• ****Join the YF Fantasy EFL League: HERE. ****

National News Sir Keir Starmer

tonyw said:
Is it the rational and moral way forward to make decisions based on a logical appraisal of the evidence, and analysis of the ramifications rather than blundering on with whatever you initially said when you were on your soapbox in opposition? Of course.

Is it politically sensible? Hell, no. And if you're in doubt at all, go ask Nick Clegg how that went for him.

Kier's only hope (maybe it's his strategy) is that by doing all the really unpopular stuff (that they failed to mention in their manifesto) in the first year, if the country does show signs of turning around in the next five years, the bulk of the media and the people may have forgotten all about it by the time the next general election comes round.
Click to expand...
1727446715142.png
Shhh - don't tell anyone ;)
 
QR said:
So, let me get this straight, now Labour is in government it has the expertise of the OBR to call on, it does so and that's a bad thing but when Liz Truss chooses to exclude the OBR and crashes the economy that's a good thing. That's an odd line of attack to be honest with you.
Click to expand...

Why do we need politicians if we are just going to what the OBR say to do? They are the people in charge really.
 
holdsteady said:
Why do we need politicians if we are just going to what the OBR say to do? They are the people in charge really.
Click to expand...
The OBR don't 'tell' any government what to do they advise on possible outcomes. Where they have an advantage over outside advisors when it comes to the public finances is that they have access to the governments books.
 
holdsteady said:
Why do we need politicians if we are just going to what the OBR say to do? They are the people in charge really.
Click to expand...
Well we don't need politicians do we?

However we've decided that democracy is our chosen version of civilisation and therefore, we elect leaders to do just that. And part of the game is them persuading us (and us believing) that their way is the best way to lead us. Whether they're in it for the right reasons (ie not themselves and their narrow definition of how things should be) is another matter enitrely.

More than happy to get rid of all the leaders and go where the science/evidence etc leads us, but we still need someone somewhere to make the decisions based on that evidence - and we may as well just plug into the matrix now and be done with it, if we're going to take all human elements out of that decision process 🤷‍♂️ 😁
 
Sheik djibouti said:
So, you like it, or you don't like it - which is it?

Would you rather they ploughed on regardless because they think they know best (aka the Tory way of doing it) or look at the evidence, take the advice from experts and come to the best decision for the country?

Isn't that the way a government should govern , y'know . . . in the interests of the country?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. If it is sensible, I don't mind a u-tun for the good of the country.

So will they now tame down the WFA reduction (certainly for this year) on the basis of advice and evidence from experts that many who would be entitled to claim will still miss out through the complexities of applying? or on the basis that they have been advised the NHS will be put under further winter pressures as a result.

Get a more robust system in place for next year rather than rush a policy through this year, maybe?

It is no good bigging up a party who do listen to experts, when in fact they still just pick and choose.

Can't shy away from the fact that it is still a bit embarrassing when all you have done for the past 12 months is berate tory policy on non-doms only to find that it is in the best interest of the country to go with it... for now.
 
bashamwonderland said:
I remember you getting in a tizz about Liz Truss U-turning a few years ago!!!

Here it is...



You've done a total 180, and the Tory posters are doing exactly the same with their current fuss over u-turns.

Seriously, don't you guys know you're all just making the reverse arguments to two years ago? Can you all not just look at the bigger picture!?

I love this thread at the moment.
Click to expand...
So this is now the equivalent of Liz Truss changing political parties for her own political expedience?

Or Liz Truss changing from a Remainer to a hard Brexit leaver - again for her own political expedience?

And changing government policy for the good of the economy and wider country, based on expert advice. A "u-turn" which seems, on balance, to be very well received by most - applauded even - is equivalent to the Trusterfuck?

And you're telling others to look at the bigger picture?
👏 👏 👏 :ROFLMAO:
 
Sheik djibouti said:
So this is now the equivalent of Liz Truss changing political parties for her own political expedience?

