First 100 days

[Iwishicouldflyhigh]

whoever you voted for, what are your thoughts after the First 100 Days?
I didn’t vote for Labour, but I was quite excited in their first few weeks as Keir got his head down and I was excited fir change.

Now I just feel deflated. Same old….freebiegate, nitpicking, infighting. A bit depressing really.

i don’t even think there was a decent alternative really….and that’s even more depressing!!!!!

You mean asylum seekers dying? No, I'm not happy. Obviously, it's been happening for years and is a difficult thing to stop, but I hope something can be done.

Fair enough, I respect that.

The risk has increased now due to Labour’s policy. Either through higher demand or lower supply of vessels, the number on the boats is higher and they are flimsier

Amnesty International have put out a statement on this. It seems strange that people mention scrapping the old policy but not much thought given to the outcome of the new one.

The risk has increased now due to Labour’s policy.

Has it? Or have the numbers increased because it was summer? How was Rwanda a deterrent when we sent more home secretaries there than immigrants?

There will always be this type of Labour voter letting people know how much they want to pay more, although the City is an odd choice for supposed those Labour values.

If they could voluntarily pay to HMRC to back up those claims instead that would be great

FWIW, I think history will judge Israel, the UK (so far) and the US as being on the right side of history. But that is a whole other issue.

If the situation with despotic and murderous Iran worsens, I fear that Starmer will be forced to concede to the many antisemites on his back benches. But, again, that is a whole other issue.

Interesting you mention Rwanda when Starmer
was like a rat up a drainpipe to visit Meloni over her (currently stymied) Albania plan.

I’m not sure Tel Aviv gives a toss which side of history others finds themselves.

This is existential for Israel - amazing how competent they are killing those who would seek to kill them.

I otherwise share your view on Labours backbenchers. It’s merely a function of time.

Labour’s policy means the boats are filled with more people and flimsier as supply is down and demand for passage is up

More money for trafficking networks per boat and higher risk of death. Hence Amnesty International making a statement on the policy

You can “smash” people smuggling any more than you can “smash” drug smuggling.

‘Smashing the gangs’

What a wonderfully delphic sound bite.

Short on detail and substance.

I imagine you read it as intended, but I meant to say “can’t smash…”!

The trouble with New Labour-style soundbites applied to real world problems is that the vague meanings take hold in the mind of ministers and civil servants and direct the formulation of policy. With predictably useless results.

Labour can't have it both ways. They can't say that's it not their fault if more people cross when the weather is mild and sunny and then say look how well we're doing when numbers decrease when the weather is bad.

We all know that channel crossings are weather dependent. They really need to sort this out which is what they proposed in their manifesto.

The PP has neglected to respond to Starmers engagement with Meloni re Albania.

Labour are also trying to divert from higher numbers but also higher risk due to higher numbers per boat and flimsier vessels

There’s no point in being happy about that outcome, as some claim to be re Labour’s approach

It's not lies because people don't share your 'what's in it for me' mindset. If it makes you feel inadequate, feel free to disbelieve.

Everyone has their limit. You may be happy to pay more tax; but you will also have a limit. I wonder if you will reach your limit with Labour?

You must have some ‘what’s in it for me’ to choose a career in the City and use private schooling over state.

Swings and roundabouts.
Good they've sorted Ofsted a bit (they had summer recess so maybe not that quick to do stuff yet)
Stopped Rwanda

Bad: they've took winter fuel allowance.
Talking down the economy bad
Scandals already
Possibly increasing fuel tax in budget. (Driving disabled kid 260miles a week)

Waiting to see how they plan to stop small boats
Sort out NHS

There haven’t been any scandals @BlackeyedSusan
You may not like the gifts, but they were properly declared and within the rules. No scandal.

Oh come on.

The Tories were rightly castigated for impropriety.

Labours PR was terrible given the WFA, and union wage settlements etc. They campaigned on no more sleeze.

Higher office and all that.

All within the rules and yet Starmer felt the need to pay some of it back…

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn7yeydd42jo.amp

QED - he knows he was wrong to do so.

Yes. For impropriety. For not declaring. For breaking laws. For watching porn 8n the chamber. For sexual assaults.
I think the gift system needs changing, but it’s hardly a scandal to follow t(e rules now, is it?

Yes. It was within the rules. He didn't ‘need’ to pay it back as it was all legit. Thanks for admitting that. He appreciated that people were upset and he acted.

Even Labour spinners knew it was a fuck up hence going on about ‘reset’ again after the polling dived

Bringing in the McSweeney guy and trying to get new headlines