UK Politics General Discussion

[rob666]

Sure Start was one of the biggest things that helped people of the last Labour Government

I'm sorry, but I worked in the trade, at the time, and followed the development and failure of the project over time...as a good Guardian reader.
The intended client groups tended not to engage, due to a general mistrust of government initiatives, and many centres either did little to combat poverty, at high cost, or ended up catering to the pushy mums of the middle classes, due to "universal access".

I worked with the local centre, and two other centres through my work, at the time.

Lovely work if you could get it, but it did not change outcomes for the poor.
Quite helpful for the well off though actually, depending on the location.
Not a great use of limited resources, so it folded.

 

[Plastic Person]

Quite helpful for the well off though actually, depending on the location.
Not a great use of limited resources, so it folded.

Not to discount your anecdotal evidence from the ground at the time, but Sure Start is generally considered a measurable success in its impact on education, as well as alleviating pressure on the NHS. Independent sources are cited in this IFC report, summarised in The Guardian earlier this year.

There were definitely challenges in implementing the scheme, but it was folded or 'reimagined' under Tory rule due to the all-pervasive ideology of austerity, not because it was proven not to work.

 

[Hid]

The only hope from a leftist's perspective is the Greens, and thats only down to Zach Polanaski seemingly being the first politician in ages to act like the one you think of. He actually ANSWERED A QUESTION DIRECTLY! The scandal!

Labour are left, Left and Right are economic terms its their social polices what difference is.

Public can't handle the MPs being directly honest with them.

 

[rob666]

Not to discount your anecdotal evidence from the ground at the time, but Sure Start is generally considered a measurable success in its impact on education, as well as alleviating pressure on the NHS. ...

Lies, damn lies and statistics.
All comes down to who wants the "evidence"...and when.
Measurable success possibly in general, but it did little if anything to stop division between rich and poor.
And it wasn't cheap.
Social services bosses wanted the option of where to input scarce resources.
Universal availability was a poor choice.
The better off are more vocal, and active, in getting the best resources available for their children, and that is often what happened.

 

[Plastic Person]

The better off are more vocal, and active, in getting the best resources available for their children, and that is often what happened.

I was adjacent to poverty-stricken areas during the peak of Sure Start, and I agree this was likely the case.

But I choose to believe the historical statistics, as well as family members and friends on the frontline of public services, whose already difficult jobs became even harder when it collapsed. I also don't think its legacy should be dismissed just because those with better resources knew what to ask for; this has always been the case. If you'll allow me a moment of optimism, then I'd suggest that in a better, more equitable future, the challenge of delivering these services more directly to the vulnerable should be taken into account. That gap between rich and poor has only expanded further since.

 

[rob666]

Couldn't agree more.
The new version should not be universal, it should be focussed on those in greatest need.
Resources were wasted last time round, and those in greatest need did not get the benefit they should have done.

 

[Slugjc]

Yes, because some clever so and so's started campaigning to tell everyone to stop smoking and drinking so everyone is living way longer than a pension's supposed to last for and having a million hip replacements before they die. Previous leaderships also managed to screw the country so much that no-one can afford kids anymore. Big round of applause.

I can remember when I was younger, the debate was smokers should be placed at the back of the queue for treatment. The main issue is, less people smoking. The less tax is being earned. NHS was hugely funded by the tobacco and drinks industry. Just not directly.

Other areas as well. I own a car. 2.0ltr diesel. I pay less than £20 a year road tax. Electric cars pay hardly anything and we wonder why the roads are bad.

We have livid through 14 years of Tory mismanagement. Years of austerity, where Osborne and Cameron convinced us all that Britain's issues would be solved by shutting libraries in Wolverhampton. Followed by Camerons bright idea of silencing the anti EU Tories in the Tory party by holding a referendum. Which he lost. Which lead to us having the issues we are now facing. Especially with your favourite topic of the people and little boats. That in 2015 we could deport because we were in the EU. Now we have regained control of our borders. We can now not.

I am a labour supporter. I am getting very frustrated with Starmer. He has done some decent stuff, agreed, but, his leadership is weak and he is not capable to fight the real enemy, Farge and the right wing media. He will bow down to there whim, but at what cost to our society?

 

[BarryZola]

You can't really say we wouldn't have a similar problem with the boat people now if it wasn't for Brexit. Yes, some legislation changed when we left but the numbers turning up and needing to be processed in 2015 pretty much everywhere in Europe, including here, were nowhere near as large as they are now. Many European countries are having trouble with immigration and managing asylum seeker numbers (and the societal issues) and they're still a part of Europe. It's disingenuous for anyone to state as a fact that this wouldn't be happening here if we'd not left the EU.

 

[Benzin]

I am a labour supporter. I am getting very frustrated with Starmer. He has done some decent stuff, agreed, but, his leadership is weak and he is not capable to fight the real enemy, Farge and the right wing media. He will bow down to there whim, but at what cost to our society?

And yet now it looks like the annual in-fighting has kicked off and bloody Wes Streeting is the apparent favourite to succeed should Starmer be ousted. Would be unlikely to steer the ship and just follows the recent Tory play book (which they are desperately trying to follow to attract some voters).

