home Office to improve security and the operation of the visa system after Brexit
● Merging the Department for International Trade with the business department to create a powerful outfit that can do trade deals with the US, Japan and Australia while transforming the economy in the north of England
● Merging the Foreign Office and the Department for International Development to help co-ordinate Britain’s aid budget with foreign policy goals
● Splitting energy and climate change from the business department again.
My worry, as a fiscally dry Tory, is who the hell pays for all of this. I know there is £6bn per year pencilled in from not cutting corporation tax. But this amounts to something like £44bn per year extra, the rest of that money needs to come from somewhere but we've committed to not raising the main rates of tax. Economic growth will account for about half of that leaving another £19bn unfunded.
We definitely need answers from Javid on where the additional money is coming from, which taxes will rise of how much additional borrowing we will see.
Honest question for the Nats here. How well do you honestly think SLAB would do if they adopted the 'pro-indyref 2, but we'll campaign for No' policy being mooted? Because it seems very similar to the UKLab's fudge on a PV, which doesn't seem to have exactly gone down particularly well for them.
"The one thing which all good leaders have is courage."
I'm not sure I agree. Blair was fundamentally a coward, except over Iraq. He spent his whole time as leader in exaggerated fear of the reactions of the Mail and the Sun. Even the Iraq war, justified or not, was essentially him cowering to the Americans to beat up a much weaker country.
The thing which all successful leaders need is judgement. If they don't have that, luck will substitute. Blair had the latter in abundance. His judgement was patchy. The last politician we had with both luck and judgement was ousted almost thirty years ago when both failed her.
They need both, I agree.
I was mainly thinking about Kinnock who did have the balls to tell his party and Militant some home truths. Blair did have some courage in his early days as leader, less so as PM, I agree.
That Kinnock speech remains for me one of the outstanding political moments. Labour badly needs someone like him now. But I don't see who that might be.
I could see either Phillips or Rayner doing a similar speech. It needs doing soon, so there can be a thorough clean out before a GE.
I fear though that the infection is too widespread.
Don’t worry, As a new member I’m going to go to my local Labour Party meetings and tell them some home truths myself!
Don't let on where you live unless you want bricks through your window or "nazi supporter" sprayed across the front of your house.
That goes for you as well CHB! Be careful around the more ardent Corbyistas.
In 2016 and 2017 we have constituencies where there was SNP to Con 'swing' with a reduction in SNP vote share but where the SNP absolute number of votes went up.
Honest question for the Nats here. How well do you honestly think SLAB would do if they adopted the 'pro-indyref 2, but we'll campaign for No' policy being mooted? Because it seems very similar to the UKLab's fudge on a PV, which doesn't seem to have exactly gone down particularly well for them.
An absolute gift to the Scons and just confirm how pointless Slab are giving them no benefit whatsoever
Nandy seems to actually get it - and she seems articulate and intelligent.
If she'd been vocal once the election was called she'd now have some credibility. However, she spent the last 5 weeks to have Jeremy Corbyn elected as PM and would have supported him in the H/C had he won. The same applies to all the rest of them - except those who stood up to be counted. Even now her words are pretty worthless as there is precious little chance the members would vote her in. The same applies to Jess Philips who is even more massively over-rated.
If she'd been saying this during the campaign, she'd have opened herself up to accusations of treachery and this being the reason they lost. This was the problem in 2017 - the Corbynistas could, with some justification, claim that if all Labour candidates had been singing from the same hymn sheet then they'd have got a majority. By forcing the leadership to own the defeat they can now move forward.
Well, they'll probable go sideways or backwards, but at least they'll have tried.
>Even under the most optimistic scenario outlined in the NHS five year forward view, an additional £8 billion a year in funding will be needed by 2020. New funding will also be required to establish a transformation fund early in the next parliament to help meet the costs of developing new community-based services and double-running during the transition between old and new models of care. With deficit reduction still a high priority, finding this money will not be easy. However, unless it is found, patients will bear the cost as staff numbers are cut, waiting times rise and quality of care deteriorates.
It's not that Labour's economic policy in isolation was totally mad, I think 2017 got the balance reasonably right (and you can see that in the Tories moving to the left economically) but 2019 went far too far.
Strip away the WASPI, broadband, etc. rubbish and stick with a couple of pragmatic things like railways and investing in the NHS and Labour would have walked it with a sane leader.
I am not totally convinced nationalization of lots of industries is quite as popular as it is perceived. I know polling says it is, but when offered it as GE, the public don't seem to go for it.
In 2017 they only promised railways didn't they?
I am saying they take the railways back into public ownership - and that's it.
They can argue that on pragmatic grounds, without being seen as anti-business. That policy was fine, it just came in the baggage of all the other rubbish.
Do you remember British Rail? The railways now carry many more passengers than BR ever did, it was at the beck and call of the unions even more so than now. The problem is that if nationalized it won’t attract the management it needs or make the correct investment decisions. What is wrong is that the privatization model is ill thought out that’s what needs addressing.
Spot on, better management & regulation is the way forward.
Some of us are old enough to remember the pre-privatization World War 2 rolling stock, the trains that never ran on time in between the numerous ASLEF strikes,not to mention the expensive tickets.
It really says something when the flagship British Rail service was known by its users as 'Inter Shitty'
But let's not forget the pre-war Grouping companies had a pretty poor reputation too: "Late and Never Early Railway."
Honest question for the Nats here. How well do you honestly think SLAB would do if they adopted the 'pro-indyref 2, but we'll campaign for No' policy being mooted? Because it seems very similar to the UKLab's fudge on a PV, which doesn't seem to have exactly gone down particularly well for them.
