UK Politics

[steviewevie]

33 minutes ago, lost said:

Are we going to move closer to the EU or the US under labour?

 

 

Good luck with that

[steviewevie]

 

[steviewevie]

 

[steviewevie]

As for EU rejoin is dead, at least for the foreseeable...best we can hope for is a closer relationship and maybe a slightly improved deal on what we have. With the US only deal that Trump could want is one that massively favours US and would likely be too problematic to sell to UK public..despite what the Telegraph hopes.

[lost]

The thing we would have to capitulate on is agriculture with regards to the US though if the long term plan is to slap solar panels and housing on farm land labour maybe happy importing most of our food from the states. It would though take us much further away from the EU.

[steviewevie]

16 minutes ago, lost said:

The thing we would have to capitulate on is agriculture with regards to the US though if the long term plan is to slap solar panels and housing on farm land labour maybe happy importing most of our food from the states. It would though take us much further away from the EU.

Won't happen 

[steviewevie]

and the whole threat to food security from solar farms thing is bollocks

[lazyred]

New Govt review of suicide and gender dysphoria at Tavistock. The review was commissioned because of claims of a increase in suicide by Jolyon Maugmn and the Good Law Project.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-suicides-and-gender-dysphoria-at-the-tavistock-and-portman-nhs-foundation-trust/review-of-suicides-and-gender-dysphoria-at-the-tavistock-and-portman-nhs-foundation-trust-independent-report#claims

 

The Claim

The central claim, made on X (formerly known as Twitter), is that there has been a large rise in suicide by current and recent patients of the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) service at the Tavistock since an earlier restriction of puberty-blocking drugs that followed a High Court decision in a case (Bell v Tavistock) in December 2020. The rise is described as a “surge” in suicides and “an explosion”, indicating a substantial and, by implication, unequivocal increase. There are multiple references to children dying in future because they are unable to access puberty-blocking drugs.

 

Conclusion

1. The data do not support the claim that there has been a large rise in suicide in young gender dysphoria patients at the Tavistock.
2. The way that this issue has been discussed on social media has been insensitive, distressing and dangerous, and goes against guidance on safe reporting of suicide.
3. The claims that have been placed in the public domain do not meet basic standards for statistical evidence.
4. There is a need to move away from the perception that puberty-blocking drugs are the main marker of non-judgemental acceptance in this area of health care.
5. We need to ensure high quality data in which everyone has confidence, as the basis of improved safety for this at risk group of young people

[philipsteak]

7 hours ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Imagine if the update that caused all this chaos was able to think for itself and generate its own updates and protection - thus stopping us fixing it.

 

Imagine if Skynet had been scuppered by an update.

John Connor would never have been born!

[steviewevie]

from what I'm reading it is likely that govt will lift cap on 2 child benefits during this parliament but not yet as want to beat their own rebellious backbenches to show who's boss.

How stupid.

[Nobody Interesting]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

from what I'm reading it is likely that govt will lift cap on 2 child benefits during this parliament but not yet as want to beat their own rebellious backbenches to show who's boss.

How stupid.

 

It will be done, as will the lowering voting age, a year or so out from the election as it will be  a vote winner.

The voting age will be left til then as doing it sooner has no benefits but then it does as those able to vote will be in the range to vote.

[steviewevie]

20 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

It will be done, as will the lowering voting age, a year or so out from the election as it will be  a vote winner.

The voting age will be left til then as doing it sooner has no benefits but then it does as those able to vote will be in the range to vote.

not bothered about voting age thing as don't really think it makes much difference.

The two child benefit cap does though.

[kaosmark2]

Making political games out of child poverty is just disgusting.

[Nobody Interesting]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

The two child benefit cap does though.

 

1 hour ago, kaosmark2 said:

Making political games out of child poverty is just disgusting.

 

I agree totally - but sadly I have already heard several ministers say several times that 'it is what we would like to do but only when fiscally possible'.

Scrap the banks tax cut given in Oct 2022 worth £7.3 billion a year and Robert is your relative. At least the Lib Dems said they would reverse this cut. They were the only ones who did.

[steviewevie]

above inflation public sector pay rise or scrap 2 child benefit cap?

[Nobody Interesting]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

above inflation public sector pay rise or scrap 2 child benefit cap?

 

or both by scrapping tax cuts for the wealthy

[pink_triangle]

3 hours ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

It will be done, as will the lowering voting age, a year or so out from the election as it will be  a vote winner.

The voting age will be left til then as doing it sooner has no benefits but then it does as those able to vote will be in the range to vote.

Do you think removing the cap would be a vote winner? The polling I saw didn’t really support that.

[steviewevie]

Just now, pink_triangle said:

Do you think removing the cap would be a vote winner? The polling I saw didn’t really support that.

Yeah cap is popular with the public, but definitely not within labour...so scrap it early to stop that internal labour fight, or delay to have that fight and win?

[Nobody Interesting]

44 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Do you think removing the cap would be a vote winner? The polling I saw didn’t really support that.

 

40 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Yeah cap is popular with the public, but definitely not within labour...so scrap it early to stop that internal labour fight, or delay to have that fight and win?

 

Wasn't it 48% supported it?

Now don't get me wrong, kids in poverty is vile but folks choose to have kids but do not choose to be disabled or have mental problems - if I had to choose between them I would choose the later two or at least to have child benefit means tested ij some way so the rich don't get it.
The Tories wanted to change PIP to getting vouchers and stuff rather than cash so lots would never be used (their words) so why no change child benefit to vouchers so it gets spernt on things for the kids rather than what former friends of mine did and use it to pay a babysitter so they could go out on the piss.

None of it is easy but there sure as hell have to be better ways that what we have now.

[steviewevie]

Thing with the child benefit cap it is popular because people are snobby about other people who have lots of kids, but this cap hasn't stopped them and in the end just punishes the kids who are totally blameless.

[Nobody Interesting]

19 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Thing with the child benefit cap it is popular because people are snobby about other people who have lots of kids, but this cap hasn't stopped them and in the end just punishes the kids who are totally blameless.

 

Very true - however there is another side to it. For example my sister in law, a consultant at GOSH and her husband and investment banker (also a total git) have 3 kids but also live in a house they purchased for several million £ and are, overall, very very wealthy. Should they also get the CB for all 3 of their kids - personally I say they should not get it at all but means testing costs lots to do......................... unless you link all government databases so they know everything about everyone and that is dangerous

[steviewevie]

47 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

 

Very true - however there is another side to it. For example my sister in law, a consultant at GOSH and her husband and investment banker (also a total git) have 3 kids but also live in a house they purchased for several million £ and are, overall, very very wealthy. Should they also get the CB for all 3 of their kids - personally I say they should not get it at all but means testing costs lots to do......................... unless you link all government databases so they know everything about everyone and that is dangerous

academic because there's now a high income benefit charge.

[steviewevie]

more and more stories about abuse MPs/candidates/campaigners suffered during the election, a lot aimed at female labour MPs because of Gaza it seems, but also lots thrown at candidates for other parties including Reform and Workers Party.

 

[steviewevie]

 

[steviewevie]

Apparently this hasn't gone down very well with Green party members/voters...