UK Politics General Discussion

[rob666]

... you can’t sack someone until there is evidence to do so.

Unless of course, your name is Donald, and you are on the other side of the pond.

 

[BarryZola]

Farage backs his MP who beat up his wife .

I'm not a reform voter and don't support that either

Anyway, Rayner is around 33% down on the first year on Labour's pledge to build 1.5 million new homes over 5 years. They needed to be building around 300,000 a year but they only managed around 200,000. Not only caught out not paying her tax, she's rubbish at her job too. No excuses. Don't promise it if you're not going to get it done.

 

[Dave]

I'm not a reform voter and don't support that either

Anyway, Rayner is around 33% down on the first year on Labour's pledge to build 1.5 million new homes over 5 years. They needed to be building around 300,000 a year but they only managed around 200,000. Not only caught out not paying her tax, she's rubbish at her job too. No excuses. Don't promise it if you're not going to get it done.

I didn’t say you where Reform.

As previously said I’m not sold on the current gov but no administration would achieve 1/5 of their goal each year. For a start the 1st year usually involves passing by legislation to enable that.

I do find it curious that when the Tories gain power the public give them a couple of years benefit of the doubt but expect Labour to give day 1 results.

But my god this government isn’t half disappointing so far, it’s just a shame no one else is offering anything.

Reform - Hell no, led by a facist.
Conservatives - Led by someone who lied about getting into Stamford university at 14
Lib-Dems - Led by the class clown.
Greens- Now led by someone who offered people hypnotherapy to make their boobs grow.
Unnamed party - Led by incompetent left wing Gandalf figure,

 

[Benzin]

Greens the best of a bad bunch confirmed.

 

[Matt N]

We’re now in an intriguing position, wherein the government are very unpopular, but the opposition in the Conservatives are also absolutely nowhere and no one is listening to them. Kemi Badenoch has herself had a very weak start to her tenure as Leader of the Opposition, and the wider Conservative Party seems to have largely faded into obscurity. Normally, a weak and unpopular government like the one we currently would see the Opposition skyrocketing in popularity, but the Tories seem equally, if not more, unpopular than Labour.

It is quite incredible what has happened. The key opposition party currently controlling the agenda is one that has a single-figure number of MPs, and only got an MP into Parliament at the last election. Whatever you think of Nigel Farage, you must admit that he is a clever political operator and has an uncanny ability to control the agenda. He clearly speaks to people in a way that the main parties don’t.

Electoral Calculus’ current prediction is that if an election was held tomorrow, Reform would win 368 seats and 30% of the national vote, versus 15% of the national vote and 5 seats in 2024: https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html

There is also thought to be an 82% chance of Reform being the largest party. Granted, I think this isn’t necessarily what would pan out if an election were actually held, for a variety of reasons, but it still paints a sobering picture for the two “traditional” parties of government.

My personal view is that instead of trying to out-Reform Reform, Labour needs to debunk their rhetoric and implement changes that make a tangible difference to people’s lives. I think very often, the political system now doesn’t speak for what real people on the ground believe in and doesn’t listen to them, and Joe Biden learned this to his detriment in 2024. As much as he did some good things on paper, the electorate couldn’t feel it and the electorate were angry, so they voted for Trump. I think this fate may befall Keir Starmer in 2029 if he is not careful; the electorate don’t care about facts and figures, they care about on-the-ground impact, and the mood of the country is now probably more negative than I’ve ever known it in my lifetime.

I myself don’t hate Keir Starmer as much as many, and I think some of the decisions made have been reasonable, but I think he isn’t doing enough to show that a Labour government can make tangible changes to people’s lives.

If I was voting tomorrow, I think I would either vote Labour or Lib Dem. I wouldn’t vote Conservative and I definitely wouldn’t vote Reform, but I also think the Greens and Corbyn are a bit further left than I personally sit. I’ve always quite liked the idea of the Lib Dems, and whenever I read their manifesto, I often think it sounds like they have the ideas that are closest to what I believe. I don’t have overly strong political views, but one thing I am firmly against is extremism, on either side of the spectrum. I would probably instinctively lean slightly left over right, but I’m not sure I believe in far-left ideas either.

 

[Dave]

Greens the best of a bad bunch confirmed.

Other than their NIMBYism in local politics and the aforementioned hypnotism yes probably.