An absolute gift to the Scons and just confirm how pointless Slab are giving them no benefit whatsoever
So, how are you feeling about your prognosis that the SNP focusing on independence was hurting them in the election campaign?
If Boris achieves only half of what The Times have set out, Labour face a very long time out of power:
In the Queen’s speech on Thursday he will announce he is enshrining in law the government’s commitment to boost NHS spending by £33.9bn by 2023-24 — the first time a government has made a spending commitment legally binding over several years. An extra £78bn is being earmarked to transform transport in the north of England with a blitz of new roads, bridges and buses.
The prime minister will also spend the Christmas break drawing up plans to make “big changes” to other Whitehall departments. Those in the works include:
● Setting up a department for borders and immigration separate from the Home Office to improve security and the operation of the visa system after Brexit
● Merging the Department for International Trade with the business department to create a powerful outfit that can do trade deals with the US, Japan and Australia while transforming the economy in the north of England
● Merging the Foreign Office and the Department for International Development to help co-ordinate Britain’s aid budget with foreign policy goals
● Splitting energy and climate change from the business department again.
My worry, as a fiscally dry Tory, is who the hell pays for all of this. I know there is £6bn per year pencilled in from not cutting corporation tax. But this amounts to something like £44bn per year extra, the rest of that money needs to come from somewhere but we've committed to not raising the main rates of tax. Economic growth will account for about half of that leaving another £19bn unfunded.
We definitely need answers from Javid on where the additional money is coming from, which taxes will rise of how much additional borrowing we will see.
Gordon Brown can chuckle. The final victory is his, the Conservative party is now singing his tune. What could possibly go wrong?
It is easy to see some of the worlds economic turmoil throwing a spanner in the works, even without Brexit.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
The baggage really was Corbyn's big problem from the start.
Not baggage in the sense of merely having an awkward past. Many perceived that Corbyn retains the same utra-leftist views he has always had and that he tried unsuccessfully to hide some of them as leader.
A Momentum supported leader will be a hard sell. If the "anti-imperialism" and terrorism platform sharing is less prominent, the Tories would then move on to the next circles of unpopularity, statist GDP destroying economics or some daft woke statements.
If Boris achieves only half of what The Times have set out, Labour face a very long time out of power:
In the Queen’s speech on Thursday he will announce he is enshrining in law the government’s commitment to boost NHS spending by £33.9bn by 2023-24 — the first time a government has made a spending commitment legally binding over several years. An extra £78bn is being earmarked to transform transport in the north of England with a blitz of new roads, bridges and buses.
The prime minister will also spend the Christmas break drawing up plans to make “big changes” to other Whitehall departments. Those in the works include:
● Setting up a department for borders and immigration separate from the Home Office to improve security and the operation of the visa system after Brexit
● Merging the Department for International Trade with the business department to create a powerful outfit that can do trade deals with the US, Japan and Australia while transforming the economy in the north of England
● Merging the Foreign Office and the Department for International Development to help co-ordinate Britain’s aid budget with foreign policy goals
● Splitting energy and climate change from the business department again.
My worry, as a fiscally dry Tory, is who the hell pays for all of this. I know there is £6bn per year pencilled in from not cutting corporation tax. But this amounts to something like £44bn per year extra, the rest of that money needs to come from somewhere but we've committed to not raising the main rates of tax. Economic growth will account for about half of that leaving another £19bn unfunded.
We definitely need answers from Javid on where the additional money is coming from, which taxes will rise of how much additional borrowing we will see.
For gods sake, what is it with politicians and creating new departments? All the manifestos were at it
The baggage really was Corbyn's big problem from the start.
Not baggage in the sense of merely having an awkward past. Many perceived that Corbyn retains the same utra-leftist views he has always had and that he tried unsuccessfully to hide some of them as leader.
A Momentum supported leader will be a hard sell. If the "anti-imperialism" and terrorism platform sharing is less prominent, the Tories would then move on to the next circles of unpopularity, statist GDP destroying economics or some daft woke statements.
It's not me you need to convince, I want Dan Jarvis or Nandy for leader
If Boris achieves only half of what The Times have set out, Labour face a very long time out of power:
In the Queen’s speech on Thursday he will announce he is enshrining in law the government’s commitment to boost NHS spending by £33.9bn by 2023-24 — the first time a government has made a spending commitment legally binding over several years. An extra £78bn is being earmarked to transform transport in the north of England with a blitz of new roads, bridges and buses.
The prime minister will also spend the Christmas break drawing up plans to make “big changes” to other Whitehall departments. Those in the works include:
● Setting up a department for borders and immigration separate from the Home Office to improve security and the operation of the visa system after Brexit
● Merging the Department for International Trade with the business department to create a powerful outfit that can do trade deals with the US, Japan and Australia while transforming the economy in the north of England
● Merging the Foreign Office and the Department for International Development to help co-ordinate Britain’s aid budget with foreign policy goals
● Splitting energy and climate change from the business department again.
My worry, as a fiscally dry Tory, is who the hell pays for all of this. I know there is £6bn per year pencilled in from not cutting corporation tax. But this amounts to something like £44bn per year extra, the rest of that money needs to come from somewhere but we've committed to not raising the main rates of tax. Economic growth will account for about half of that leaving another £19bn unfunded.
We definitely need answers from Javid on where the additional money is coming from, which taxes will rise of how much additional borrowing we will see.
Johnson will pay the debt interest and the following PM can worry about the debt.
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
I don't think the problem is money, so much as people. You can throw the chequebook at buildings, but training and retaining staff is a massive issue.
The baggage really was Corbyn's big problem from the start.
