Jump to content

UK Politics


kalifire
 Share

Recommended Posts

behind a paywall but he summarises most if it in thread...basically difficult how to play this by Reeves, obviously a lot of it self inflicted for decisions made during campaign, but that was the trap set by Tories who would be faced with same dilemma if they'd won (but they knew they wouldn't). On top of all that is internal Labour problems over that 2 child cap.

Going to a difficult few years, longer if they don't get growth up a few percent.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but if they hadn't said they wouldn't raise NI/IT/VAT would they still have won a comfortable majority? Probably, but we'll never know.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

behind a paywall but he summarises most if it in thread...basically difficult how to play this by Reeves, obviously a lot of it self inflicted for decisions made during campaign, but that was the trap set by Tories who would be faced with same dilemma if they'd won (but they knew they wouldn't). On top of all that is internal Labour problems over that 2 child cap.

Going to a difficult few years, longer if they don't get growth up a few percent.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but if they hadn't said they wouldn't raise NI/IT/VAT would they still have won a comfortable majority? Probably, but we'll never know.

 

 

'Weeks of deliberation on how to get it right and yet despite only finding the black hole last week they are talking about what they will do on Monday................ so if it took weeks of deliberation then they knew about it long before they sadi they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

'Weeks of deliberation on how to get it right and yet despite only finding the black hole last week they are talking about what they will do on Monday................ so if it took weeks of deliberation then they knew about it long before they sadi they did.

of course they knew that it was bad, but they wouldn't have known the fine details of how bad it was and where the acute problems actually were.

It is a mix of politics and an actual public service crisis not all of which labour could have known about before coming into power.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

of course they knew that it was bad, but they wouldn't have known the fine details of how bad it was and where the acute problems actually were.

It is a mix of politics and an actual public service crisis not all of which labour could have known about before coming into power.

 

 

Are you saying that the IFS who saw all the same details during the election and said there was a £20bn shortfall just made that up then?
It was known about, long ago and is just being used as a political toy.

There is nothing that they could not have seen - not my words but those of the people in Whitehall who know.

Edited by Nobody Interesting
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Are you saying that the IFS who saw all the same details during the election and said there was a £20bn shortfall just made that up then?
It was known about, long ago and is just being used as a political toy.

There is nothing that they could not have seen - not my words but those of the people in Whitehall who know

No I mean the actual details for each state department etc. Not overall numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

Are you saying that the IFS who saw all the same details during the election and said there was a £20bn shortfall just made that up then?
It was known about, long ago and is just being used as a political toy.

There is nothing that they could not have seen - not my words but those of the people in Whitehall who know.

 

All true but the IFS don't have to get  elected. Any hint of tax rises would have been distorted and amplified. How could else Labour play it? Labour had costed manifesto promises and the Tories did leave a mess that any incoming Govt would have to fix with tax rises.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, lazyred said:

 

All true but the IFS don't have to get  elected. Any hint of tax rises would have been distorted and amplified. How could else Labour play it? Labour had costed manifesto promises and the Tories did leave a mess that any incoming Govt would have to fix with tax rises.

 

 

 

Honesty is how all political parties should 'play it'.

At least some other ties said tax rises were needed and detailed which ones.

14 years of Tory lies should not mean we now get Labour lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Honesty is how all political parties should 'play it'.

At least some other ties said tax rises were needed and detailed which ones.

14 years of Tory lies should not mean we now get Labour lies.

You mean those parties that didn't win. We'll find out soon if Labour lied or not but they only ruled out specific tax rises.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, steviewevie said:

jeez man, it's not hard. It's ok for police to use force when being attacked, it is not ok for them to kick someone in the head once they've been restrained.

The CCTV video on the MEN website shows it all happened very quickly. The police were attacked and the man in light blue puts 2 officers on the floor before jumping on the offending officer from behind. They both fall to the ground and it looks like he has been tasered but not hand cuffed. The officer gets up, the man raises his head and he is kicked in the head. Its not right but it wasn't a calm situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, steviewevie said:

I think point is lying about knowing state of public finances.

Fair enough, we know opposition ministers discuss their plans with civil servants before the election but we don't know what data they get access to. It was widely reported the NI cuts were based on unattainable public service cuts and that defence, prisons, LA's, NHS and benefits needed more funding.

I can't remember if Labour lied directly or just fudged it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, lazyred said:

Fair enough, we know opposition ministers discuss their plans with civil servants before the election but we don't know what data they get access to. It was widely reported the NI cuts were based on unattainable public service cuts and that defence, prisons, LA's, NHS and benefits needed more funding.

I can't remember if Labour lied directly or just fudged it

I think fudge is more accurate.  I guess they didn't rule out putting up various wealth taxes, and it looks like that is what they're going to do. It will probably mean some public services face cuts too, although maybe they will find some fudge to their fiscal rules so they can borrow a bit more too.

Tories would have had to increase some taxes too if they had won, they could probably have found it easier to reverse the NI cuts, but that would be more difficult for Labour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Today we find out how bad the country's finances are. I am going to go out on a limb and predict they'll be really bad.