But in my constituency my choice is Labour of Reform, it would be nice to be able to vote who I wanted but that’s not the system we have.

 

[Dave]

I'm not a reform voter and don't support that either

Anyway, Rayner is around 33% down on the first year on Labour's pledge to build 1.5 million new homes over 5 years. They needed to be building around 300,000 a year but they only managed around 200,000. Not only caught out not paying her tax, she's rubbish at her job too. No excuses. Don't promise it if you're not going to get it done.

Actually just had time to read the full details.

Stamp duty calculation made by solicitor was wrong due to the presence of a fund for a disabled child.

I know we generally distrust politicians but should MP’s be blamed for bad advice from a professional?

Obviously there should be an investigation to check this is true but it seems a bit nasty, and certainly a higher standard than other politicians are held to?

 

[rob666]

Lots of MP's have blamed their misdemeanours on the advice of professionals over the years.
It isn't new.

 

[Dave]

Lots of MP's have blamed their misdemeanours on the advice of professionals over the years.
It isn't new.

It’s easily provable either way, they can submit the advice they received to investigation.

HMRC rules are that if you received bad advice you remain liable for the tax but not the fine, same principle should exist here.

I find the idea that a parade of Tories and Reform do this and no one cares but a working class woman does it and it’s pitchforks at dawn…

 

[Hid]

We’re now in an intriguing position, wherein the government are very unpopular, but the opposition in the Conservatives are also absolutely nowhere and no one is listening to them. Kemi Badenoch has herself had a very weak start to her tenure as Leader of the Opposition, and the wider Conservative Party seems to have largely faded into obscurity. Normally, a weak and unpopular government like the one we currently would see the Opposition skyrocketing in popularity, but the Tories seem equally, if not more, unpopular than Labour.

It is quite incredible what has happened. The key opposition party currently controlling the agenda is one that has a single-figure number of MPs, and only got an MP into Parliament at the last election. Whatever you think of Nigel Farage, you must admit that he is a clever political operator and has an uncanny ability to control the agenda. He clearly speaks to people in a way that the main parties don’t.

Electoral Calculus’ current prediction is that if an election was held tomorrow, Reform would win 368 seats and 30% of the national vote, versus 15% of the national vote and 5 seats in 2024: https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html

There is also thought to be an 82% chance of Reform being the largest party. Granted, I think this isn’t necessarily what would pan out if an election were actually held, for a variety of reasons, but it still paints a sobering picture for the two “traditional” parties of government.

My personal view is that instead of trying to out-Reform Reform, Labour needs to debunk their rhetoric and implement changes that make a tangible difference to people’s lives. I think very often, the political system now doesn’t speak for what real people on the ground believe in and doesn’t listen to them, and Joe Biden learned this to his detriment in 2024. As much as he did some good things on paper, the electorate couldn’t feel it and the electorate were angry, so they voted for Trump. I think this fate may befall Keir Starmer in 2029 if he is not careful; the electorate don’t care about facts and figures, they care about on-the-ground impact, and the mood of the country is now probably more negative than I’ve ever known it in my lifetime.

I myself don’t hate Keir Starmer as much as many, and I think some of the decisions made have been reasonable, but I think he isn’t doing enough to show that a Labour government can make tangible changes to people’s lives.

If I was voting tomorrow, I think I would either vote Labour or Lib Dem. I wouldn’t vote Conservative and I definitely wouldn’t vote Reform, but I also think the Greens and Corbyn are a bit further left than I personally sit. I’ve always quite liked the idea of the Lib Dems, and whenever I read their manifesto, I often think it sounds like they have the ideas that are closest to what I believe. I don’t have overly strong political views, but one thing I am firmly against is extremism, on either side of the spectrum. I would probably instinctively lean slightly left over right, but I’m not sure I believe in far-left ideas either.

I would like to say I think Labour will get more popular when their policies are online but also its just the first wave of policies there will be more later down the line.

Also during Thatchers era the Tories were unpopular in the beginning but through the Parliament they got more popular.

 

[Dave]

I would like to say I think Labour will get more popular when their policies are online but also its just the first wave of policies there will be more later down the line.

Also during Thatchers era the Tories were unpopular in the beginning but through the Parliament they got more popular.

I would like to think so but they lack communication skills so I’m not holding my breath.

