Fears Rishi Sunak will renege on promise to clarify definition of biological sex

Why the fuck would anyone vote for them?

Fewer hospital beds, doctors and nurses per head of the population.
A housing crisis.
Austerity leading to increased dependence on food banks and strikes and lack of facilities.
Piss poor rates of sexual assault/rape/CSA convictions.
Piss poor rates of criminal investigations and convictions.
Brexit in all its disgraces.
The erosion of women's rights due to their trans shitshow.

The extra £100ss being paid monthly for mortgages due to Trussterfuck Economics.
The loss of our reputation and credit rating on the international stage because of our instability. 5PMs and a shitload of bad decisions in the past 7 years.🤦‍♀️
Increased NHS waiting lists.
Increased strikes.
Bonkers or non-existent approach to migration.
Really high taxes.
Trans shitshow.
Increased waste in waterways.
Worse transport.
Fucked up criminal justice system.
Destruction of trust in our institutions.
Collapse of devolved govt in NI.

That's some of the ways the Tories have been shit. I'm sure there are more.

So, ignoring economic growth in line with the G7 (apart from the USA 'cos they're so leftist), increasing health spending, social spending and education spending at a greater rate than GPR, how shit have they been!

We will never know because it didn't happen. The Tories have been in power for 13 years. Our country: NHS, Economy, Education, Women's rights are where they are now because of decisions the Tories made. Their incompetence, corruption and lies got us to where we are today.

Why the fuck would anyone, feminist or not, vote for them?

Whereas if Labour had been in power......

The Tories have literally crashed our economy with unfunded spending commitments, landed families with a Tory mortgage penalty for years to come, let growth plummet and taxes rise to a 70 year high.

Yep. They really have fucked the entire country.

The UK Labour Government did indeed spend more on the NHS after coming to power in 1997, and it showed.

I agree but PFI casts a long shadow...

Labour havd said they will increase spending on the NHS but not by hos much nor where the money will come from.

Reeves having kittens by the sound of it!

www.politico.eu/newsletter/london-playbook/on-the-plane-to-dc-nao-row-procurement-pains/

"TREASURY TEAM DING-DONG: After the i’s Paul Waugh reported that Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves has ordered the shadow Cabinet not to make unfunded spending commitments, a Treasury official told Playbook: “Every time a Labour shadow minister opens their mouth on telly the mask slips and they commit to billions of pounds of random unfunded spending commitments. They can’t help themselves. Good luck to Reeves reining this lot in, she’ll need it.” A Labour spokesperson hit back with: “The Tories have literally crashed our economy with unfunded spending commitments, landed families with a Tory mortgage penalty for years to come, let growth plummet and taxes rise to a 70 year high.”"

Labour havd said they will increase spending on the NHS but not by hos much nor where the money will come from.

You’re right. They haven’t shown this at all.

Wales under Labour for decades doesn’t inspire me

Not only have the Tories eroded Women's rights. They have also wrecked the NHS and whole UK economy. England and the devolved regions are all suffering due to their fiscal incompetence and recklessness.

They've been busy bastards on the wrecking front and I know that it will take time for our country to recover once they're out.

41 trusts in England have been in special measures, out of 219. That's 18.72%.

2 health boards in Wales have been in special measures, out if 10 boards and trusts. That's 20%.

It's a both parties problem.

@Alexandra2001 I don't admire the Tories. I just doubt whether Labour will do much better.

The details of Wales' funding sources are here https://research.senedd.wales/financial-scrutiny/fiscal-devolution-in-wales/

The demographics of Wales are recognised in the fiscal framework agreed by thf Welsh Government with Westminster. From the Senedd document; "The fiscal framework set out a modified Barnett formula for Wales. This includes a needs-based factor currently temporarily set at 105%. When funding relative to England has converged to an agreed level this factor will be increased to 115%."

Taxation powers are also devolved. The Welsh Government has the power to vary income tax rates in Wales but has not yet done so.

The UK Labour Government did indeed spend more on the NHS after coming to power in 1997, and it showed. However, the UK economy at that time was relatively prosperous. Since 2008 it has struggled.

Labour havd said they will increase spending on the NHS but not by hos much nor where the money will come from.

Plagued by chaotic mismanagement, it has been through seven chief executives in 13 years, and four since 2019. At one point it was paying a 'cost-saving' consultant nearly £2,000 a day for nine months, in a deal that allowed him to work from his villa in Marbella"

Terrible isn't it?

Of the 41 trusts that have been in special measures, between 2013 and 2018, only six are now rated as 'good' overall by CQC. The rest are either rated ‘requires improvement’ or are still in special measures following an 'inadequate' CQC rating at their most recent inspection. Although many trusts have successfully exited special measures and are improving, six trusts have re-entered the regime having previously met the exit criteria

Almost all of the 41 trusts were English, so bad was the situation in England, the Govt change the name from Special Measures to Recovery Support Program... sounds better but the results are the same.. more failure and mismanagement, its simply NOT a welsh problem which Tory supporters would have you believe, its a Tory problem.

Can you link to the evidence that Wales is a separate country, with its own currency, central bank, border controls et etc its not is it?

Its a poor region of the UK, terrible transport links and an increasing older population, not helped by English retirees... which of course they cannot control, they have a Westminster controlled settlement, which they have to live within.