 

If it is £20 billion that really is small................... considering we are fast moving towards debt of £3 trillion which nobody really worries about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

If it is £20 billion that really is small................... considering we are fast moving towards debt of £3 trillion which nobody really worries about.

small or not, it needs filling unless they're going to break their fiscal rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Latest Activity

    • The Festival acknowledges that booking SZA was viewed as a mistake by many and is keen to learn from the small crowd, Contact has been made with her team post festival and the bookers are actually keen for SZA to return to the farm in the future although no actual plans are put in place at this point, the team don’t want SZA legacy with the festival to be perceived as a negative one. They will follow her career closely and it may be 10 or more years when she returns and as to what slot she occupies will entirely depend on career trajectory.    There was emergency talk when Madonna pulled out about if Olivia Rodrigo could step in to take over and this would have been the festivals first choice, prior to speaking to Stevie Wonder who was at one point set to take over however health concerns meant that this was short lived due to health concerns.  However Olivia and her team wanted more time to prepare for a headline slot which has for some time been discussed and at time of writing has been agreed for the Friday headliner slot for 2025.  Although a young artist the booking team are more confident of her success due to her previous appearance at the festival being a success.     The festival team has agreed that the best way to introduce big artists from the US that have quickly grown in popularity is by first pitching them in an afternoon slot on the Pyramid or Other prior to them headlining this was the mode used for Billie Eilish and is why the festival does not consider Olivia Rodrigo to be a risk. For this reason talks with breakout artists such as Chappell Roan or Sabrina Carpenter will be based around a festival debut appearance in an afternoon slot to gauge their success with Glastonbury crowds and not rushing them into a big slot, too early.    The festival has not been in contact with Taylor Swift about headlining at anypoint since the festival cancellation this is not out of any negativity between the two teams but it's just not a possibility for Taylor in the immediate future, The Glastonbury team are hopeful that they can agree a lower than normal & cut with team Swift as her extremely high current fees would be out of reach for the festival and its thought that Taylor would still like to make the festival appearance once her current roadmap is cleared.    Fred Again will headline Saturday at Glastonbury 2025, Prominent members of the Glastonbury booking team were on site at Reading festival to observe his show and are confident that he will be able to entertain a Pyramid crowd, the team is closely monitoring the growth in popularity of electronic music and will be using Fred Again’s headline set to establish if there may be future dance headliners on the Pyramid although at this point no names are mentioned.    Oasis team have been non committal on any headline slot at Glastonbury in the coming years while completely ruling out 2025, there does not seem to be much interest in returning to the festival as the tour is mostly financial motivated and any benefits of playing Glastonbury such as increased streaming revenue has already been achieved by the reunion. However the answer is not yet officially no to a Glastonbury appearance at some point.    From Pulp Jarvis Cocker specifically remains close to the festival booking team as an advisor on other musical acts but seemingly has ruled out any Pulp show on the farm. Pulp reunion has been enjoyed by the band a lot and they have prolonged the comeback longer than originally planned though they think there last show at Glastonbury is the one they want to be remembered for and so will most likely not play the festival again, though Jarvis will appear in some format to be determined at next year's festival.    Rihanna is the booking team's strong leader to play the Sunday night headliner slot, the thinking after early departures last year they want the most prominent headline act to play the Sunday headliner slot this year and with two relatively new acts this will hopefully be Rihanna.  She has been on the festivals radar for many years and it was previously though financials might be a stumbling block it now appears that Rihanna is perhaps thinking of putting a lid on her musical career for good and wants to tick a last few boxes before an early retirement to focus on other ventures which includes an appearance at Glastonbury, She was very close to appearing at Glastonbury 2023 and remains keen.     It's considered Stevie Wonder is considered as a good plan B to Rihanna though lingering health concerns last around if he could commit to such long shows again in the future.   Eminem is not a serious contender to headline despite media speculation, the booking team have discussed in the past and existing concerns remain in place.    Lady Gaga is a name the festival would like to get, however her plans are not settling in as reasonable a time scale as the festival needs to lock in a headliner for next year. It looks like it's a no for 2025 however she remains a preferred target for future festivals.    Sam Fender not on the booking teams radar for 2025, Sam is considered a headliner but with Olivia Rodrigo and Fred Again in the other two slots the festival would like to pursue more experienced targets, It seems Sam Fenders team would be prepared to consider a lessor slot on the farm but the festival team are drawn more towards him headline in 2027 or 2028.    Bruce Springsteen content with his one headline appearance, has no plans to play again at this point.    Little Simz sub headline slot was very positively received and the booking team are keen for her to be considered for a Pyramid Headline slot for a festival after the fallow year, though no formal talks have taken place.   IDLES after the other stage headline slot the festival booking team are keen to think a bit differently about how they size acts for stages - the local hero status of the band meaning they can perhaps take a larger slot than perhaps there current popularity suggests, however the festival team would prefer them to have headlined at Reading or Download prior to any serious consideration for a Pyramid headline slot.    Kings Of Leon were a possibility of appearing last year however talks proved unfruitful and probably not likely to be seen at the festival again.    Away from headliners at the festival the popularity of the Sugarbabes recent appearances has not gone unnoticed and the possibility of a regular Pop nostalgia slot has been discussed the key problems with this are about getting acts that are a consistent level of popularity likely to be trialed in 2025 with B*witched lined up to test.    The answer to the question you have is 15,20,1,20,14,5,22,14,9
    • Is he on good terms with the festival though, he was booked in 2013 and pulled out -  they don't tend to give second chances unless there is a good reason for the pull out 
    • he actually said in his interview with vogue or esquire cant remember where but one of his goals is to do what legends do, things such as headlining Glastonbury. specifically name dropped Glastonbury. so he wants to do it and doesn't care about the money.
    • Scoring for a team that wins does help.
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...