Scared of what labour will do

[Wantachangefor2024]

Is anyone else terrified of what labour will enforce. The tax on farmers. Will they means test pip? Will they tax state pension more? What else will they do and where will it all end. They ruthlessly without no care took away the winter fuel allowance. Means testing and taxing state pension would massively impact my family

Growth is extremely difficult, the Tories had 14years and rarely achieved it, there is no magic wand....

Green energy projects are driving job growth, esp in Scotland and around the Humber.... we cannot keep on with our reliance on gas, with prices set internationally, see the energy rises today?

Tax rises don't win elections, its not a winning formula... reversing the NI cut would have been portrayed across the media as an attack on ordinary people struggling in the COL crisis, anti growth, it would have been a godsend for the Tories.

Only have to see how Labour have plunged in the polls since the have increases taxes to see what would have happened had they planned to reversed NI & put income tax up.

I think much of the plunge in popularity is not coming from policies. It's the hypocrisy many -including me - just can't stand and the fact it looks as if they are going back on election promises.
Prior to the election, MN was full of people saying over and over again they would be happy to pay more tax and I think if it was correctly presented, people could have got on board with going back on Hunt's NI rise as Labour surely were well aware of the state if public services.
Instead we got an increase in employer's NI which although was not a promise they broke, was against the impression they give prior to the election. This with a helping of wide-eyed innocence about a black hole which they 'had to fix'.
They have spent 24 years carping at every move the Tories made, calling for resignations and generally being holier-than-thou and supercilious, giving the impression it would be different with a Labour goverment because they were better people.
So far, we've had lying on CVs, freebies, housing controversy, dodgy landlords, punching constituents and the recent Whatsapp controversy. And as we are constantly told, they've only been in power seven months!
And all the while, many supporters are brushing all the above aside as 'the grown-ups are in charge' in a way they would never, ever do if eg a Tory was revealed as a dodgy landlord.
'The Tories were worse' is the constant cry on here, as if nothing that Labour do matters or counts. Did people who voted Labour vote for what they got? Would they be happy if a Conservative chancellor lied on their CV or was found to be talking about constituents? Of course they wouldn't, and we would know about it, on here. But, on the basis that 'the Tories were worse' all is fine apparently.

And, if I may rant a little more, growth.
Yes, it is difficult. But again it's the optics.
Labour and Reeves gave the impression that growth was achievable it's just the Tories never bothered to try. They would sort it because they knew what they were doing.
Now we are hearing that it's the economic situation that's the problem, not them.
The Tories had many issues to deal with but oh no, issues in the UK economy were on them and Labour would have sorted it, if only they were in power.
We have a chancellor who lied on the CV, blamed someone else for doing it and seems to think talking about growth a lot while implementing policies that cripple businesses is the way to achieve it. But that's fine apparently, because it's Labour.

The first post should say 14 years, not 24 obvs

The Tories had many issues to deal with but oh no, issues in the UK economy were on them and Labour would have sorted it, if only they were in power

Ummmmm that is the job of opposition, the Tories are doing it now, at every opportunity...

But there is no doubt that the Tories handled many things badly, Austerity for starters, then Brexit, the biggest dampener on growth we've had recently, handing out billions in Covid supporter to fraudsters...

They did however, get Ukraine right, Bojo did a good job there, their energy support was needed too.. they didn't get everything wrong.

Saying you worked at the BoE for 6 years instead of 5 years 6 months, 20/25 years ago, is not on my list of concerns given what the UK and Europe face right now....

@Katypp "They have spent 24 years carping at every move the Tories made, calling for resignations and generally being holier-than-thou and supercilious, giving the impression it would be different with a Labour goverment because they were better people."
That's what oppositions do!

So far, we've had lying on CVs, freebies, housing controversy, dodgy landlords, punching constituents and the recent Whatsapp controversy.
The "freebie" thing was badly handled, I agree. The "housing controversy" turned out to be not to be a controversy at all. The "dodgy landlord" the "constituent puncher" and the guy with the WhatsApps were out so fast their feet didn't touch the ground.

