What will Labour do early?

[Davidchecksall]

We can safely assume that Labour will form the next Government. Many of their proposed policies will take a long time to show a difference. They want to appoint many more teachers, but it will take time to develop ways of retaining the ones we have and enticing back those who recently resigned. etc. Recruiting new teachers will take years.
They can impose the VAT on some schools quickly,
Making it easier to change 'gender' or 'sex' can happen quite quickly.
What do you think they will do to show they mean to make changes?

I would imagine this will be the case. The unions have so much control over Labour that historically this has happened

Will Labour be in the trade unions pockets though ? Isn’t that the problem when a trade union helps fund a political party?

“Have you completely missed the fact that most of the EU members have swung massively to the ‘right’ * in the past two years? Holland, Italy, Portugal…the Belgian central -left bloke has had to resign because his party was given a resounding kicking, Macron has ‘ gone to the country’ for similar reasons, the German ‘ central left’’ are in serious trouble. We are the only large economy who are embracing the same old centrist globalist ‘ socialism’ in Europe.”

@Allthegoodnamesarechosen - what are you on about? We already had our far right moment, it’s called BREXIT. Did you miss that? They are just doing what we did in 2016.

The notions of what is left and right are being blurred by neo liberal globalism.

Left is meant to protect the poor and vulnerable. Mass immigration and not funding services and letting working class wages being undercut by poorer immigrants is the antithesis of protection of the poor and vulnerable.

But it need not be like this. There are countries like Switzerland that are in Schengen who have managed to primarily get richer immigrants in, become more diverse and richer as a result. By using ID cards, having zero tolerance of a cash economy, having a functioning rental system (zero tolerance of slum landlords and overcrowding), and anyone who wants to rent who is a foreigner has to pay upfront (and people get fined for doing cash jobs or engaging anyone doing cash jobs). So that kind of system keeps poorer immigrants out. Brexit happened because poor people here have been failed and voted with a protest vote. The Tories failed these people again.

Norway doesn’t seem to have the same problems as other EU countries though.
Couldn’t we have had a deal that made us more like Norway rather than being out the EU altogether?

Better to be funded by groups that represent a lot of ordinary workers than a very few ultra rich people who want to hang onto power and wealth for themselves though.

Hopefully bring forward getting rid of gas boilers and ICE cars

@Everygrain Will you pay for my boiler and a Tesla for our family or just your own?

No chance whatsoever. Probably another 10-20 years before that can happen.

Theresa May tried to get various different "Lite" Brexit options through Parliament but the MPs voted against everything, even against options that would have been far more beneficial than we've ended up with "hard" Brexit.

They'll make everyone be transgender and charge £5 million for private school fees.

They'll make the ice cream in your fridge go all melty.

🤣 Love it.

I’d like to have a centralist government, that uses some common sense and is fair.

Id like to have a boring government for five years with no major cluster fucks. A boring five years of them governing.

Is this too much too ask ?

The alternatives are becoming cheaper every day. In five years there will be people who will be happily driving an electric car who will have previously declared the expense outrageous.

Why should I pay to feed somebody else's kids? What exoenditure can a parent legitimately prioritise over feeding their children?

Because you live in an allegedly civilised society in which we don’t allow children to starve. If you couldn’t feed yours we’d all step up to do it.

The problem with this argument - and it is a decent one - is that we would not be able to tackle anything because ultimately there would always be someone who would suffer from the reform.
So, in the example originally used, we would carry on giving people extra money to buy food - which they didn't get before Covid - because stopping it would mean children may be disadvantaged.
So what do you suggest we do? Carry on paying this 'new' money for ever or gradually stop it and redeploy is where it's needed elsewhere?
Getting free stuff very quickly becomes a habit, with howls of protest about 'cuts' when it's taken away, even though it may have been clear that the eg uplifht in UC was only ever going to be temporary.
Just remember when the cost of living payments were first paid - it was stated from the very beginning that there would be a window in which the payments would be made, yet social media was full of people on the very first day of the window accusing the Govt of starving their children because the money didin't land when they expected it to. What would they have done if the money wasn't coming?
We need to get away from the dependency that a lot of people have, expecting the state to look after them like a parent would.

I used to tell my DC, "Be nice to other people, because they have you outnumbered". "Because they'll be nice back to you" isn't always a given, but does happen more often than not, and it sure makes life more pleasant. However, if we're going to go totally utilitarian about this, we feed the hungry because otherwise they'd revolt. We provide schools for all because we all benefit from an educated, engaged workforce. National health care because sick people are unproductive. Free inoculations because we don't want infections spreading to us too. It's in our sound practical interest to keep society working under decent conditions, everyone earning enough to keep comfortable at least, with a jointly funded police force as both protection and deterrent against antisocial behaviour. It used to be known as the social contract. But because it's got "social" in it, some people get all panicky. Kind of like how anything with Europe or European in it has the usual suspects hearing jackboots.

Ooh, a Thatcherite. 'There's no such thing as society'!

We know some children aren't getting a decent diet, for a range of reasons. You can point your finger and huff and pontificate about 'I blame the parents' and it makes f*ck all difference to the children. But free school meals mean that all children get at least one decent meal a day, and that pays dividends in the short, medium and long term for children.

Apparently not
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjqe82lk5g5o