Not baggage in the sense of merely having an awkward past. Many perceived that Corbyn retains the same utra-leftist views he has always had and that he tried unsuccessfully to hide some of them as leader.
A Momentum supported leader will be a hard sell. If the "anti-imperialism" and terrorism platform sharing is less prominent, the Tories would then move on to the next circles of unpopularity, statist GDP destroying economics or some daft woke statements.
It's not me you need to convince, I want Dan Jarvis or Nandy for leader
Either of those would be a good choice but only if not shackled to a third long suicide note.
Honest question for the Nats here. How well do you honestly think SLAB would do if they adopted the 'pro-indyref 2, but we'll campaign for No' policy being mooted? Because it seems very similar to the UKLab's fudge on a PV, which doesn't seem to have exactly gone down particularly well for them.
An absolute gift to the Scons and just confirm how pointless Slab are giving them no benefit whatsoever
So, how are you feeling about your prognosis that the SNP focusing on independence was hurting them in the election campaign?
As I said earlier it gave a boost to the conservatives especially in the NE
However, I still believe that Scotland will not vote to leave the union no matter when a referendum is held
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
I don't think the problem is money, so much as people. You can throw the chequebook at buildings, but training and retaining staff is a massive issue.
Bringing back the nursing bursary is a good start - but perhaps doing something about tuition fees would be a good idea too.
The baggage really was Corbyn's big problem from the start.
Not baggage in the sense of merely having an awkward past. Many perceived that Corbyn retains the same utra-leftist views he has always had and that he tried unsuccessfully to hide some of them as leader.
A Momentum supported leader will be a hard sell. If the "anti-imperialism" and terrorism platform sharing is less prominent, the Tories would then move on to the next circles of unpopularity, statist GDP destroying economics or some daft woke statements.
It's not me you need to convince, I want Dan Jarvis or Nandy for leader
Either of those would be a good choice but only if not shackled to a third long suicide note.
A paired down 2017 manifesto would be a good start.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
I don't think the problem is money, so much as people. You can throw the chequebook at buildings, but training and retaining staff is a massive issue.
Bringing back the nursing bursary is a good start - but perhaps doing something about tuition fees would be a good idea too.
From a pragmatist viewpoint, tuition fees are not the most pressing problem. The biggest problem is living costs whilst training. Not everyone can live at home.
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
Brexit has clearly shifted NI to a non-sectarian future. This movement is backed up by other polls. Protestants and Catholics are shedding ancient identities. This is why a border poll, if it ever happened, is far from a foregone conclusion.
If Boris achieves only half of what The Times have set out, Labour face a very long time out of power:
In the Queen’s speech on Thursday he will announce he is enshrining in law the government’s commitment to boost NHS spending by £33.9bn by 2023-24 — the first time a government has made a spending commitment legally binding over several years. An extra £78bn is being earmarked to transform transport in the north of England with a blitz of new roads, bridges and buses.
The prime minister will also spend the Christmas break drawing up plans to make “big changes” to other Whitehall departments. Those in the works include:
● Setting up a department for borders and immigration separate from the Home Office to improve security and the operation of the visa system after Brexit
● Merging the Department for International Trade with the business department to create a powerful outfit that can do trade deals with the US, Japan and Australia while transforming the economy in the north of England
● Merging the Foreign Office and the Department for International Development to help co-ordinate Britain’s aid budget with foreign policy goals
● Splitting energy and climate change from the business department again.
My worry, as a fiscally dry Tory, is who the hell pays for all of this. I know there is £6bn per year pencilled in from not cutting corporation tax. But this amounts to something like £44bn per year extra, the rest of that money needs to come from somewhere but we've committed to not raising the main rates of tax. Economic growth will account for about half of that leaving another £19bn unfunded.
We definitely need answers from Javid on where the additional money is coming from, which taxes will rise of how much additional borrowing we will see.
For gods sake, what is it with politicians and creating new departments? All the manifestos were at it
To be fair breaking up the Home Office is probably a long overdue step. It doesn't exactly enjoy the best reputation, particularly with regard to its uselessness on immigration and asylum.
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
I was and I still am, the only reason SF won Foyle in 2017 is because the UUP and the SDLP joined forces / invented a partnership.
Foyle is a die hard republican and nationalist area and therefore dissident republicans are more likely to vote sdlp over SF any day.
Also, soft to centre unionists tend to vote sdlp as they can accept them more than SF.
Colum Eastwood is more popular and interesting than mark durkan as well.
Mr. Hauser, the Scots voted to stay in the UK. That's not a prison. That's a choice.
MD it was done based on staying in the EU otherwise it would have been Yes. The unionists lied. A second referendum is unstoppable.
I would be sorry to see Scotland go, but now it is only a matter of time. The decision should be Holyroods, and Holyrood's alone.
I have no doubt that a referendum in late 2021is most likely and equally I have no doubt it will be lost
Yes, but by whom?
In the unlikely event there is another referendum then it should exactly follow what Sturgeon tried to impose on the UK parliament with a second EU referendum.
So the first Sottish referendum would be Remain or Leave
With a second referendum two years later if a Leave vote won.
Remain or Leave after the terms of separation are known.
It's electoral suicide in Scotland and won't be popular in rUK. Brilliant.
If Scottish Labour is planning to back the SNP on this then it makes you wonder - I mean, wonder even more than before - what purpose there is to their continuing existence. The SNP has already supplanted them as the voice of the Scottish centre-left. If they're now going to equivocate on the Union as well then they might just as well go the whole hog, dissolve themselves and give up.
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
Brexit has clearly shifted NI to a non-sectarian future. This movement is backed up by other polls. Protestants and Catholics are shedding ancient identities. This is why a border poll, if it ever happened, is far from a foregone conclusion.
