National News Rishi Sunak

There’s no way the Conservatives will go for a GE in July.
October 10 is my expected date. Any later than that and they will be cornered into an election they will definitely lose.
I think they will lose but not a massive majority.
The electorate haven’t warmed to Starmer at all
 
Peterdev said:
There’s no way the Conservatives will go for a GE in July.
October 10 is my expected date. Any later than that and they will be cornered into an election they will definitely lose.
I think they will lose but not a massive majority.
The electorate haven’t warmed to Starmer at all
Click to expand...
Based on what are you saying 'the electorate haven't warmed to Starmer'? Are you repeating what you've picked up via the media?

I've found people either don't like him because he's Labour (and they are Tory or Lib) or they say he lacks charisma. I will then challenge the latter group and say 'you mean he's a serious politician?' and they say yes.
 
Peterdev said:
There’s no way the Conservatives will go for a GE in July.
October 10 is my expected date. Any later than that and they will be cornered into an election they will definitely lose.
I think they will lose but not a massive majority.
The electorate haven’t warmed to Starmer at all
Click to expand...

Don`t think you are far wrong there.

A lot of long term Labour voters I know talk about SKS as a "tory-Lite" and many are thinking about tactical voting where they live which pushes things towards a hung parliament.

Many of them are also frustrated by the lack of substance, ideas and hard hits other than "we aren`t them".

Economy starts picking up, people get a few more £££`s in their pocket and a lot of things that were big will get smaller.

5 months is a lifetime in politics.
 
Eric Blair said:
s**t loads especially now we have an aging population but we have to start paying more for public services and we have to start somewhere
Click to expand...
I'd say we already pay enough to at least have competent services. Very few public services work well, and I'd argue that's more to do with management than a lack of money.
 
MustardYellow said:
I'd say we already pay enough to at least have competent services. Very few public services work well, and I'd argue that's more to do with management than a lack of money.
Click to expand...
Easy target. Have you got any examples that would make a significant difference? I would counter you that one of the biggest wastes on money is down to structure. Why do we still have two tier local government (i.e. County and City/District councils)? It is a completely anachronistic set up from a time when almost ever transaction had to be face to face. It requires massive duplication and creates operational barriers (i.e in-built inefficiencies) when there need not be any. Governments won't bite the bullet and force the change (rather than allow councils to merge if they ask to, few do, Oxfordshire have been talking about it for the past 30 years!) because there will always be a one off hit of costs (due to redundancies etc) and they are too weak to stand their ground and argue the case that long term savings (due to e.g. fewer managers, the rationalisation of buildings etc) will outweigh the one off costs.
 
Last edited:
QR said:
Easy target. Have you got any examples that would make a significant difference? I would counter you that one of the biggest wastes on money is down to structure. Why do we still have two tier local government (i.e. County and City/District councils)? It is a completely anachronistic set up from a time when almost ever transaction had to be face to face. It requires massive duplication and creates operational barriers (i.e in-built inefficiencies) when there need not be any. Governments won't bite the bullet and force the change (rather than allow councils to merge if they ask to, few do, Oxfordshire have been talking about it for the past 30 years!) because there will always be a one off hit of costs (due to redundancies etc) and they are too weak to stand their ground and argue the case that long term savings (due to e.g. less managers, the rationalisation of buildings etc) will outweigh the one off costs.
Click to expand...

Ooof, we agree! (y)

The recently elected "East Midlands Regional Mayor" doesn`t include large parts of the East Midlands, because County & City levels of bureaucracy wish to preserve the status quo and their pensions.

You could also apply the same ethos to the NHS.............
 
QR said:
Easy target. Have you got any examples that would make a significant difference? I would counter you that one of the biggest wastes on money is down to structure. Why do we still have two tier local government (i.e. County and City/District councils)? It is a completely anachronistic set up from a time when almost ever transaction had to be face to face. It requires massive duplication and creates operational barriers (i.e in-built inefficiencies) when there need not be any. Governments won't bite the bullet and force the change (rather than allow councils to merge if they ask to, few do, Oxfordshire have been talking about it for the past 30 years!) because there will always be a one off hit of costs (due to redundancies etc) and they are too weak to stand their ground and argue the case that long term savings (due to e.g. less managers, the rationalisation of buildings etc) will outweigh the one off costs.
Click to expand...
One example is the National Audit Office released a report earlier this year saying the NHS spent over £3billion outside the NHS supply chain. What that translated to is trusts spending up to £490 for each hip replacement stem part. The price of the same part within the supply chain was £258. That's just one example.