 

[Hid]

I would like to think so but they lack communication skills so I’m not holding my breath.

They have made changes to their comms team so maybe it will get better

 

[Dave]

They have made changes to their comms team so maybe it will get better

Day 2 of that change is going well isn’t it

 

[BarryZola]

Actually just had time to read the full details.

Stamp duty calculation made by solicitor was wrong due to the presence of a fund for a disabled child.

I know we generally distrust politicians but should MP’s be blamed for bad advice from a professional?

Obviously there should be an investigation to check this is true but it seems a bit nasty, and certainly a higher standard than other politicians are held to?

I don't know man, it's right here on one of the main pages about paying higher stamp duty: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/stamp-d...ential-property#who-the-higher-rates-apply-to

- If any of you will own, or part own more than one residential property worth £40,000 or more, you will have to pay the higher rates on your new purchase (unless there is another reason why the higher rates do not apply).


Include any residential property that:

• is owned on behalf of children under the age of 18 (parents are treated as the owners even if the property is held through a trust and they are not the trustees)
• you have an interest in as the beneficiary of a trust

Let's assume that she couldn't be bothered to even read basic stuff on the HMRC website. She then has access to the Chancellor Rachel Reeves on a daily/weekly basis. She could have asked her. I'm not sure the identity of this 'expert' has been released yet and their exact credentials, or the information that she gave to them. Ignorance on something like this cannot be an excuse, for me. Not in her position. It's her responsibility to pay the right tax and the information on whether she needed to pay it was easily available. I found it in a few minutes and I'm not in a position of importance like her that surely requires a high level of intelligence. Probably tried her luck but got found out.

I will respectfully agree to disagree with you.

 

[Hid]

Day 2 of that change is going well isn’t it

It takes time for things to change

 

[Dave]

I don't know man, it's right here on one of the main pages about paying higher stamp duty: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/stamp-d...ential-property#who-the-higher-rates-apply-to

- If any of you will own, or part own more than one residential property worth £40,000 or more, you will have to pay the higher rates on your new purchase (unless there is another reason why the higher rates do not apply).


Include any residential property that:

• is owned on behalf of children under the age of 18 (parents are treated as the owners even if the property is held through a trust and they are not the trustees)
• you have an interest in as the beneficiary of a trust

Let's assume that she couldn't be bothered to even read basic stuff on the HMRC website. She then has access to the Chancellor Rachel Reeves on a daily/weekly basis. She could have asked her. I'm not sure the identity of this 'expert' has been released yet and their exact credentials, or the information that she gave to them. Ignorance on something like this cannot be an excuse, for me. Not in her position. It's her responsibility to pay the right tax and the information on whether she needed to pay it was easily available. I found it in a few minutes and I'm not in a position of importance like her that surely requires a high level of intelligence. Probably tried her luck but got found out.

I will respectfully agree to disagree with you.

I’m PAYE so I don’t profess knowledge of how complex Tax can be but when I bought a house I paid a solicitor to sort out the tax and paid what I was told, I didn’t read the HMRC website nor ask friends with tax knowledge. My understanding is if I paid incorrectly I would be liable for the unpaid tax but not a fine as a professional advised the tax.

My question is why would we expect more from a politician? My lesser question is why we always give the Tories a free pass on this stuff? The only time they got into bother was when they actually deliberately messed their tax? Jacob Reece Mogg moved his money off shore to avoid tax and no one cared.

As I say this would all need to be investigated to be sure it’s true but seems a little off kilter to me.

 

[BarryZola]

I’m PAYE so I don’t profess knowledge of how complex Tax can be but when I bought a house I paid a solicitor to sort out the tax and paid what I was told, I didn’t read the HMRC website nor ask friends with tax knowledge. My understanding is if I paid incorrectly I would be liable for the unpaid tax but not a fine as a professional advised the tax.

My question is why would we expect more from a politician? My lesser question is why we always give the Tories a free pass on this stuff? The only time they got into bother was when they actually deliberately messed their tax? Jacob Reece Mogg moved his money off shore to avoid tax and no one cared.

As I say this would all need to be investigated to be sure it’s true but seems a little off kilter to me.