Or the loyalists are finally realizing that the English do not care about them. If I were a NI unionist I would be seriously asking myself what is the point any more.
In net swing terms in most of the 2017 Tory seats there was a fall in the SNP vote and an increase in the Tory one. There was also some tactical voting amongst the Unionist parties but the most telling shift was SNP -> Conservative, eg Aberdeen South:
Conservative 42.1% +19.3 SNP 31.5% -10.2 Labour 20.6% -6.2 Liberal Democrats 5.8% +1.2
Majority 4,752 10.6 n/a Turnout 44,556 68.6 -2.7 Conservative gain from SNP Swing +14.8
Yeah, so looking at percentages is what will fool you.
In 2015 the turnout was ~48500 In 2017 the turnout was ~44500
So that's 4000 less voters.
Knock that off the SNP total and that only leaves you with 2000 SNP switchers which can easily be churned into Lab and LD without going straight to the Cons.
Possible, but not especially likely. The more likely explanation is that the drop in votes wasn't all SNP and given the Labour vote also dropped, SNP to Labour switchers weren't a big factor in this constituency. Hence most went SNP -> Conservative.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
I don't think the problem is money, so much as people. You can throw the chequebook at buildings, but training and retaining staff is a massive issue.
Part of the solution is undoubtedly going to be immigration. Retention of older staff hampered by them being in a position to switch to part time or retire early (and tax incentives to encourage that).
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
I was and I still am, the only reason SF won Foyle in 2017 is because the UUP and the SDLP joined forces / invented a partnership.
Foyle is a die hard republican and nationalist area and therefore dissident republicans are more likely to vote sdlp over SF any day.
Also, soft to centre unionists tend to vote sdlp as they can accept them more than SF.
Colum Eastwood is more popular and interesting than mark durkan as well.
Mark Durkan would be more well known in Belfast.
Both the DUP and SF lost a chunk of support. Voters appear to be getting the idea that if they kick the bums out they might get some representation. Time for BoJo to do something decent for NI and call a Stormont election.
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
Brexit has clearly shifted NI to a non-sectarian future. This movement is backed up by other polls. Protestants and Catholics are shedding ancient identities. This is why a border poll, if it ever happened, is far from a foregone conclusion.
Or the loyalists are finally realizing that the English do not care about them. If I were a NI unionist I would be seriously asking myself what is the point any more.
Does that mean they're delusional as they class themselves as Pro British ?
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
Brexit has clearly shifted NI to a non-sectarian future. This movement is backed up by other polls. Protestants and Catholics are shedding ancient identities. This is why a border poll, if it ever happened, is far from a foregone conclusion.
Or the loyalists are finally realizing that the English do not care about them. If I were a NI unionist I would be seriously asking myself what is the point any more.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
I also wonder if one of the sources of funding that the Government might turn to for the NHS - given the pledge to leave income tax, NI and VAT alone - is sin taxes on high fat and high sugar foods? Could be used to raise quite a lot of money and try to prod people in the direction of healthier eating (thus reducing healthcare demand) at the same time.
Has anyone managed to explain why the Brexit party appear to have done particularly well in certain seats, to the extent that Labour hung on. 30% in Dan Jarvis's seat a particularly startling example. A coincidence there that the Conservative was from an ethnic minority?
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
I was and I still am, the only reason SF won Foyle in 2017 is because the UUP and the SDLP joined forces / invented a partnership.
Foyle is a die hard republican and nationalist area and therefore dissident republicans are more likely to vote sdlp over SF any day.
Also, soft to centre unionists tend to vote sdlp as they can accept them more than SF.
Colum Eastwood is more popular and interesting than mark durkan as well.
Mark Durkan would be more well known in Belfast.
Both the DUP and SF lost a chunk of support. Voters appear to be getting the idea that if they kick the bums out they might get some representation. Time for BoJo to do something decent for NI and call a Stormont election.
An Easter election is looking highly likely and that means more tips and money for you guys
I’m going to be more upset if the moderates lose the coming Labour civil war than I am about the election result. Only then will it all be utterly hopeless.
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
I was and I still am, the only reason SF won Foyle in 2017 is because the UUP and the SDLP joined forces / invented a partnership.
Foyle is a die hard republican and nationalist area and therefore dissident republicans are more likely to vote sdlp over SF any day.
Also, soft to centre unionists tend to vote sdlp as they can accept them more than SF.
Colum Eastwood is more popular and interesting than mark durkan as well.
Mark Durkan would be more well known in Belfast.
Both the DUP and SF lost a chunk of support. Voters appear to be getting the idea that if they kick the bums out they might get some representation. Time for BoJo to do something decent for NI and call a Stormont election.
An Easter election is looking highly likely and that means more tips and money for you guys
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
Brexit has clearly shifted NI to a non-sectarian future. This movement is backed up by other polls. Protestants and Catholics are shedding ancient identities. This is why a border poll, if it ever happened, is far from a foregone conclusion.
Two main obstacles to overcome,firstly the massive subsidy NI receives from Westminster & secondly how the NHS would be replaced after unification, as the republic not only an expensive health care system (€100 A&E charge),but one of the poorest performing in Europe.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
I also wonder if one of the sources of funding that the Government might turn to for the NHS - given the pledge to leave income tax, NI and VAT alone - is sin taxes on high fat and high sugar foods? Could be used to raise quite a lot of money and try to prod people in the direction of healthier eating (thus reducing healthcare demand) at the same time.
Yeah, so the problem is in your last line - it can't be trying to both raise money and change attitudes, since the more successful it is in the latter, the less it will be at the former. Plus I don't think we want to go down the Gordon Brown route of holding the headline taxes steady but death by a thousand cuts on stealth taxes.
"The one thing which all good leaders have is courage."
I'm not sure I agree. Blair was fundamentally a coward, except over Iraq. He spent his whole time as leader in exaggerated fear of the reactions of the Mail and the Sun. Even the Iraq war, justified or not, was essentially him cowering to the Americans to beat up a much weaker country.
The thing which all successful leaders need is judgement. If they don't have that, luck will substitute. Blair had the latter in abundance. His judgement was patchy. The last politician we had with both luck and judgement was ousted almost thirty years ago when both failed her.
They need both, I agree.
I was mainly thinking about Kinnock who did have the balls to tell his party and Militant some home truths. Blair did have some courage in his early days as leader, less so as PM, I agree.
That Kinnock speech remains for me one of the outstanding political moments. Labour badly needs someone like him now. But I don't see who that might be.
I could see either Phillips or Rayner doing a similar speech. It needs doing soon, so there can be a thorough clean out before a GE.
I fear though that the infection is too widespread.
Don’t worry, As a new member I’m going to go to my local Labour Party meetings and tell them some home truths myself!
Good luck with that. There's nothing an organisation loves more than an influx of new members telling them how they are doing it all wrong.
"The one thing which all good leaders have is courage."
I'm not sure I agree. Blair was fundamentally a coward, except over Iraq. He spent his whole time as leader in exaggerated fear of the reactions of the Mail and the Sun. Even the Iraq war, justified or not, was essentially him cowering to the Americans to beat up a much weaker country.
The thing which all successful leaders need is judgement. If they don't have that, luck will substitute. Blair had the latter in abundance. His judgement was patchy. The last politician we had with both luck and judgement was ousted almost thirty years ago when both failed her.
They need both, I agree.
I was mainly thinking about Kinnock who did have the balls to tell his party and Militant some home truths. Blair did have some courage in his early days as leader, less so as PM, I agree.
That Kinnock speech remains for me one of the outstanding political moments. Labour badly needs someone like him now. But I don't see who that might be.
I could see either Phillips or Rayner doing a similar speech. It needs doing soon, so there can be a thorough clean out before a GE.
I fear though that the infection is too widespread.
Don’t worry, As a new member I’m going to go to my local Labour Party meetings and tell them some home truths myself!
Good luck with that. There's nothing an organisation loves more than an influx of new members telling them how they are doing it all wrong.
I’m used to it. Gateshead Lib Dems made it pretty clear that I was not welcome back a few years ago...
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
I was and I still am, the only reason SF won Foyle in 2017 is because the UUP and the SDLP joined forces / invented a partnership.
Foyle is a die hard republican and nationalist area and therefore dissident republicans are more likely to vote sdlp over SF any day.
Also, soft to centre unionists tend to vote sdlp as they can accept them more than SF.
Colum Eastwood is more popular and interesting than mark durkan as well.
Mark Durkan would be more well known in Belfast.
Both the DUP and SF lost a chunk of support. Voters appear to be getting the idea that if they kick the bums out they might get some representation. Time for BoJo to do something decent for NI and call a Stormont election.
An Easter election is looking highly likely and that means more tips and money for you guys
I take it youre posting from NI ?
Yes sir, I got 16/18 correct and I told people to be weary of Belfast North.
Stephen Farry (Alliance Party) wasn't a shock in the slightest as North Down has always been a fairly liberal place, I just didn't see value in 2-1 for him.
Labour need Scotland to leave. The idea of an SNP controlled hung parliament is far more scary to English voters than a Lab/Lib one. It's why a hung parliament wasn't scary in the run-up to 2010 but it was in 2015. It is just one more roadblock to Labour winning a majority again, it played a fundamental role in screwing Miliband's chances.
The decision should be devolved to Holyrood, if they want another vote then why not. If people are fed up with the SNP they will vote them out.
In the article you make reference to Anthony Broxton's "Tides of History". Anthony occasionally writes PB articles and his blog and twitter is good: interested PB readers can find them here:
I’m going to be more upset if the moderates lose the coming Labour civil war than I am about the election result. Only then will it all be utterly hopeless.
It would be nice to think that Labour will come to its senses, but I fear that you will soon be feeling that terminal disappointment. After Corbyn's rejection at the ballot box we're due a repeat of the 2015 rage spasm: the members will extend the middle finger at the electorate and pick whichever candidate most appeals to them, i.e. the most left-wing one available.
I hope I'm wrong because the country needs a decent Opposition (and I could do without going through a repeat of the terror I felt at the notion of a Corbyn ministry come 2024,) but given what's happened to Labour these past nine years I don't expect to be proven so.
Jess Phillips is head and shoulders above anyone else proposing to be Labour leader.
She says the right things but some of the stuff she has said is a bit out there. Cabinet but not leader I think.
She speaks like a normal person, so you are probably right, far too sensible to be Labour leader.
It's not that. It's some of the stuff she's said on equality that the Daily Mail and others will go after
If she were Mother Theresa the Daily Mail will vilify her anyway. She doesn't look like the kind of woman that would worry too much about what the Daily Mail might say.
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
I was and I still am, the only reason SF won Foyle in 2017 is because the UUP and the SDLP joined forces / invented a partnership.
Foyle is a die hard republican and nationalist area and therefore dissident republicans are more likely to vote sdlp over SF any day.
Also, soft to centre unionists tend to vote sdlp as they can accept them more than SF.
Colum Eastwood is more popular and interesting than mark durkan as well.
Mark Durkan would be more well known in Belfast.
