Labour isn't Working - Thread 37

[NoWordForFluffy]

In Nuthatch's absence, I've been asked to start the new thread!

A chat thread for those of us who don't like this Labour government.

"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Previous thread: www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5548208-labour-isnt-working-thread-36?page=1

Yes definitely. I’d probably cheer Burnham too in a pub just for getting rid of bollard.

On the political messaging it wasn’t going to keep Col down and now it will. Impossible to engage with, whiplash everywhere.

strawberrybubblegum · Today 07:57
Lineker's net worth is estimated at around £30million. With that kind of wealth, his children's education wasn't really about preparing them for a job where academic ability is important.
Given his likely aspirations for them, having a public spat with the (very famous and well-respected) school does seem even more silly and counterproductive than it would be for other parents.
Which is rather in keeping with my opinion of his wider judgement.
Being a good footballer doesn't give his opinions outside football much value...

I Loathe Lineker but your comment about being worth £30 Million and education or a career for your children being irrelevant or pointless is incorrect. I have known and know many people with that and far more than that who are deeply invested in their children building, their own success. Two daughters of one multi millionaires are know are teachers in the state system, one boy is a GP and another one is an Accountant with a big firm. Your idea that because you are 'wealthy' that your children can be thick and live of the parents, without doing anything positive is so wrong. Yes a large number will go into a family business and perhaps 'coast'. However, the majority of children from wealthy backgrounds do achieve because of who there are, not because of family wealth.

I still know two daughters of a multi millionaire who teach in the state system. The problem though is they have to keep, all details of themselves out of the reach of teaching colleagues ! This, tells you more about the 'colleagues' ideas then the two women..

The man with the terrier was definitely a wrong (right?) person.

Before it all kicked off we'd been chatting to him and he was telling us about his time in the army, not boasting; just factual - clearly one of the lads.

Judging by the way he'd stared down the person who insulted his dog and his reaction to the reason the train had stopped, DH was concerned terrier man might do something he'd regret and escalate the situation even further, which is why he stayed on the train chatting - basically distracting the man and talking him down.

That doesn't surprise me at all
And speaks to what I posted earlier in the thread

@SpaceRaccoon we talked about that on the previous thread I think. I was saying that it's so ridiculous, I almost wonder if the civil service just thought it was a funny prank to play. I find it hard to believe that's what Boris Johnson actually wanted.

On the flipside, it must've changed by now but at one point, if you looked at the list of jobs that would get you a Visa into this country, it was truly astonishing. I think I saw that in 2024? Presumably those conditions didn't change until ... actually maybe they haven't changed? You could literally apply for a Visa to be a supermarket trolley attendant.

He can't claim he was unaware of stuff that is basic as that. And this is a massive problem. Some people will never vote Tory again because of that.

it is an age old problem, well it goes back to the 2000s at least, and successive administrations have just made it worse and worse.

Actually I hadn’t thought of that. What better way to fuck up someone who keeps shouting about net zero than to give him a job that requires four flights a week?

Just to add to the fun, Foreign Office staff have begun strike action over plans to cut 2000 jobs in their department.

A great start for Miliband.

Miliband will probably be on the picket line with them when he gets back.

I know that a couple of things have been tightened up on since the Boriswave stuff, like I think carers not being able to bring their families? But from this account, which checks current business registrations, it still looks pretty bad, so I can well believe visas were handed out for trolley collecting!

This is the account that tracks it, I think (I'm sure there's another one with a less lurid name but can't remember what it's called).
https://x.com/UKDecline

I'll be honest, I take it quite personally. I emigrated using the Highly Skilled pathway years ago, and the only way you'd have been able to get in to work minimum wage jobs (short of marrying an obliging Brit) was the Working Holiday route from Commonwealth countries, although they discontinued that, and it was time-limited anyway.

I actually had a friend who married in order to remain in the UK, and she was caught out and reported!

Well done to your husband - as satisfying as it might be in theory to have the guy take action, in reality it would have been horrific with a train full of people as a captive audience!

@SpaceRaccoon I completely understand why you take that personally

I've not seen that account before - I have seen one called The Procurement Files which looks at a lot of issues and I think they have covered Visa issues at times.

It all makes me feel very hopeless

By the way, I think the wealth tax is probably coming and probably certain individuals - like Gary Lineker - have been asked to promote it? It seems likely.

I see today's big talking point is that Andy Burnham made use of whatever flight to get up to Manchester. I completely understand why he cannot take the train and I have no issue with that. However, one of the first rules about travelling in that way is meant to be based on necessity. I would argue that the prime minister needs to relocate.

I know Rishi Sunak was criticised for that method of travel, I think the issue here is if Andy Burnham is planning to do it every week. Then it will add on to whatever the Prime Minister normally uses it for - and that that's expensive.

Plus, we'll be paying for an awful lot of staff to get up to Manchester every week.

I saw that and thought wtf. How many actually work in the foreign office if they can lay off 2000 ?

If various commentators are to be believed, across various departments you could easily add another zero to that number and still be overstaffed.

@SapphireCasino what's with the posturing of "tax us more, Andy"?

They're welcome to overpay on their taxes any time they're feeling generous. Also why am I not suprised to see Val McDermid pop up as one of the virtue-signallers?

This is why I love JK Rowling - she just gets on with using her wealth to make the world a better place for women and girls.

@SpaceRaccoon I genuinely wonder if they've been asked to do that posturing

Because it will be seen as like a soft PR launch before putting something in the November budget with compulsory wealth taxes

They could have gone for a voluntary campaign first, but of course they can't measure what they'll get. So I suspect what we're hearing now is part of a plan Burnham made ages ago.

I said upthread that I’d googled a few nonentity Labour appointments under Burnham that I’d never heard of. They generally seemed to be local council, union, NGO, charity etc time servers. I mentioned Alex Norris.

But another that I googled but didn’t mention is Kirsty McNeill. She’s an absolutely fantastic example of a lanyard-wearing never-done-a-proper-job Labourite. She’s in the news today as an avid foreign aid agitator.

🤦‍♀️

Matt's take on it! (Maximise if you can't see the words!)

That is really interesting and also depressing

I don't get it..its Burnham and his staff but up North..how does that shift power? Am I being dim?

@redange - I certainly agree that most people want to achieve something in their own right.

But slating Charterhouse reflected badly on him, and - as we can see here - still does now 15 years later.

That matters more for someone famous -

... both because the newspapers probably wouldn't have picked up on it if he had been anonymous

... but also because Lineker's name and wealth would have opened some different options for him if he was able and interested. But that would depend on reputation and discretion. No one trusts someone who publicly blames others.

For someone anonymous doing something fairly standard which depends on academics, many employers could probably overlook it as youthful indiscretion (although even then, it would be a black mark for many jobs if it had made the papers)

Typical Labour: ideology instead of outcomes.

I did love love love that pound coin cartoon - it is
so accurate. We cannot tax our way out of this mess - didn’t Reeves already try this?

That's absolutly hilarious 😂😂😂

I would say that I'm not slagging off any immigrant who has arrived in the UK legally and abides by the law. Who wouldn't take the opportunity to improve their circumstances?
The fault is all with the policy makers.

The driving cartoon