Or Liz Truss changing from a Remainer to a hard Brexit leaver - again for her own political expedience?

And changing government policy for the good of the economy and wider country, based on expert advice. A "u-turn" which seems, on balance, to be very well received by most - applauded even - is equivalent to the Trusterfuck?

And you're telling others to look at the bigger picture?
👏 👏 👏 :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
Next thing we know you'll be defending Keir for hosting a lockdown party, or relying too heavily on simple slogans!

Brexit means Brexit
Get Brexit Done
Change
Change Begins
"Change means change"
"Get change done"
 
Village-Yellow said:
Absolutely. If it is sensible, I don't mind a u-tun for the good of the country.

So will they now tame down the WFA reduction (certainly for this year) on the basis of advice and evidence from experts that many who would be entitled to claim will still miss out through the complexities of applying? or on the basis that they have been advised the NHS will be put under further winter pressures as a result.

Get a more robust system in place for next year rather than rush a policy through this year, maybe?

It is no good bigging up a party who do listen to experts, when in fact they still just pick and choose.

Can't shy away from the fact that it is still a bit embarrassing when all you have done for the past 12 months is berate tory policy on non-doms only to find that it is in the best interest of the country to go with it... for now.
Click to expand...
I think there are two or maybe three things going on here.

Because they wanted to change the scattered gun WFA scheme in-year they had to do it by a certain date as it would take money away from some in-year. At the same time they have employed more staff to increase the take up of pension credits. Any changes they may make to the financial advantage of folks in this financial year they can do in the budget. If they do have something up their sleeve I bet the Labour politicians 'in the know' are biting their collective lips very hard as those out of that loop are, like many, not very happy!
 
Last edited:
bashamwonderland said:
Not that I'm aware of - you best make sure your arguments are lined up though, just in case it comes out.

Go back to the Boris Johnson threads and look up what the Tories were saying in his defence at the time.
Click to expand...
There is a major difference between the two. Johnson broke both the Law and parliamentary rules (for which Starmer called him out as all opposition leaders with their salt would do). Stamer has broken neither laws of parliamentary rules and the only train you know anything about this is because he had declared it. You're not stupid, you know that, so you're simply sh1t stirring. Give it a rest for all our sakes.
 
QR said:
I think there are two or maybe three things going on here.

Because they wanted to change the scattered gun WFA scheme in-year they had to do it by a certain date as it would take money away from some in-year. At the same time they have employed more staff to increase the take up of pension credits. Any changes they may make to the financial advantage of folks in this financial year they can do in the budget. If they do have something up their sleeve I bet the Labour politicians 'in the know' are biting their collective lips very hard as those out of that loop are, like many, not very happy!
Click to expand...

I've said previously that the WFA review is a good thing. I am not sure many can argue against the proposal so long as it protect the right pensioners.

I am still expecting some sort of amendment come the October statement.

Maybe they do indeed have something up their sleeve.
 
Northstandboy said:
What’s all this stuff on X about him and some sordid affair?!
Click to expand...

Rumours that’s why he had the flat, nothing to do with his kid studying for GCSEs, him and his missus are not really together etc. Sordid probably makes it sound more interesting than it will turn out to be, it will be with the Labour version of Edwina Currie.
 
holdsteady said:
Rumours that’s why he had the flat, nothing to do with his kid studying for GCSEs, him and his missus are not really together etc. Sordid probably makes it sound more interesting than it will turn out to be, it will be with the Labour version of Edwina Currie.
Click to expand...
Is he really as dull as John Major
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
National News Sir Mo Farah
Replies
7
Views
1K
OUFCGav
OUFCGav
Oxymoron
Sport RIP Sir Sterling Moss
Replies
7
Views
2K
Sarge
Sarge
Northstandboy
Local News Sir Roger Bannister RIP
Replies
8
Views
3K
iambungle
iambungle
Back
Top Bottom