Both the DUP and SF lost a chunk of support. Voters appear to be getting the idea that if they kick the bums out they might get some representation. Time for BoJo to do something decent for NI and call a Stormont election.
An Easter election is looking highly likely and that means more tips and money for you guys
I take it youre posting from NI ?
Yes sir, I got 16/18 correct and I told people to be weary of Belfast North.
Stephen Farry (Alliance Party) wasn't a shock in the slightest as North Down has always been a fairly liberal place, I just didn't see value in 2-1 for him.
North Down has always been a place apart, the DUP thought they were just going to pick the place up when SH went, but the size of the majority for Farry gives them an uphill task.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
If Boris can neutralise the NHS as an attack line against the Tories, then he might be able to permanently relegate Labour to the status of a regional instead of a national party (which they virtually are already). Take away the NHS, and Labour has almost nothing left in their armoury that can mobilize people on a mass scale. It's brilliant.
The decision should be devolved to Holyrood, if they want another vote then why not. If people are fed up with the SNP they will vote them out.
Except it won't work like that. The reaction to the No campaign winning in 2014 was the SNP tsunami in 2015.
The Unionist vote in Scotland is hopelessly split, whereas the Nationalist vote is almost completely united. Therefore, we shall get an endless series of SNP Governments and demands for the referendum to be re-run every few years forever, until the SNP get what they want.
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
I was and I still am, the only reason SF won Foyle in 2017 is because the UUP and the SDLP joined forces / invented a partnership.
Foyle is a die hard republican and nationalist area and therefore dissident republicans are more likely to vote sdlp over SF any day.
Also, soft to centre unionists tend to vote sdlp as they can accept them more than SF.
Colum Eastwood is more popular and interesting than mark durkan as well.
Mark Durkan would be more well known in Belfast.
Both the DUP and SF lost a chunk of support. Voters appear to be getting the idea that if they kick the bums out they might get some representation. Time for BoJo to do something decent for NI and call a Stormont election.
An Easter election is looking highly likely and that means more tips and money for you guys
I take it youre posting from NI ?
Yes sir, I got 16/18 correct and I told people to be weary of Belfast North.
Stephen Farry (Alliance Party) wasn't a shock in the slightest as North Down has always been a fairly liberal place, I just didn't see value in 2-1 for him.
North Down has always been a place apart, the DUP thought they were just going to pick the place up when SH went, but the size of the majority for Farry gives them an uphill task.
Absolutely but North Down is one of the most, if not the most middle class constituency in Northern Ireland.
Jess Phillips is head and shoulders above anyone else proposing to be Labour leader.
She says the right things but some of the stuff she has said is a bit out there. Cabinet but not leader I think.
She speaks like a normal person, so you are probably right, far too sensible to be Labour leader.
It's not that. It's some of the stuff she's said on equality that the Daily Mail and others will go after
If she were Mother Theresa the Daily Mail will vilify her anyway. She doesn't look like the kind of woman that would worry too much about what the Daily Mail might say.
Three things about her, she's an 'emoter', the wobbling chin, the tear in the eye. Her 'working class' origins are about as authentic as Blair and Thornberry, and she is incredibly naive when pushed for more detail about solutions to problems she identifies.
Treating people on election day by handing out foodbank vouchers is something that deserves an interview under caution.
I’m going to be more upset if the moderates lose the coming Labour civil war than I am about the election result. Only then will it all be utterly hopeless.
Some of us embraced hopelessness as soon as the AV referendum was lost.
Electoral reform. Until it happens we have no democracy, and are reliant solely on the largesse of posh boys.
I’m going to be more upset if the moderates lose the coming Labour civil war than I am about the election result. Only then will it all be utterly hopeless.
Some of us embraced hopelessness as soon as the AV referendum was lost.
Electoral reform. Until it happens we have no democracy, and are reliant solely on the largesse of posh boys.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
If Boris can neutralise the NHS as an attack line against the Tories, then he might be able to permanently relegate Labour to the status of a regional instead of a national party (which they virtually are already). Take away the NHS, and Labour has almost nothing left in their armoury that can mobilize people on a mass scale. It's brilliant.
Maybe, maybe not. The standard line rolled out on the NHS at election time is a comfort blanket that prevents Labour from coming up with sensible and well thought out policies. Assuming that enough people will vote for them out of fear of what the Tories will do for the NHS (without actually advancing serious policies themselves), is all part of the pattern of taking their voters for granted. Lets not forget that the NHS polling ("Johnson and Hancock" vs "Corbyn and Ashfield" actually favoured the former!)
I’ll tell you what. If Boris really wants to thank the voters in Blyth Valley. He will fund the extension of the Metro to Blyth through Cramlington. It’s sorely needed. Much more than 1 new ‘vegan food’ factory.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
If Boris can neutralise the NHS as an attack line against the Tories, then he might be able to permanently relegate Labour to the status of a regional instead of a national party (which they virtually are already). Take away the NHS, and Labour has almost nothing left in their armoury that can mobilize people on a mass scale. It's brilliant.
Maybe, maybe not. The standard line rolled out on the NHS at election time is a comfort blanket that prevents Labour from coming up with sensible and well thought out policies. Assuming that enough people will vote for them out of fear of what the Tories will do for the NHS (without actually advancing serious policies themselves), is all part of the pattern of taking their voters for granted. Lets not forget that the NHS polling ("Johnson and Hancock" vs "Corbyn and Ashfield" actually favoured the former!)
I thought the Tories were behind Labour on NHS polling in the run-up? Although it may have changed in the final days.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
If Boris can neutralise the NHS as an attack line against the Tories, then he might be able to permanently relegate Labour to the status of a regional instead of a national party (which they virtually are already). Take away the NHS, and Labour has almost nothing left in their armoury that can mobilize people on a mass scale. It's brilliant.