Structure certainly plays a part, but there seems to be a culture in our public services where wastage and financial irresponsibility is acceptable.
 
MustardYellow said:
One example is the National Audit Office released a report earlier this year saying the NHS spent over £3billion outside the NHS supply chain. What that translated to is trusts spending up to £490 for each hip replacement stem part. The price of the same part within the supply chain was £258. That's just one example.

Structure certainly plays a part, but there seems to be a culture in our public services where wastage and financial irresponsibility is acceptable.
Click to expand...

That is because the brand not listed on NHS SC is the surgeon/consultants preference.

The same consultant may (or may not) receive benefits in kind for using their products.

The idea of NHS Supplychain is centralising and standardising all the "stuff", but each Trust has the ability to buy elsewhere which leads to excess spend, lack of standardisation and more cost...............................
 
Essexyellows said:
That is because the brand not listed on NHS SC is the surgeon/consultants preference.

The same consultant may (or may not) receive benefits in kind for using their products.

The idea of NHS Supplychain is centralising and standardising all the "stuff", but each Trust has the ability to buy elsewhere which leads to excess spend, lack of standardisation and more cost...............................
Click to expand...

If a company is being used outside of the NHS sc then there are much wider implications too. For example fake goods, goods built to a poor standard, illegally sourced products, even down to things like spare parts purchased invalidating warranties etc. it even gets to a point that foreign states or agents wanting to cause mischief within the UK could see this as an open door to do so.
The risk involved in not having a validated supply chain is massive.
 
Essexyellows said:
Ooof, we agree! (y)

The recently elected "East Midlands Regional Mayor" doesn`t include large parts of the East Midlands, because County & City levels of bureaucracy wish to preserve the status quo and their pensions.

You could also apply the same ethos to the NHS.............
Click to expand...

I agree with you and QR on rationalisation of Councils although there is always the issue of getting too big, so that residents don't feel represented. I think the rationalisation of the Councils in Cumbria came to a decent compromise with the circumstances of the area as an example.

Although you did make me laugh with the pensions comment, they aren't that good and in my experience, as well as from reading trade magazines within the sector, staff concerns like this are never a factor. Otherwise outsourcing would have never happened.
 
QR said:
Based on what are you saying 'the electorate haven't warmed to Starmer'? Are you repeating what you've picked up via the media?

I've found people either don't like him because he's Labour (and they are Tory or Lib) or they say he lacks charisma. I will then challenge the latter group and say 'you mean he's a serious politician?' and they say yes.
Click to expand...
When I speak to various people I know and some I don’t know, they certainly are not enthralled by Sir Keir Starmer as an incoming PM. The reason Labour is leading in the polls is I think more due to the fact that Rishi Sunak despite some qualities is another PM foisted on us like Liz Truss, not voted for by the electorate. Very reminiscent of John Major but not likely to end well. Also an ex chancellor who is associated with economic failings of the Tories
 
Peterdev said:
When I speak to various people I know and some I don’t know, they certainly are not enthralled by Sir Keir Starmer as an incoming PM. The reason Labour is leading in the polls is I think more due to the fact that Rishi Sunak despite some qualities is another PM foisted on us like Liz Truss, not voted for by the electorate. Very reminiscent of John Major but not likely to end well. Also an ex chancellor who is associated with economic failings of the Tories
Click to expand...

Tbh, it would be nice to have a PM elected who isn't a 'character' and gives the air of being competent. Also, in general the shadow cabinet gives that impression as well.

Whether he is or his shadow cabinet are competent remains to be seen of course.
 
Peterdev said:
When I speak to various people I know and some I don’t know, they certainly are not enthralled by Sir Keir Starmer as an incoming PM. The reason Labour is leading in the polls is I think more due to the fact that Rishi Sunak despite some qualities is another PM foisted on us like Liz Truss, not voted for by the electorate. Very reminiscent of John Major but not likely to end well. Also an ex chancellor who is associated with economic failings of the Tories
Click to expand...
The Tories have now had 5 PMs so in a row who have all royally ballsed it up in one way or another. There is absolutely no chance they will get the opportunity to make it 6 in a row (unless of course they decide on another leader coronation between now and their final and inevitable defeat at the rapidly approaching GE.

That of course won't stop the diehard Tories continuing to saddle up their unicorns and take them for a canter😂
 
All these rainbow lanyards coming over here taking our jobs and our houses and corrupting our young people.

IT'S-A-DISGRACE
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom