To people who voted Reform…

[InWithPeaceOutWithStress]

…and ended up with a Labour MP (due to splitting the conservative vote), how do you feel?

The fact that some die hard tory voters bored for someone more right wing and reactionary is hardly likely to bother Labour. I think Nigel F will find he has less of a platform inside parliament than out. He will also be a very tiny voice of a minor party. He will get bored of it pretty soon.

Yes but that imaginary pot of money doesn’t exist. You can’t pay for your expensive reform policies from that. The question is how will you fund those reform policies you mentioned without tax? You want low tax small state. But you also want those expensive policies you mentioned. How?

I’m not ignoring anything. Are you aware of how much richer the richest in society became under the coalition in the first 4 years from 2010?

The conservatives haven’t spent people’s taxes on public services that’s the problem.

InWithPeaceOutWithStress

conservatism is about low tax, higher productivity and growth- productivity and grow generates revenue, which funds public services.

we already pay an massive amount tax burden-it’s clear that it’s because we are spending more than we are creating in terms of actual value.

another way is generating debt- which we are good at, and no doubt labour will fund net zero by creating more debt. So you don’t need a “money pot”, because we can print money- causing inflation.

debt can be good, if the money is invested in ways which make more growth. But net zero will mean less growth.

Is that because you’re on benefits Jourl? I’m retired - I’ve paid enough tax thank you very much.
The state pension is also a benefit, so pot and kettle.

debt can be good, if the money is invested in ways which make more growth. But net zero will mean less growth.

it seems to me there's a massive growth opportunity for developing and selling green energy. It's the future.

@cansu

I think Nigel F will find he has less of a platform inside parliament than out. He will also be a very tiny voice of a minor party. He will get bored of it pretty soon.

Oh I dunno. Just takes a couple of truth bombs at PMQs and he'd be loving the theatre. He's the most influential politician of the 21st century.

I am open minded.

I live in a rural constituency in the SW and this is the first time Labour have ever won this seat. We have a very good long standing Labour local councillor, who is well respected, and our new MP is a young woman who lives locally. Labour have never given a shit about the countryside, so that's a concern, but it might be an advantage to have an MP from the governing party. Time will tell.

Our last MP was Tory and pretty useless, she lost 30% of her vote and more than half of that went to Reform. I think people don't want Labour but they wanted to show that they support many of the policies that Reform stand for, policies which used to be Conservative but the Conservatives have ignored.

I don't know why you keep deflecting to net zero. I am asking you about the Reform policies that you want, and how you will fund them without taxes. You're saying that Labour can't afford to spend money on net zero. Fine. But then how could Reform afford the expensive policies that you are in favour of, alongside cutting taxes?

I admire your tenacity but I don’t feel like a response is coming. Reform’s manifesto was judged to be about 50 billion out by the IFS.

Ridiculous gimmicky policies.

Sweeping generalisation there.

They do make an attempt to cost it out

Net zero is a massive save…already we pay 20% (or near to that) when we fill our tank of petrol. But the cost of net zero is astronomical and honestly, our impact on climate change is too negligible to bankrupt the country.

I do hear you, it has to be costed, my feeling is these are business people, they know how to balance the books

@TonTonMacoute
Labour have never given a shit about the countryside
Ain't that the truth. They have no clue about it, don't engage with it, ignore the people who live in it.
As someone on the centre-left who has a fair bit to do with farmers etc, it pisses me off.

I can only think that most people who voted Reform either didn't read or didn't understand the implications of their 'contract', which was basically setting out a 'Liz Truss budget on steroids', involving 90 billion quid's worth of largely unfunded tax cuts.

This is what the IFS says about their manifesto/contract: "Reform UK proposes tax cuts that it estimates would cost nearly £90 billion per year, and spending increases of £50 billion per year. It claims that it would pay for these through £150 billion per year of reductions in other spending, covering public services, debt interest and working-age benefits."