Just constantly shooting themselves in the foot. Even if some of the attempted scandals are veiled attempts of mud-slinging. Though that appears to be all that politics is these days. Performative posturing and spouting as much nonsense as possible rather than tackling and solving the issues directly facing us.

 

[Slugjc]

You can't really say we wouldn't have a similar problem with the boat people now if it wasn't for Brexit. Yes, some legislation changed when we left but the numbers turning up and needing to be processed in 2015 pretty much everywhere in Europe, including here, were nowhere near as large as they are now. Many European countries are having trouble with immigration and managing asylum seeker numbers (and the societal issues) and they're still a part of Europe. It's disingenuous for anyone to state as a fact that this wouldn't be happening here if we'd not left the EU.

YOu are right. You are missing one key thing. We now no longer in the EU. Any co-operations regarding the issue needed to be negotiated. As warned prior to leaving, by the EU. That wouldn't be easy and to make it harder, we literally went in ill prepared. No documents, no advisories. Completely and utterly schooled. And fair play to those across the channel.

Remember, Europe needed us more than we needed them. Project fear. It's actually worse than project fear actually projected.

We are also very reliant on the French. A few hundred years of history will tell you. Unless Germany are moving towards them, they aren't that helpful.

 

[BarryZola]

I'm not going to pretend that Brexit probably wasn't the best idea with how it all turned out, I'm just saying that we'd very very much likely still have the same boat issue that we have now had we Brexit-ed or not. We'd still now be overwhelmed with numbers of asylum seekers to process and they'd still need somewhere to stay. I don't think we were even using the Dublin agreement much to send people back to other safe countries that they'd travelled through anyway, and even if we'd wanted to most would claim that they needed to be in the UK for family and other reasons so they'd still end up in the system here appealing being sent elsewhere. That's the reality of it.

 

[Slugjc]

There will always be the issue. As long as small boats float, people will try to get here. The issue ain't stopping. When I was a lad, it was rabies ridden foxes coming through the channel tunnel.

Still, least we have catchy catchphrases like "stop the boats" and " smash the gangs." Rather than an actual plan.

 

[jon81uk]

Other areas as well. I own a car. 2.0ltr diesel. I pay less than £20 a year road tax. Electric cars pay hardly anything and we wonder why the roads are bad.

Vehicle Excise Duty is not ring-fenced for roads, it goes into general taxation. The state of the roads is a council tax issue, again due to the elderly population and the fact councils don’t have enough funding for adult care services meaning there isn’t enough for them to spend on roads and other services like youth centres.

 

[rob666]

Nice to see the Mail winding Labour up at every opportunity...

Today's page 5 picture exclusive...

Lord Mandelson tinkles against a posh garden wall in Notting Hill around midnight.

Stop the press.

Please.

 

[BarryZola]

I hear Reeves has changed her mind about increasing income tax. Apparently it'll upset her back-benchers and voters too much. Just to potentially save her job she refuses to do what's best for the long-term future of the country and millions of people. Wonder where she'll get the money from now then? They really are a pathetic lot these politicians are. No backbone AT ALL.

 

[Hid]

I hear Reeves has changed her mind about increasing income tax. Apparently it'll upset her back-benchers and voters too much. Just to potentially save her job she refuses to do what's best for the long-term future of the country and millions of people. Wonder where she'll get the money from now then? They really are a pathetic lot these politicians are. No backbone AT ALL.

Testing the waters to see how viable it is they are investing a lot in to UK infrastructure for the long term. short term pain for long term gain was their strategy.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

Testing the waters to see how viable it is they are investing a lot in to UK infrastructure for the long term. short term pain for long term gain was their strategy.

No. The OBR recently updated their forecast to suggest that we will only have a £20 billion deficit, compared the original forecasted £30 billion deficit.

The Chancellor has decided that, as a result of the forecast being better than anticipated, she no longer needs to smash the emergency glass of raising income tax. This is despite the proposed rises being generally more popular than originally anticipated.

We now have a unprecedented situation where the electorate, and right wing media, are actually cross that there won't be income tax increases.

 

[BarryZola]

No, it was another thing that they clearly wanted to do as they'd been softening the public up for a massive U-turn for weeks (not testing the water). This is another big money making/saving scheme that they've chickened out on due to pressure from back-benchers (the benefits savings was the first one). I'll say it again, there's literally no point to Starmer and Reeves. They're just front-people who do what they're told. There is no point to them at all. Extending that, there was no point in Labour getting into power because the party is clearly too split in its beliefs to get anything genuinely worthwhile done. All they've managed to do is increase expenditure as far as I can see.

 

[Benzin]

Wasn't the whole issue that we needed to increase expenditure because the country is so behind on everything because austerity didn't work?

Labour has always been split as a party because its members can never decide how left or centrist it wants to be. Or in current situation, right wing.

We now have a unprecedented situation where the electorate, and right wing media, are actually cross that there won't be income tax increases.

The goalposts will be moved. Much like they were every time Conservative government tested the waters with a negatively viewed policy and u-turned on it.

Gotta keep sticking those knives in for our mates etc.

 

[pluk]

I see PCCs have been abolished saving £100m. I shall not weep for their loss.