Sweet Square
Full Member
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
When Sajid Javid, the chancellor, told the Tory conference in September that the government would raise the national living wage to £10.50 an hour over five years, that sounded like a clear commitment. It was in the manifesto (pdf) too as a promise about what would happen under a Conservative government, not something that might happen.
But now an element of doubt seems to be creeping in. As the government briefing document (pdf) on the Queen’s speech reveals, the national living wage increase will only take place “provided economic conditions allow”. This implies that, in the event of a recession, the rise won’t go ahead. The document says:
The chancellor has pledged that the national living wage will increase, reaching two-thirds of median earnings within five years (projected to be around £10.50 an hour in 2024), provided economic conditions allow.
it makes sense. If wages stagnate, do not rise in line with inflation or even fall between now and then, the minimum wage would be (relatively) too high. I expect most legislative to have detail like this.Surprise!
Government suggests planned national living wage increase could be shelved if economy falters
While true it's worth remembering that a)Tories promised rise in minimum wage b) stagnating wages are the consequences of successive tory governments c)inflation is a direct consequence of current tory policy.it makes sense. If wages stagnate, do not rise in line with inflation or even fall between now and then, the minimum wage would be (relatively) too high. I expect most legislative to have detail like this.
its just contingency though. If the economic conditions are met, they they deliver that wage rate, can’t see the problem. Nothing to concern ourselves with to be frank.While true it's worth remembering that a)Tories promised rise in minimum wage b) stagnating wages are the consequences of successive tory governments c)inflation is a direct consequence of current tory policy.
So while it makes sense it also makes sense to blame those responsible for it. Especially when they promised something else less than a 10 days ago.
Are you under the impression that if they don't put that statement in they'll be forced to implement it? What exactly is the contingency? Why is said statement not applicable to the other policies in the document.its just contingency though. If the economic conditions are met, they they deliver that wage rate, can’t see the problem. Nothing to concern ourselves with to be frank.
People may well have voted on that as the guaranteed minimum pay rise it was presented. Not even a week in and it's already exposed as a Tory lie or half-truth at best.its just contingency though. If the economic conditions are met, they they deliver that wage rate, can’t see the problem. Nothing to concern ourselves with to be frank.
unless there is a big issue in the economy then there’s not an issue. There will be a recession, and if we had a crack like 2008, you would expect that to change the landscape, and affect such policies wouldn't you?People may well have voted on that as the guaranteed minimum pay rise it was presented. Not even a week in and it's already exposed as a Tory lie or half-truth at best.
Nothing to concern ourselves with though and roll on those 40 new hospitals, the 50,000 nurses and 20,000 police, along with innumerable flying pigs across the land.
Followed by thisTweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Never mind Scotland and NI, at this rate I'd build a moat around London and declare independence.It's time to break up this country
One can argue it's pragmatic, much as the Tories may argue that not disclosing that caveat was pragmatic I guess. They provide zero detail on what conditions would preclude the wage rise not being implemented too.unless there is a big issue in the economy then there’s not an issue. There will be a recession, and if we had a crack like 2008, you would expect that to change the landscape, and affect such policies wouldn't you?
Boundary changes, voter id, new laws around union donations and a cut in short money were what Osborne planned to neuter Labour with, but for various reasons most never made it over the line. Wouldn’t surprise me to see all four happen now the Tories have a working (Lib Dem free) majority for the first time.Followed by this
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...speech-voter-id-polling-station-a9253386.html
So predictable and depressing.
Trouble with our FPTP system is it penalises parties who are a shower of shite.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I'm probably being massively naive here, but can't the Electoral Commission or anyone block a government shamelessly reconstituting the boundaries into its favour? What's to stop any government with a majority doing that, except not being a cnut?Probably be a new boundary review that's even worse before the next election.
The Boundary Changes are not done by the government, they’re done by a boundary commission which is independent of government.I'm probably being massively naive here, but can't the Electoral Commission or anyone block a government shamelessly reconstituting the boundaries into its favour? What's to stop any government with a majority doing that, except not being a cnut?
Cheers. Still ropey, given a government can presumably not implement them if they're helping the opposition.The Boundary Changes are not done by the government, they’re done by a boundary commission which is independent of government.
https://boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/2018-review/
Corbyn's legacy.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The terms of the review are also set by the government, which is why Cameron mandated aspects (600 seats, equalused constituency sizes) that benefitted the Tory party.Cheers. Still ropey, given a government can presumably not implement them if they're helping the opposition.
I wonder if they're as independent as the BBC?The Boundary Changes are not done by the government, they’re done by a boundary commission which is independent of government.
https://boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/2018-review/
They need to be chucked straight back out on their ear.Britain First leader officially joins Conservative Party: 'Boris Johnson is like us'
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ohnson-muslim-women-letterboxes-a9254061.html
Corbyn's legacy.
Who monumentally botched the election and delivered those constituencies into Tory hands? What exactly do you thin will be Corbyn's legacy? One of the burdens of leadership is to accept responsibility for failure. It's a shame that Corbyn and his followers seem to be devoid of humility and honesty.
They're actually pretty good historically, the issue is that the two main parties can still influence the outcome by how they respond at the consultation stage. When the Boundary Commission goes out to consultation, every affected CLP responds. If each constituency ends up putting in competing responses with their Labour neighbours its counter productive. Quite simply if one CLP says the border should be there, but their CLP neighbours disagree, then as far as the consultation is concerned the submissions kind of cancel each other out.I wonder if they're as independent as the BBC?
Election season is over, which means we can stop caring about racism.They need to be chucked straight back out on their ear.
Christ! Being a liberal is easy isn't it.Who monumentally botched the election and delivered those constituencies into Tory hands? What exactly do you thin will be Corbyn's legacy? One of the burdens of leadership is to accept responsibility for failure. It's a shame that Corbyn and his followers seem to be devoid of humility and honesty.