Don't count your sheep yet.
If we have a recession as I think we will, all of this will quickly disappear and we'll back into austerity again.
A lot can change in five years, Labour need to wake up.
Ash is a literal communist. Hopefully the new leader will throw her out.
I don't understand how that conversation even came about, Britain was the IRA's enemy.
Ive just been running through the NI results. Amid all the excitement of Dodds and North Down noone is looking at the SF collapse in Foyle. Any idea why they lost half their votes ?
I was and I still am, the only reason SF won Foyle in 2017 is because the UUP and the SDLP joined forces / invented a partnership.
Foyle is a die hard republican and nationalist area and therefore dissident republicans are more likely to vote sdlp over SF any day.
Also, soft to centre unionists tend to vote sdlp as they can accept them more than SF.
Colum Eastwood is more popular and interesting than mark durkan as well.
Mark Durkan would be more well known in Belfast.
Both the DUP and SF lost a chunk of support. Voters appear to be getting the idea that if they kick the bums out they might get some representation. Time for BoJo to do something decent for NI and call a Stormont election.
An Easter election is looking highly likely and that means more tips and money for you guys
I take it youre posting from NI ?
Yes sir, I got 16/18 correct and I told people to be weary of Belfast North.
Stephen Farry (Alliance Party) wasn't a shock in the slightest as North Down has always been a fairly liberal place, I just didn't see value in 2-1 for him.
North Down has always been a place apart, the DUP thought they were just going to pick the place up when SH went, but the size of the majority for Farry gives them an uphill task.
Absolutely but North Down is one of the most, if not the most middle class constituency in Northern Ireland.
any way have to go now, NI tends to be a specialist interest on PB, theres a handful of us from home, Bev C, Yokel, myself and Topping is an honorary as he spent his youth in uniform luxriating in the sheughs of Fermanagh. Do keep posting as theyre always informative.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
If Boris can neutralise the NHS as an attack line against the Tories, then he might be able to permanently relegate Labour to the status of a regional instead of a national party (which they virtually are already). Take away the NHS, and Labour has almost nothing left in their armoury that can mobilize people on a mass scale. It's brilliant.
Johnson can throw all the money in the world at the NHS and it still won't be enough.
If Labour don't get their act together something else will replace the Party. The Conservatives will run out of road at some point. Hopefully Johnson won't have done too much damage before that happens.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
If Boris can neutralise the NHS as an attack line against the Tories, then he might be able to permanently relegate Labour to the status of a regional instead of a national party (which they virtually are already). Take away the NHS, and Labour has almost nothing left in their armoury that can mobilize people on a mass scale. It's brilliant.
Cameron completely protected NHS funding. And because NHS spending (like all spending) had substantially increased following the 2007 crash, reigning in spending elsewhere while sustaining NHS spending had a weird effect health spending gobbling up more and more of the public spending pie that was frozen and decreasing quite significantly in other areas.
But.. Despite this we still had NHS not safe under tories/privatisation/ charges for services and operations etc by Labour.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
I also wonder if one of the sources of funding that the Government might turn to for the NHS - given the pledge to leave income tax, NI and VAT alone - is sin taxes on high fat and high sugar foods? Could be used to raise quite a lot of money and try to prod people in the direction of healthier eating (thus reducing healthcare demand) at the same time.
Johnson is on record opposing the existing sugar tax.
I don't think he has ever had a head for money or numbers. He doesn't understand them, because numbers are facts not rhetoric.
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
If Boris can neutralise the NHS as an attack line against the Tories, then he might be able to permanently relegate Labour to the status of a regional instead of a national party (which they virtually are already). Take away the NHS, and Labour has almost nothing left in their armoury that can mobilize people on a mass scale. It's brilliant.
Don't count your sheep yet.
If we have a recession as I think we will, all of this will quickly disappear and we'll back into austerity again.
A lot can change in five years, Labour need to wake up.
Labour's civil war may still be in full flow in 5 years
>The Prime Minister has vowed to draw up legislation to guarantee he does not backslide on the promise that will see an extra 3.4 per cent (£20.5bn in real terms) of frontline spending by the end of the parliament.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
If Boris can neutralise the NHS as an attack line against the Tories, then he might be able to permanently relegate Labour to the status of a regional instead of a national party (which they virtually are already). Take away the NHS, and Labour has almost nothing left in their armoury that can mobilize people on a mass scale. It's brilliant.
Don't count your sheep yet.
If we have a recession as I think we will, all of this will quickly disappear and we'll back into austerity again.
A lot can change in five years, Labour need to wake up.
Labour's civil war may still be in full flow in 5 years
Further updates from Corbynland, its opening up now - the bbc is nothing but propaganda and everything, yes everything, about jeremy was smears. Boris has already done a deal with Trump, the NHS is dead.
I’m going to be more upset if the moderates lose the coming Labour civil war than I am about the election result. Only then will it all be utterly hopeless.
Some of us embraced hopelessness as soon as the AV referendum was lost.
Electoral reform. Until it happens we have no democracy, and are reliant solely on the largesse of posh boys.
I’ll tell you what. If Boris really wants to thank the voters in Blyth Valley. He will fund the extension of the Metro to Blyth through Cramlington. It’s sorely needed. Much more than 1 new ‘vegan food’ factory.
Not his decision; the Metro comes under a joint board of the two separate combined authorities. They have to request funding for the project.
Comments
In 2015 the turnout was ~48500
In 2017 the turnout was ~44500
So that's 4000 less voters.