Not up to speed on the "lying on the CV" so can't comment.

I think it’s very much “best of a bad bunch” though. We couldn’t go on with the tories as they were.

The noise around the Labour Party is at least broadly around policy and not the permanent round of backstabbing and personal sleaze (yes, I know Labour are not immune from that but the noise is just significantly reduced). Quite frankly I want a party that sticks to politics in the main. The Tories and Reform wouldn’t have given us that, and the Lib Dems just aren’t big enough to compete.

The opposition have been noticeably quiet in the last few months - probably because there aren’t a lot of realistic choices that aren’t worse. The donkeys of the last 14 years have made such a bloody mess. Labour always said their unpopular policies would be implemented first when the polls least matter. I think this is a very sensible approach. We all need the medicine I’m afraid, no matter how disgusting it tastes.

@Katypp mn isn't really in step with other media, there's a lot of Labour

What you post is relevant though as you can see the impact on support for Labour since the GE.

The one thing i never got and i agree, partly with @Rummly is the freebies pre election over many years....

All above board, declared in the members interests but boy how does that look to "normal" people.... very disappointing.

All known about at the time but the media chose to release this info post election... max damage to Labour and of course the country.

Have to laugh at MN not in step... the majority of the media is right wing.... which isn't the view of most of the public... the majority of whom would still vote for pro EU and/or centre/centre left parties....if latest polling is to be believed?

Bojo got 43% of the vote in 2019, of course no Reform to split the vote either... now the Tories would be lucky to get 20%...

Alexandra2001
Saying you worked at the BoE for 6 years instead of 5 years 6 months

BBC
In a 2021 magazine interview, which she subsequently posted on X, [Reeves] said: "I spent a decade working as an economist at the Bank of England and loved it."

In a speech to the Labour Party Business Conference in February last year, Reeves said: "I spent the best part of a decade as an economist at the Bank of England."

She said the same thing in a speech at a CEO summit in July 2022, and in a video posted on her Facebook page in the same month.

The claim was also repeated in a Labour party document last year which stated that she spent "most of the first decade of her career at the Bank of England".

As she had already started at HBOS by the spring of 2006, her time at the central bank only amounted to five and a half years. This included nearly a year studying for a Masters at the London School of Economics (LSE).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c77r05nx11po

Yes a bit of a porky isn't it?

But again, does it matter...

This country needs some stability, not the constant merry go round of ministers we have seen in the lats few years.

To be honest-if "lying on her CV" amounts to calling 6 years "the best part of a decade" I think I can live with that!

But it does illustrate the nitpickery that's going on. Which does rather suggest the barrel is being scraped....

It's not six years - it's really only four and a half years if she spent nearly a year studying at the LSE during that time.

Agreed.. and don’t forget Tulip Siddiq.
Optically corrupt Labour minister in charge of corruption.

Couldn’t make it up. Oh yes.. you could. 🤢

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/comment/tulip-siddiq-resignation

Alexandra2001
This country needs some stability, not the constant merry go round of ministers we have seen in the last few years

I wonder how many of Starmer's ministers will last a full year in office.

I think your post perfectly illustrates the double standards on here.
RR has stated many times she was at the BoE for the best part of a decade. But to point out she was only there six years is apparently nitpicking (because, Labour).
Would you extend the same largesse to this from eg Jeremy Hunt? We'll never know.
Would you say that Tory politicians who have misbehaved should be forgotten because they were expelled quickly? We'll never know.
No doubt you will point out that the Tories would not have been expelled, but if Labour hadn't expelled theirs, that would be OK too
In other words, there is a contingent on here that will justify everything Labour do because they are Labour.
Obviously We'll never know if the Tories would have been praised for taking WFP away from most pensioners or loading businesses with enough costs to close them, but I think we can take an educated guess
And at the end of the day, when there are absolutely no justifications to use, you can always fall back on the two MN favourites: Bias in the media and The Tories Were Worse.

