Westminster Politics

TwoSheds

More sheds (and tiles) than you, probably
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
12,998
"The problem is the benefits are too generous and being given to people who don't need them" "I don't get any benefits and lots of people round here are struggling and using food banks".

Has it crossed your mind that perhaps the money isn't really being spent on benefits then you absolute walloper?
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,458
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
"The problem is the benefits are too generous and being given to people who don't need them" "I don't get any benefits and lots of people round here are struggling and using food banks".

Has it crossed your mind that perhaps the money isn't really being spent on benefits then you absolute walloper?
Wasn't she the one who said benefit recipients spend it all on booze and fags?
 

SilentWitness

ShoelessWitness
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
30,658
Supports
Everton
This online safety bill in its current form is something that scares me. Governments definitely do not have histories of lying so them having access to tech which can look at your private messages is definitely not something that people should be worried about. :nervous:
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
50,403
Location
Birmingham
I hate these guys so much.
Where was stopping Putin from winning when this country voted to drive itself off a cliff?
 
Last edited:

ha_rooney

Correctly predicted France to win World Cup 2018
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
38,843
Striking workers, Putin & immigrants... that's to blame for all the misery. Definitely not the Tories fault.
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,458
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
I hate these guys so much.
Where was stopping Putin frkm winning when this country vited to drive itself off a cliff?

Where was stopping Putin frkm winning when this country vited to drive itself off a cliff?
I was just reading that. Nurses should accept the 3% pay offer- that'll show Putin.
 

Buster15

Go on Didier
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
13,515
Location
Bristol
Supports
Bristol Rovers

Maticmaker

Full Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
4,720
Anyone over the age of 4 eh? ....more like over 74 in my case! @Pexbo

Putin doesn't care what goes on in the UK, it's just a war of propaganda indulged in from both sides. I don't suppose the Nurses give a 'tinker's curse' for any of it, either from Putin or our Government ministers, they just want a decent wage to reflect what they do.
 

RedSky

Shepherd’s Delight
Scout
Joined
Jul 27, 2006
Messages
74,283
Location
Hereford FC (Soccermanager)
He has a history of saying stupid things and little else.
He says stupid, cnuty comments because those comments have worked to win voters in the past. Boris for example isn't stupid, he played up the bumbling fool act because it made him likable to voters. They carefully plan this out, this is the problem with Tories, they're smart (or employ smart people) and know how to appeal to casual voters (people who don't care much about politics). It's what makes them so dangerous.
 

SilentWitness

ShoelessWitness
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
30,658
Supports
Everton
He says stupid, cnuty comments because those comments have worked to win voters in the past. Boris for example isn't stupid, he played up the bumbling fool act because it made him likable to voters. They carefully plan this out, this is the problem with Tories, they're smart (or employ smart people) and know how to appeal to casual voters (people who don't care much about politics). It's what makes them so dangerous.
I think that's true for some of them, but this guy and Braverman are just idiots, along with being cnuts.
 

calodo2003

Flaming Full Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
41,856
Location
Florida
I hate these guys so much.
Where was stopping Putin from winning when this country voted to drive itself off a cliff?
Granted it's a little early here, but what the feck is this person getting at?
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
22,292
The message being sent out to Putin regarding energy loses a little potency when the Government is paying the inflated energy prices to oil companies.
 

The Corinthian

I will not take Mad Winger's name in vain
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
11,890
Supports
A Free Palestine
I hate these guys so much.
Where was stopping Putin from winning when this country voted to drive itself off a cliff?
Honestly feck these guys. If these were olden times, their heads would be on pikes for being so corrupt and treating their public with contempt. Absolute cnuts. Let’s hope the next GE finishes off the Tory party for good.
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,458
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
He says stupid, cnuty comments because those comments have worked to win voters in the past. Boris for example isn't stupid, he played up the bumbling fool act because it made him likable to voters. They carefully plan this out, this is the problem with Tories, they're smart (or employ smart people) and know how to appeal to casual voters (people who don't care much about politics). It's what makes them so dangerous.
That's all true but they also drop massive clangers, particularly when speaking live or being asked unscreened questions, or totally misjudge public perception, eg the U-turn on school meals after initially rejecting Rashford's campaign.
 