Knock that off the SNP total and that only leaves you with 2000 SNP switchers which can easily be churned into Lab and LD without going straight to the Cons.
In the Queen’s speech on Thursday he will announce he is enshrining in law the government’s commitment to boost NHS spending by £33.9bn by 2023-24 — the first time a government has made a spending commitment legally binding over several years. An extra £78bn is being earmarked to transform transport in the north of England with a blitz of new roads, bridges and buses.
The prime minister will also spend the Christmas break drawing up plans to make “big changes” to other Whitehall departments. Those in the works include:
● Setting up a department for borders and immigration separate from the Home Office to improve security and the operation of the visa system after Brexit
● Merging the Department for International Trade with the business department to create a powerful outfit that can do trade deals with the US, Japan and Australia while transforming the economy in the north of England
● Merging the Foreign Office and the Department for International Development to help co-ordinate Britain’s aid budget with foreign policy goals
● Splitting energy and climate change from the business department again.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/now-for-the-boris-johnson-revolution-pm-to-wield-axe-on-cabinet-0cpdldlk6
My worry, as a fiscally dry Tory, is who the hell pays for all of this. I know there is £6bn per year pencilled in from not cutting corporation tax. But this amounts to something like £44bn per year extra, the rest of that money needs to come from somewhere but we've committed to not raising the main rates of tax. Economic growth will account for about half of that leaving another £19bn unfunded.
We definitely need answers from Javid on where the additional money is coming from, which taxes will rise of how much additional borrowing we will see.
That goes for you as well CHB! Be careful around the more ardent Corbyistas.
(OK, joking aside, it's also because - sorry, @malcolmg but it's true - the SNP leadership were rubbish. Dont hate me: prepare better next time.)
I really hope this isn't true. Abolishing DECC was one of the few good things to come of May's time in office.
That being said, Industrial Strategy does need to be removed from the name of BEIS. There are better ways of doing it though.
>boost NHS spending by £33.9bn by 2023-24
So that would be £7Bn per year.
Well, they'll probable go sideways or backwards, but at least they'll have tried.
Kings Fund says:
>Even under the most optimistic scenario outlined in the NHS five year forward view, an additional £8 billion a year in funding will be needed by 2020. New funding will also be required to establish a transformation fund early in the next parliament to help meet the costs of developing new community-based services and double-running during the transition between old and new models of care. With deficit reduction still a high priority, finding this money will not be easy. However, unless it is found, patients will bear the cost as staff numbers are cut, waiting times rise and quality of care deteriorates.
So it's not a bad start.
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-general-election-2019-tory-funding-pledge-nhs-investment-1332861
It's electoral suicide in Scotland and won't be popular in rUK. Brilliant.
It is easy to see some of the worlds economic turmoil throwing a spanner in the works, even without Brexit.
>Experts believe the additional money will still not meet the entire needs of the NHS, but will lead to a major increase in funding, bringing the NHS England budget to £149bn by 2023/24.
We'll see by the end of the five years how it's going, I will remain cynical until then. But fair enough.
A Momentum supported leader will be a hard sell. If the "anti-imperialism" and terrorism platform sharing is less prominent, the Tories would then move on to the next circles of unpopularity, statist GDP destroying economics or some daft woke statements.
https://twitter.com/VictimOfMaths/status/1205867779007623168?s=19
We will see how it's going by 2024, I will remain unconvinced until then.
However, I still believe that Scotland will not vote to leave the union no matter when a referendum is held
Foyle is a die hard republican and nationalist area and therefore dissident republicans are more likely to vote sdlp over SF any day.
Also, soft to centre unionists tend to vote sdlp as they can accept them more than SF.
Colum Eastwood is more popular and interesting than mark durkan as well.
Mark Durkan would be more well known in Belfast.
In the unlikely event there is another referendum then it should exactly follow what Sturgeon tried to impose on the UK parliament with a second EU referendum.
So the first Sottish referendum would be Remain or Leave
With a second referendum two years later if a Leave vote won.
Remain or Leave after the terms of separation are known.
Who could possibly argue against that?
No they'll just blame the last Labour Government somehow
Two main obstacles to overcome,firstly the massive subsidy NI receives from Westminster & secondly how the NHS would be replaced after unification, as the republic not only an expensive health care system (€100 A&E charge),but one of the poorest performing in Europe.
Stephen Farry (Alliance Party) wasn't a shock in the slightest as North Down has always been a fairly liberal place, I just didn't see value in 2-1 for him.
The decision should be devolved to Holyrood, if they want another vote then why not. If people are fed up with the SNP they will vote them out.
I hope I'm wrong because the country needs a decent Opposition (and I could do without going through a repeat of the terror I felt at the notion of a Corbyn ministry come 2024,) but given what's happened to Labour these past nine years I don't expect to be proven so.
The Unionist vote in Scotland is hopelessly split, whereas the Nationalist vote is almost completely united. Therefore, we shall get an endless series of SNP Governments and demands for the referendum to be re-run every few years forever, until the SNP get what they want.
Strangford is pretty much middle class too.
Treating people on election day by handing out foodbank vouchers is something that deserves an interview under caution.
Electoral reform. Until it happens we have no democracy, and are reliant solely on the largesse of posh boys.
If we have a recession as I think we will, all of this will quickly disappear and we'll back into austerity again.
A lot can change in five years, Labour need to wake up.
If Labour don't get their act together something else will replace the Party. The Conservatives will run out of road at some point. Hopefully Johnson won't have done too much damage before that happens.
But.. Despite this we still had NHS not safe under tories/privatisation/ charges for services and operations etc by Labour.
I don't think he has ever had a head for money or numbers. He doesn't understand them, because numbers are facts not rhetoric.