I look at how Labour, UK wide, managed the NHS, during 1997 and 2010, how people did not wait days in AE nor treated in Ambulances in car parks, we also didn't raid developing countries health systems for staff either, being in the EU, we attracted EU nurses & paid the nurse bursary and mtce grant to AHPs etc,

Now its nurses from Ghana, Nepal, Zimbabwe..., leaving them with shortages....

Tories always promise one thing and deliver another or in the case of the thread.. nothing at all :(

Aside, for a supposed non Tory, you certainly seem to rather admire them!

Wales seems to be often overlooked when it comes to how it's run. Certainly gets nothing like the coverage in England, as that of Scotland. Ignore the eye-catching headline, the facts are the facts. And they make for miserable reading:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12109405/The-report-shows-Labour-trusted-run-NHS.html

"If you happen to be one of the 700,000 people who live in North Wales, then your health and happiness lies in the hands of the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board.

Named after a local contemporary of Florence Nightingale, it runs 20 hospitals and coordinates the work of 96 GP practices and 147 pharmacies across six counties, spending £1.2 billion a year.
This hefty sum — the equivalent of £400 for every man, woman or child in Wales — makes it the largest single public-sector organisation in the entire country. Sadly, against stiff opposition, it can almost certainly be described as the most incompetent, too.
For six of the past eight years, including this one, Betsi Cadwaladr has been in 'special measures', an emergency status that supposedly allows the Labour-run Welsh government, which has devolved responsibility for healthcare, to sort out failing NHS bodies.
Plagued by chaotic mismanagement, it has been through seven chief executives in 13 years, and four since 2019. At one point it was paying a 'cost-saving' consultant nearly £2,000 a day for nine months, in a deal that allowed him to work from his villa in Marbella."

Those concerned about health services should take a look at the situation in Wales

Health is a devolved matter. In Wales, the Welsh Government is responsible for policy, organisation and funding. For 22 years, the party of government has been Labour.

On waiting lists, this from the BBC last October:

"60% of waits in England are less than 18 weeks compared to 45% in Wales.
The biggest difference is in those longest waits.

In England, about one in 20 patients on the list have been waiting more than a year, in Wales it is nearly one in four.
We can see in Wales, 7.9% of waits are more than two years - in England, it's just 0.04%."

With regard to mental health, there was an item yesterday about diagnoses of bipolar. Currently the wait in Wales to be diagnosed is two years longer than in England.

So if, or more probably when, Labour win the next UK general election, don't get your hopes up too high.

Why would any feminist vote for a party that calls them rights hoarding dinosaurs or tells them women can have penises

Calls them bigoted and shrill and their views aren’t worth talking about

Who knows. Answers on a postcard..

Aw thanks Eats, you can send me my halo in the post.

I am acutely aware of the damage done to women and our rights by 13 years of Tory government, right up to the trans shitshow they have inflicted on us. The trans shitshow that they continue to inflict on us. And the lies they tell about it.

The Tories are damaging women every day the are in power. I am a feminist, why the fuck would I vote for them? Why would any feminist?

Aren't you good! Aren't you righteous!

Oh, and aren't you aware of the fact that when Labour and the Lib-Den coalition make self-ID law there will be no such thing as a woman to damage?

Westminster Hall is what happens as a matter of procedure but also, it is the gesture that politicians make when they have very little intention of doing anything. It is a talking shop. A debate in Parliament with legislators matters far more in terms of making change.

Whether it be by secondary legislation or primary, you don't need a debate beforehand.

But if you want to make changes to the Equality Act, I don't think there's a government that won't do this with a consultation, because that would be expected as a matter of public law.

You are very certain that Scotland does not matter. I think it does. While it's obviously based on the application of the Scotland Act, the legitimate interpretation of the Equality Act must also be part of the submissions by both sides. I would be surprised therefore that the Government would do anything in this area, captured or not, before it had that result in its favour.

Procedures are for manipulating - this is politics. It's rarely as simple as saying, change the law. You have to convince all the top people it's worth their time.

I also thought part of why this got the TRAs' backs up so much was because it would be an SI and therefore quick. Quick in government terms anyway, as would not be primary legislation/dragged out. But it's not exactly clear so who knows.

I know! But you have to draft it, check it, get it listed, redraft it, send it to the two committees and then take it through Parliament. And that's only if, and only if a Minister has said "yes".

You can do them very quickly if it's wanted. Strangely, this does not seem to be happening- oh wait, it's the sound of the Civil Service doing nothing.

Why?

Do you have an idea of timing on the Scottish legislation?

Will it be decided pre GE do you think

Interesting posts and from ResisterRex too

A work of months? Says here they do 3500 a year, with 1000 needing to be considered in Parliament:

www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/secondary-legislation/

And here it says most simply come into force, with a small number falling outside that:

commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06509/

"In the region of 3,500 SIs are made each year. Many SIs are not subject to any parliamentary procedure, and simply become law on the date stated. Whether they are subject to parliamentary procedure, and if so which one, is determined by the parent Act.
The majority of SIs subject to parliamentary control automatically come into force but Parliament has the power to annul them within a particular period after they are laid (the negative resolution procedure). A smaller number of SIs require the approval of Parliament before they can be made and brought into force (the affirmative resolution procedure)."

There's a paper here, with an appendix on annulment of SIs:

researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06509/SN06509.pdf

I don't know! If it was right, it would be work of months. But assuming that the Government wants to drive down the risk of legal challenge, then they can decide to do otherwise. You might want the fastest route, they might not!