Yes, I would also like to find out the exact details on who the expert was and exactly what information was given. If she has honestly been clearly badly advised then my stance would soften to some extent. The thing is though, if I was buying a property and it came back that I didn't have to pay as much stamp duty as I would reasonably expect then it would seem a little weird to me, and I personally would want to double check it myself to the best of my abilities, just to be clear in my own mind. As pointed out, that would only take a matter of minutes on the HMRC website or whatever. Maybe the first answer she heard sounded good for her bank balance so she didn't want to investigate any further in-case another answer came back that she didn't like?

But yes, if she has been badly advised by an actual expert in tax matters and then that person is properly sanctioned, then my opinion could change. My prediction is that the investigation will find that there was some 'confusion' about the information between the expert and Rayner, or a 'misunderstanding' so that no-one is sanctioned in any meaningful way.

On the point of the Tories, I personally was always happy to put the boot in about any corruption or similar. I have a general dislike for politicians in all honesty, so no particular party is free from criticism. Talking more generally, I suppose it's who the loudest voices in the media take a like or dislike to. If it was up to me anyone wanting to become a politician as a career choice should be banned from doing it. I'd much prefer the government to be chosen from people in the community of a good moral standing and track record for doing good things, actual experts in their fields etc. Like for example, you'd probably approach some professor with a good social standing in a suitable area of science to be the health secretary and stuff like that. I just think that trying to make a career of being a politician just for the sake of getting into power is an awful thing, so I distrust them from the start. Most of them won't even give you a straight answer to a question. Obviously there will be a few exceptions, but not many. Not sure why I started rattling on about that, but there you go.

 

[Dave]

Yes, I would also like to find out the exact details on who the expert was and exactly what information was given. If she has honestly been clearly badly advised then my stance would soften to some extent. The thing is though, if I was buying a property and it came back that I didn't have to pay as much stamp duty as I would reasonably expect then it would seem a little weird to me, and I personally would want to double check it myself to the best of my abilities, just to be clear in my own mind. As pointed out, that would only take a matter of minutes on the HMRC website or whatever. Maybe the first answer she heard sounded good for her bank balance so she didn't want to investigate any further in-case another answer came back that she didn't like?

But yes, if she has been badly advised by an actual expert in tax matters and then that person is properly sanctioned, then my opinion could change. My prediction is that the investigation will find that there was some 'confusion' about the information between the expert and Rayner, or a 'misunderstanding' so that no-one is sanctioned in any meaningful way.

On the point of the Tories, I personally was always happy to put the boot in about any corruption or similar. I have a general dislike for politicians in all honesty, so no particular party is free from criticism. Talking more generally, I suppose it's who the loudest voices in the media take a like or dislike to. If it was up to me anyone wanting to become a politician as a career choice should be banned from doing it. I'd much prefer the government to be chosen from people in the community of a good moral standing and track record for doing good things, actual experts in their fields etc. Like for example, you'd probably approach some professor with a good social standing in a suitable area of science to be the health secretary and stuff like that. I just think that trying to make a career of being a politician just for the sake of getting into power is an awful thing, so I distrust them from the start. Most of them won't even give you a straight answer to a question. Obviously there will be a few exceptions, but not many. Not sure why I started rattling on about that, but there you go.

That’s my point though I’m not saying we should believe the politicians themselves, it needs investigating.

I agree they won’t give straight answers to questions but then the media (and public) don’t want straight answers either. We don’t allow politicians to say “I have reassessed something and changed my opinion” so we incentivise politicians to be vague until they are sure.

Politics is a two way contract, I feel like both sides are breaking this contract.

Sadly Labour don’t seem to be able to do anything about it.

 

[Benzin]

Unfortunately when Labour are essentially courting Reform voter types who will have ZERO intention of voting for them they're annoying their actual base voters who'll go elsewhere.

The plan seems to be "agree with Reform type stuff and trust the voters will vote for us instead".

It's a poor look.

 

[Dave]

Unfortunately when Labour are essentially courting Reform voter types who will have ZERO intention of voting for them they're annoying their actual base voters who'll go elsewhere.

The plan seems to be "agree with Reform type stuff and trust the voters will vote for us instead".

It's a poor look.

Exactly this, you will never out Reform Reform.

In other news Nigel Farage was in America instead of Parliament this week and got absolutely ripped to shreds by an American politician.


From: https://youtu.be/reQaq3ArAak?si=17255W5Sv9LeXPRx


As usually the British media have cut this bit out of their coverage.