pink_triangle

5 years ago I had never watched a whole women’s match, watched a few games in the last Euros and this time I’m watching highlights of most games and starting to get to know a few of the players. I imagine others are in a similar position to me and the direction of travel is only going one way. In the men’s game I would never (being Welsh) support England, but happy for the women’s team to do well and think it would ultimately benefit girls in wales as well. While many have focused on the money Wrexham have spent since their “Hollywood “ takeover, what isn’t reported is how they have also invested and really got behind the women’s team. I am looking forward to watching a few games this season.

I mean from my perspective to get 3000ish more votes, in an area which has consistently voted Tory, with 1/3 less of the votes to fight over seems a pretty good result. I’m not sure what people would be consider a good amount of votes to win. Im sure there are Tory voters who won’t vote labour and stayed at home, I hope some will make the same decision next year.

Im disappointed to see some “so called” labour supporters going on about what school the new MP went to and the fact he did some work for someone who was a Tory MP many years ago. Why not give the bloke a chance. Fact is if they had put forward a very left candidate he may not have won in an area that is not very left.

I suspect supporters of both parties stayed at home, at this time of the year many are on holiday and doubt many would go to the effort in a by-election when turnout are traditionally down. In a general election turnout will improve and that may mean labour lose the seat, but this isn’t a seat labour need to win.

I think that’s a dodgy use of statistics. Turnout was down by 20 percent, on that basis your going to struggle to get much more

I will hold my hands up that I didn’t have the time to read beyond the summary. Looking at the people who work for the organisation it looks like a bunch of lefties who will no doubt find leftish solutions to the problem. As someone who wants a leftish government that may not be a huge problem to me, but I think it’s worth noting as sometimes people use the word “report “ to almost make something more scientific than political and that’s not always the case. I have no doubt a right wing think tank will come up with different answers to tackling poverty and will have data to back up their philosophy. I believe that most people Tory and labour voters want to see less child poverty but may have different views in how that is achieved. From a labour perspective I think there are 2 different discussions what you can pledge to win power and what you can do in power. I don’t assume they are the same, in fact I don’t think they are.

Well people without kids don’t get it, then there is the argument should poorer people without kids be paying more for richer people with kids.

I always think there should be some caution in these reports. Assuming you wouldn’t automatically take on board recommendations from a report from a right leaning think tank. I think my scientific background always leads me to question, who is writing the report, how does their methodology stand up etc. From those recommendations I think the one that may be most palatable (to the electorate ) is increasing everyone’s child benefit, as everyone thinks they need more. To me the most effective is targeting through universal credit, but as I say that’s an election loser.

To me they are two different conversations. One is the most effective way to get children out of poverty and I was querying if that may be to increase benefits. The second question is what can you sell to voters and I think taking people out of poverty by increasing benefits is a tough sell. I think it’s something he may do in power , but not something he is going to let the torys (and media) twist against him in an election campaign. So I am basically back in Starmer as a person, rather than a list of pledges that may or may not be possible as circumstances change. I see him as someone who is in politics for the right reasons and easily could be making more money doing something else. The painting of him as a plastic Tory is silly in my view. I think his heart is in the right place and in power he will do good. He may be over cautious, but it’s a minor flaw compared to some of the previous leaders of the big 2.

You probably couldn’t go into an election campaign saying it, but surely increasing universal credit payments would get more out of poverty than removing the child benefit cap?

I am enjoying the World Cup , even though the time of games means mainly highlights. I found it really strange some on social media almost using it as a badge of honour not watching it and talking about it being rammed down their throat!

Means testing adds an extra layer of administration, then you have to ask is the cost of that administration worthwhile. My question is still whether there is a different way to lift the children (and those from 1-2 child houses) without giving the extra to the well off. Unfortunately with the Torys messing up the country and the finances we can’t afford to give more to the well off. Could you just adjust universal credit and leave the benefit cap in place and get a better result ? I hold my hands up that I’m not clever enough to know the answers, but think we should be asking the questions.

I’m not arguing. I didn’t support the cap in and would be quite happy if it is removed. I have no doubt that removing the cap would bring people out of poverty. However removing the cap won’t impact on anyone in a one or two child household living (or borderline) in poverty. I think it’s a reasonable question to ask that while this may lift people out of poverty, is there a better way of doing it. I don’t feel my left wing credentials are tainted in the slightest by asking the question.

Well if your the Green Party you can offer the moon on a stick knowing you will never get the opportunity to implement anything. If you are labour then you need to win an election as that’s the only way you get in power and change things. It would be great to live in a country where everyone in the middle and higher was putting their hands up to pay more for a more equal society. Unfortunately Starmer has to work with the electorate as it is, not what we would like it to be.

I would also argue that it’s an investment that will make savings in the future. However I still think it’s reasonable to ask the question what is the most effective way to take people out of poverty. As I say removing the cap redistributes to middle and higher earners and does nothing for 1 and 2 children households. Is a targeted approach not possible?

Are you confident that if you polled the “working class” about the benefit cap they would come out on your side? I suspect you may be surprised. To me the best way to help the working class is get in power and get things done.

I think to those who will decide the election it doesn’t.

He is a newly elected MP, I think it’s a bit much expecting him to come out attacking the leadership on day 1, I say give him a chance. There are studies that show a lot of things and politicians generally cherry pick the ones they like. I would be happy to see the cap go, but the consequence of that is people with 3 kids at the top of the income scale will also be better off, I would rather they not get the bonus and that money instead go to poorer families with 1 or 2 kids.

Not a quota at all, just me guessing how many are currently there. I think people with different ages and backgrounds offer different perspectives.

I see on twitter Owen Jones getting at Kier Mather for supporting the leadership stance (let’s be honest as a 25 year old, newly elected MP he has no influence on labour policy) regarding the child benefit cap. As someone who would be happy for them to remove the cap, the idea that anyone who disagrees supports children being in poverty is disingenuous. There are wealthy parents with 3 children, while there are families with 1 or 2 kids living in poverty. We absolutely need less children in poverty, but this is not the only way to achieve that aim.

How many people will pay any attention to the manifesto?

What kind of work experience do you expect him to have at that age?

I find it strange some people moaning about someone in their 20s being an mp. I don’t think you want 650 of them , but having 2 or 3 offers a different perspective.

I think it has a small cut through, but I don’t think most pay attention beyond Starmer and Sunak. My work is full of people who are likely swing voters, I guarantee most won’t have a clue who Flynn is. I would be interested to know how well known he is in Scotland compared to Humza.

Playing devils advocate, but is PMQ easier if you are from a party with no chance of forming the government?