@Katypp "No doubt you will point out that the Tories would not have been expelled, but if Labour hadn't expelled theirs, that would be OK too In other words, there is a contingent on here that will justify everything Labour do because they are Labour"

Well, address your comments to them. I am not one of them. I think it was seriously daft to lie on a CV. But in the scheme it's not a big deal. Which is what I meant by barrel scraping.

@Katypp "RR has stated many times she was at the BoE for the best part of a decade. But to point out she was only there six years is apparently nitpicking (because, Labour)

No. Because nitpicking.

Louise Haigh Criminal conviction.. where will it end.. Andrew Gwynn nasty about his own constituents.. where will it end

‘Labour set itself a very high bar on ethics in government

In the years running up to the 2024 general election, Starmer and his party focused strongly on ethics in government, criticising many Conservative ministers for apparent ethical failings and promising to establish a new ethics and integrity commission. Since taking office, Labour’s track record has been mixed. The prime minister did eventually publish a new ministerial code that made important steps towards strengthening how ministers are held to account for their actions, but the ethics commission has yet to emerge.

In November the prime minister suffered his first ministerial resignation, when transport secretary Louise Haigh stepped down following revelations about a (spent) criminal conviction, which Starmer knew of when he appointed her to the shadow cabinet.

Following 'freebie-gate', it is beginning to look as if this government does not fully understand how ministers’ actions look to its external critics.

Having been so quick to loudly criticise the last government for its perceived failings on ethics and integrity, Starmer and his team need to show that they truly understand the importance of meeting the standards that they promised to uphold once in office. ‘

@Kittygolightlyy "Louise Haigh Criminal conviction.. where will it end.. Andrew Gwynn nasty about his own constituents.. where will it end"

Louise Haigh had a spent conviction which she told Starmer about. The key word is "spent". But she resigned promptly when it began (wrongly) to look embarrassing. Sod rehabilitation of offenders, eh?

Andrew Gwynn- properly and rightly sacked.

I don’t for a moment believe that any MN Labour supporter would regard Tory CV lying as inconsequential.

(By ‘Labour supporter’ I mean those who post sympathetically about this government, not people who actually voted Labour: a surprising number of pro-Labour posters deny that they’re ‘supporters’ or ‘fans’ and claim to vote for some other party.)

FWIW, I suspect part of this problem for Labour comes from many Labour politicians having done little or no work outside unions, think tanks, NGOs or local authorities. They find the need to ‘acquire’ other skills and qualifications once they have many constituents to appeal to and greater exposure of their work experience.

Of course it's a big deal that our Chancellor is a liar.
She sold us all, and businesses a lie! Her whole shtick was that she was an economist with a decades experience at the BofE. That was her sales pitch. She was going round the country telling lies.
Not only did she lie about her time at the BofE, she lied about her more recent position and job title at HBOS, and the reason she had been unemployed for approx 12 months before becoming an MP.
This really matters, same with Reynolds.

Incidentally. @Katypp, it's customary to acknowledge extensive quotation from outside sources.

‘Her conviction sheet sets out for the first time however that she admitted to having lied about the theft in the first place in order to get a newer phone, and that the investigation and replacement phone cost Aviva £1,249. She was discharged for 12 months and paid £100 in fines, £85 to the Crown Prosecution Service and £15 as a victim surcharge.

The sheet says: “You dishonestly made a false representation, namely that your work-issued mobile phone had been stolen, intending to cause loss to Aviva insurance by falsely reporting the loss of your phone, causing them to issue you with a new iPhone 5 instead of a replacement BlackBerry phone as well as conducting an investigation into that loss.”’ The guardian

I don’t know about you but I’ve never committed Fraud.

Should people with criminal convictions never be allowed to enter Parliament, even when the conviction is spent?