Maticmaker

Full Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
4,720
I’d imagine @Maticmakerbecause Starmer isn’t a real Labour leader’, ‘ Labour can no longer be trusted by workers’ or some such twaddle.
I think Starmer is 'warming up' to the role and may yet prove his critics wrong, if he can restore the traditional Labour values/faith in the red wall seats, he will be well on his way to winning the next GE. Things are looking slightly better in Scotland, which is the real prize. Labour might just get a small minority without Scotland, but if they can win enough seats from both Unionists and Nationalist, in Scotland then they could finish up with a decent size majority at Westminster.

Some of the Labour hierarchy still have doubtful ideals (in my opinion), "they practice to deceive" where (of course) many Tory politicians don't need to practice deceit, it is part of their DNA. However, Labour has its own set of 'carpet baggers' amongst its elite, who will sell out their heritage, if needs be... look where they send their kids to school, that is a good indicator, of not practicing what they preach.
 

Dan_F

Full Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Messages
10,416
I think Starmer is 'warming up' to the role and may yet prove his critics wrong, if he can restore the traditional Labour values/faith in the red wall seats, he will be well on his way to winning the next GE. Things are looking slightly better in Scotland, which is the real prize. Labour might just get a small minority without Scotland, but if they can win enough seats from both Unionists and Nationalist, in Scotland then they could finish up with a decent size majority at Westminster.

Some of the Labour hierarchy still have doubtful ideals (in my opinion), "they practice to deceive" where (of course) many Tory politicians don't need to practice deceit, it is part of their DNA. However, Labour has its own set of 'carpet baggers' amongst its elite, who will sell out their heritage, if needs be... look where they send their kids to school, that is a good indicator, of not practicing what they preach.
Why are you bothered about where a Labour leader sends their children to school? Clearly Starmer (for example) is rich and can afford to do that, if he thinks it’s better than a state school that’s been run into the ground after 12 years of Tory leadership, I wouldn’t argue any different.

I’m far more bothered about what they plan to do to improve the education system going forward.
 

Maticmaker

Full Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
4,720
Why are you bothered about where a Labour leader sends their children to school? Clearly Starmer (for example) is rich and can afford to do that, if he thinks it’s better than a state school that’s been run into the ground after 12 years of Tory leadership, I wouldn’t argue any different.

I’m far more bothered about what they plan to do to improve the education system going forward.
Because it's a perfect example of not practicing what you preach. Labour has been in power, admittedly some time back, but could have made some positive changes to Education, they should have been standing on the shoulders of Giants, who introduced the original Education Act. What makes you think they will make any changes in the future ?
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
120,154
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Because it's a perfect example of not practicing what you preach. Labour has been in power, admittedly some time back, but could have made some positive changes to Education, they should have been standing on the shoulders of Giants, who introduced the original Education Act. What makes you think they will make any changes in the future ?
So you’d rather judge labour from years ago than the Tories for the last 12 that they’ve been in power? Bizarre way to look at it
 

Buster15

Go on Didier
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
13,515
Location
Bristol
Supports
Bristol Rovers
Because it's a perfect example of not practicing what you preach. Labour has been in power, admittedly some time back, but could have made some positive changes to Education, they should have been standing on the shoulders of Giants, who introduced the original Education Act. What makes you think they will make any changes in the future ?
But they did make a number of positive changes to education.
They invested heavily in new and upgraded school buildings.
And they vastly improved attainment standards by improving the national curriculum.
 

Berbasbullet

Too Boring For A Funny Tagline
Joined
Nov 3, 2011
Messages
20,306
But they did make a number of positive changes to education.
They invested heavily in new and upgraded school buildings.
And they vastly improved attainment standards by improving the national curriculum.
Education education education was their mantra.

The lengths people go to to justify voting tory is hilarious. Pick and choose who these standards apply to.
 

jeff_goldblum

Full Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2011
Messages
3,917
But they did make a number of positive changes to education.
They invested heavily in new and upgraded school buildings.
And they vastly improved attainment standards by improving the national curriculum.
I think Labour's approach to education is a good microcosm of what they were generally very good at and what they were generally very bad at.

