Thread 19 Starmer - A Coalition of the Willing

[DuncinToffee]

.https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5276594-thread-18-starmer-all-sides-of-the-house-agree-apart-from-the-trump-bootlickers?page=40&reply=142583752

previous thread

I wish PE had explained why KC signed the letter with a massive Sharpie in the mode of Trump.

Yes that's much more pressing information

The constitutional settlement since his previous namesakes reign has been the monarch does what they are told without having any ideas of their own.

If Charles can't hack the tradition of an institution he was born into then he can follow his great Uncles lead and piss off abroad.

It's bad enough having to put up with a monarch in the first place. But a whinging monarch really rubs it in ? How much more does he want to be paid FFS ?

I think he would be happier being left to his own devices giving time to his hobbies.

He could always give up the crown to do that.

Judging from the black spider memos Charles doesn't want to be left alone to his hobbies.

Regardless his job is to play along at the direction of the government - and he's doing just that.

Farage takes a pop at Lowe in the Torygraph.

"We have elections to win" 🤭

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/03/08/reform-has-an-election-to-win-cant-afford-to-waste-time/

@placemats 22 billion on carbon capture when it's still an unknown is a travesty.

An absolute tragedy

@AlternativeView

I read about a carbon capture facility in Australia. This is a great piece on it.
Be of no doubt that currently the technology isn't available to make it work

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/22/australia-60bn-carbon-capture-ccs-windfall-claim-aep

It can work in the future, of that I'm sure. But it's not good to set aside the billions for it. False promises are hopeless and should be avoided at all .costs.

@placemats I've heard several experts saying that it could be something for the future but why are we not investing in what we know works and when we are 100 % sure of carbon capture do it then. There have been leaks and issues where it is implemented.
22 billion and we are cutting wfa, going after pip, disability, sen ehcp, no money for colleges.

My beloved Party, The Labour Party, is now in charge and for that I am grateful, notwithstanding that we have finally a wonderful Labour MP, who I campaigned for.

Be of no doubt that proposed cuts to the vulnerable are mostly fueled by a right wing media. It never happens. And cutting WFA is acceptable because it was not means tested and should have been done on a sliding scale. However the broad spectrum approach was not good.

TBH, I think a great deal of the net zero work is very foolish and self-harming. A lot of people are going to lose their jobs and livelihoods, and a great deal of money is going to be thrown away, without any replacement work or return on expenditure.

Be of no doubt that proposed cuts to the vulnerable are mostly fueled by a right wing media

What do you mean? Labour doesn't have to make the cuts to disability benefits. It is choosing to. The only question is how severe the cuts will be.

I suspect a great deal of this will be dropped.

CC isn't going to happen when we may need defence to go to 4 or even 5%.

I think Hunts 17billion NI cut is looking even more foolish, were you quite so critical of that waste at the time?

I think starting with reversing the NI cut would be a great starting point.

I think any changes to disability cuts will be targeted at those with mental health difficulties. Purely based on comments made in run up to election.

If done correctly it could benefit a lot of people who could work with the right understanding or MH difficulties and reasonable adjustments.

And if people get the right MH support they generally don't struggle to the point of needing PIP.

But I would rather they didn't touch it if reforming the system is more likely to leave those in need without than have a few who could do something to improve their situation with whilst they don't iyswim?

I also think things like lifelong conditions and disabilities should receive a life long award.

If you're paraplegic you are paraplegic.

If you're blind you are blind.

If you have CP etc then it's life long.

I could list a whole host of things.

But I also think of you have a stroke for example and it's known you will take months of rehabilitation you should automatically get a 6 month award (so change it from last longer than 3 months and expect to last a year) as it think those payments will make it so much easier to support families who can make adaptations etc quickly which may even free up beds in hospitals.

I think we just do illness and disability so arse about tit in this country.

We seem to need to wait until someone is really ill or disabled before stepping in whereas early intervention and support would probably be much cheaper in the long run.

I agree about reversing the employees NI cut, but that would be breaking a fundamental election pledge.

Yes it would be but it would now have to be framed to have to happen due to Trump and lack of NATO commitment.

A 3% reversal, would apparently raise the amount needed to take defence spend to 3%.

I think the Tories would have to asked to support this.... for it to actually happen though.

But I also think of you have a stroke for example and it's known you will take months of rehabilitation you should automatically get a 6 month award (so change it from last longer than 3 months and expect to last a year) as it think those payments will make it so much easier to support families who can make adaptations etc quickly which may even free up beds in hospitals

this is my DD's area of expertise, she works in Neuro rehab, the pressures on giving patients LESS therapy after Strokes etc is getting greater and greater, she really has to fight to get patients more than 6 weeks... all due to targets on waiting lists... quality of care? who cares!!!

& its got worse since Labour got in, with no new money for staff, just shifting budgets around, one less therapist for Physio means one more for OT .. sort of thing...

Criticising net zero mania has nothing to do with other, unrelated decisions.

In case I get accused of being a denier, of course anthropogenic warming is real. The issue is how, how far and how fast we take steps to mitigate our part in it.

As for Hunt, no, I don’t think the NI cut was a bad decision. I’m in favour of lower taxes. But if tax needs to go up now to pay for the military, then so be it.

Which NI cut? Both of them?
You don't just think they were a desperate attempt to drag back some support after Johnson & Truss?

Most people prefer^^ tax cuts. Doesn't mean you can't afford them.

And given the Tories did diddly for social care over a decade I don't think we could afford them, either of them.

That’s all very well. But you have to be able to afford tax increases too. Most of Reeves’s troubles have come from a huge business tax rise that’s harming growth. Tax people more and you’ll get more harm to growth. There isn’t a humming economy of the sort that Blair inherited.

I didn't support Reeves business tax rise - I would have reversed the NI cuts.

Hunt's NI cut was an electoral bribe.

Would you be reversing the business tax increases but increasing NI payable by workers from earnings? Or would you do both?