Really hope that as MP's Farage and Tice get completely bombarded by the day to day bollockry of their constituents constantly asking for help with planning permission and noise abatement issues. They don't believe in public service so they'll be crap MP's.

"Net zero is a massive save…already we pay 20% (or near to that) when we fill our tank of petrol. But the cost of net zero is astronomical and honestly, our impact on climate change is too negligible to bankrupt the country.

I do hear you, it has to be costed, my feeling is these are business people, they know how to balance the books"

I like how you use the same reasoning that Trump supporters use when talking about his climate change denialism, enormous tax cuts etc - 'he's a businessman, he'll know how to balance the books'.

Tice and Farage et al are a bunch of neo-liberal grifters. Like Trump.

Voted Reform in safe London Labour seat. Got Labour. Im giving them a second chance. Let's see what will happen.

The Net Zero lunacy is absolutely key to the economic trajectory of this country. The politicians of the principal political parties (apart from Reform) are either positioning themselves through woeful ignorance, or a shocking level of duplicity.
I have been concerned for a long time that there is a complete disconnect between the hubris of the ostensible net zero target and its realistic achievability. Its pursuit at the proposed rapid pace will be extremely inflationary at best and its ambitions cannot possibly be realised within the proposed timescales - due to absolutely inescapable upstream supply-side constraints (see linked video for a measured, expert summary).
Reform is quite right that we should be concentrating on creating a socio-economic context that increases resilience to an ever-changing climate. Instead we are going to impoverish ourselves in the rapid and silly pursuit of net zero and (regardless of your position on the degree to which there is anthropogenic forcing of the climate) make ourselves far more vulnerable to all future shocks to our economy (whether they are climatic, geo-political or natural...or an entangled combination!).
My only criticism is that Reform (understandably for a young, small party) does not have the intellectual gravitas necessary to adequately represent the crucial counter-narrative (which has been sadly lacking within both mainstream politics and media - which have promulgated a heavily propagandised and overly simplistic milieu). Thus, they will be vulnerable to accusations that their policies serve to reinforce the existential threat of climate catastrophe, without necessarily being able to make a good enough job of defending their position. If this turns out to be the case, it will be a missed opportunity and a great pity as a legitimate case can be made that it is actually the ridiculously rapid push for net zero that represents the existential threat to the West, not climate change per se!

Net zero is a massive save…already we pay 20% (or near to that) when we fill our tank of petrol. But the cost of net zero is astronomical and honestly, our impact on climate change is too negligible to bankrupt the country.

are you talking about fuel duty? Ie a tax that you would like to cut? How would cutting this tax allow Reform to fund its expensive policies?

Net Zero is to cost at least £50bn a year

fuel duty is just a very small part of it

Reform’s stance was we can’t afford it

I agree

And the gains are so marginal / unpredictable it just isn’t worth it imo

@StuffandFluff
great post

I have heard Farage attempt to explain why it’s a risky policy to forge ahead with net zero, Richard Tice has also given it a go. In my eyes, the problem is, as youve said, the media and other parties are just in the ‘no debate’ zone with ‘climate catastrophe’

They are all in the Science is Settled camp, and as per usual, anyone who defects from this view has a disparaging name….climate denier in this case

It’s tiresome.

Fuel duty is a revenue raiser. Cutting that won’t help to fund Reforms expensive new policies.

I think you are misunderstanding me

There is a 20% duty on fuel for the net zero policies already but that is just one very very small part of how much it will cost us all to deliver net zero

The total cost to us will be £50bn a year

Do you think it’s a good idea to spend £50bn a year on net zero?

This £50bil net zero spend isn’t a manifesto commitment of Labour or the conservatives though, it sounds like scaremongering. The only policy actually pointed to is fuel duty which raises revenue.

Reform had £50bil a year of unfunded commitments. Bleating on about net zero doesn’t explain how they would be paid for.

And yet accurate. The population has a short memory. Don’t pretend otherwise.