Investing in education (especially in poorer areas) was a great thing to do, it positively impacted a lot of peoples' lives (including mine) and things have gotten immeasurably worse for pupils and teachers since the Tories got their mits on it after 2010. Unfortunately, the limit of New Labour's concept of a good educational outcome for people in poor areas was "some of them will now be able to somewhat compete with richer kids for good jobs in London or Manchester".

They didn't see education as an opportunity to address regional or economic inequality more broadly, just as a way to give the "best and brightest" from poor areas (in practice, generally those who were already better off than average and had stable home lives) a way to escape the drudgery that awaited their less fortunate or less academically gifted peers. The missed opportunity was that they never made any real efforts to address the drudgery, they saw that as a natural and inevitable (if unfortunate) consequence of not being clever.

Ultimately, unless you invest in job creation in poor areas, increased investment in schooling will have next to no impact on the lives of most people living in those areas. The major beneficaries won't even be the kids who get their A Levels and degrees (the majority of whom will struggle to find a job which uses them anyway), it will be rich areas and the employers and landlords based there who benefit enormously from the constant influx of bright young people competing for the best jobs and the worst accomodation.
 

Dan_F

Full Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Messages
10,416
Because it's a perfect example of not practicing what you preach. Labour has been in power, admittedly some time back, but could have made some positive changes to Education, they should have been standing on the shoulders of Giants, who introduced the original Education Act. What makes you think they will make any changes in the future ?
I was in education myself during Blair’s Labour so I won’t pretend to remember what they did while in power, however researching that now, I can see that there’s plenty of policies aimed at fixing things I would support currently.

EMA - I directly benefitted from this and would have struggled to pay transport to college without it.

Surestart - had one in my area and plenty of under privileged families benefitted from it. Completely gutted of funding by the Tory’s.

Children Act - impacts on education massively and bought in a big switch to more focus on safeguarding and wellbeing.

As always, I don’t agree with everything they did, uni fees for example, however, I don’t really see anything of value that the Tory’s have tried to do in a decade. Ofsted isn’t fit for purpose, British values and Prevent is a joke, wanting to introduce more grammar schools - guess who that will benefit.
 

Maticmaker

Full Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
4,720
But they did make a number of positive changes to education.
They invested heavily in new and upgraded school buildings.
And they vastly improved attainment standards by improving the national curriculum.
I agree, they did do something, but it was equivalent to 'polishing the hood' and 'inflating the tyres', it did nothing about the things that make/should make the Education system an equal playing field. Even ignoring the existence of public schools (with charitable status) only being really available to the rich, or occasionally some extremely talented youngster from a 'sink' estate. The state system was given a 'lick of paint' and a bit of 'academy' type upgrades in achievement levels, by Labour, but no fundamental policies or new laws to demand and ensure every state school has the very best management, staffing and resources wherever it exists in the country.

So you’d rather judge labour from years ago than the Tories for the last 12 that they’ve been in power? Bizarre way to look at it
It's not about judging the Tory Party, their 'leading lights' have no real feeling or time for state education, it's not where most Tory kids go, and they will pay lip service only. Labour should under Blair, and I admit he did make some minor changes (in the overall context), have bridged the chasm between state and private education once and for all in a way that would have changed the education system and the life of millions of ordinary folks for decades to come; and incidentally laid the foundations for economic growth.

This next Labour government needs to rid itself of those who pay lip service to improved State Education systems and buckle down to it, re-organise funding to ensure State Education gets the best. This does not mean closing private schools, it means shifting the balance positively and permanently and this means every Labour MP sending their children to State Schools, to show they mean it.
 

crossy1686

career ending
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Messages
31,725
Location
Manchester/Stockholm
“We’re no longer voting conservative because they’re no longer punitive enough, nor racist enough”

cnuts. All of them.
Agree completely with this statement. Unfortunately this is the problem with many, many working class places in the UK. People angry at their lot in life want to know that somone else is worse off than them and being punished for it so they feel better about their bad life choices.