The fact Reform are smashing Labour and the Conservatives in the polls indicates the strength of the feeling amongst most of the population. Let's also not forget this is the same Reform party that has lost a lot of its members and support due to how they've handled the Rupert Lowe and Ben Habib sagas. Is it really that bad? No, it's worse. I think a lot of people on here are underestimating how pi$$ed off this country is.
I really wouldn't focus too much on polls at this this stage. I'm not saying they don't tell a story, but modern political history here and abroad is literally jam packed with stories of parties riding high in polls 3-4 years out from an election and not getting close when push gets to shove. So is the country in a bad way because people are pissed off? I agree lots of people seem very angry more often. I'm under no illusions about that because I've spent the best part of 17 years working in public services of one sort or another and see the public daily!
I don't think we should, we ****ed the great deal and exemptions bwe had when we left. We should have much closer ties than we have now. People (9 years ago with low turnout) narrowly voted to leave the EU. There was no vote on the arrangement we have now However if the majority of people did want to rejoin, we would be in a much stronger position to deal with sthe small boat crossings you're so angry about. You must be aware these have massively gone up since we left the EU? Dinghy have been around for a long time, as have asylum seekers. Something changed about t years ago with our borders and it wasn't the invention of the boat. Then there's the obvious economic benefits that would make everyone richer
You're calling a crumb over 72% a low turnout? Was the highest turnout we've had since 1992. The point on the arrangement we have is an interesting one, as this impacts both sides of the coin - The people who wanted Leave wouldn't favour a very close relationship (or similar to being in the EU in all but name), and Remain wouldn't favour a distant/no relation type arrangement. No idea how they'd be able to organise this though as it'll be effectively showing the UK's hand before negotiations started, and there's a ton of differentials at play to get a clear choice.
The "strength of feeling" is, at best, around 30% of the electorate indicating that they would vote Reform in the polls. Thanks to FPTP it probably would make them the largest party but it's not the massive endorsement that it's being sold as.
All recent polls have around 60% wanting to rejoin and more than 80% saying Brexit has been bad for the UK. I think the MSM would probably put a dent in that but any right minded person can see now see the benefits of being in the EU far outweighs being on the outside. Of course foreign policy is within the power of the Executive so strictly speaking there doesn't need to be a vote. But, if there were, and the rejoin campaign was far more effective than the pathetic Cameron remain campaign, then yes I could see a positive outcome. It won't happen under this government. But I would like them to be more positive about the possibility of it in the future and, as they are doing, taking steps now to strengthen our relationship with EU and at least undo some of the damage caused.
Not a low turnout then, but my point was combined with the fact it was 52/48 vote it means it's false to say the majority of the electorate, much less the population voted to leave. 9 years on through aging and death the vote would go the other way even without people changing their minds. The fact is closer ties with the EU today is not going against what people want today, it's not going against what people wanted in 2016, and it isn't in conflict with what people who voted leave for in the advisor non binding refendum. Whether some wanted no ties is different, the referendum did ask that.
Easy tiger. I never said you were losing sleep about me, I just said you're ignoring my questions why you think tents will stop small boat crossings. It isn't going to work. Your other idea of sending the navy into french waters is also unworkable as others said. You claim reform have the answers to stop it, but they don't, and you don't. Please enlighten us how reform are going to fix it without catastrophic consequences elsewhere? Or is it a secret dear leader has?
Seeing as how the electorate demographic would now include a significant quantity of younger voters who could not vote in 2016, then I think it would be a certainty. Especially in the context of how borderline the referendum result was. I’d venture a not insignificant number of those who voted Leave would change to Rejoin also. One benefit would be to be able to implement the Dublin Regulation which would immediately put the onus on assessing asylum claims onto countries other than the UK. This includes legally allowing the UK to return certain ‘small boat arrivees’ to France…something that the way Brexit was (not) organised means is no longer possible.
Polls mean nothing 4 years out from an election, and realistically it's probably going to be at least 9 years before Labour lose power. Once Badenoch gets the boot and the Tories bring in a Boris Johnson v2 the Tory/Reform vote will be more evenly split . I think the only way Reform achieve their current polling in the next general election is if the Tories completely fold and sitting MPs switch to Reform. I think whilst some on here might be underestimating how pissed off the country is, I think Labour can see it a mile off and are already acting on it - must be infuriating for Farage and Tice as they'd probably hoped Labour would be as na*ve/reactionless as previous sitting Governments.
Labour are all WORDS. No action will be taken for the betterment of the country. Unfortunately Labour are too wrapped up with their mythical £22bn black hole they supposedly inherited (I think Rachel from accounts mentioned it 73 times in her speech earlier) and too busy moaning about what they inherited to actually have a plan to fix the country. Taking political prisoners isn't exactly endearing or helping his cause.....
Great u-turn from Starmer on winter fuel payments. Just acknowledgement his judgement was WRONG last year! I remember when all the Boris haters were up in arms when he changed his mind on policy. I hope all you lefties have the same energy (if you pardon the pun).
Yep, the same as every other sitting Government, especially in the early years. You can promise the world from the opposition benches but our political system really doesn't allow to much deviation from the norm once in power. Labour doing what the Conservatives did when they got into power and no doubt the cycle will repeat it's self for decades to come. Reform would fall into the same cycle too if they ever got into power. The problem isn't the political parties, it's the system and decades of financial mismanagement by the Conservatives and Labour. Which political prisoners? I've kept my head buried a little bit recently from politics.
So in the past two weeks they've announced support for the first new reservoirs to be built in this country in 30 years, £15bn for public transport outside London and the South East, a significant uplift in defence spending and investment, a new deal with the EU apparently worth a few billion each year and took another train company into national ownership. Does none of that qualify as action for the betterment of the country? The thing that links all of those things is they won't bear fruit now and probably not even this decade. Yet that's responsible government isn't it? Putting things in place now to pay off in the future, rather than chasing short term shyte now.
Haven't kept up to date with a lot of it - but heard the defence uplift - Have they commented on how it's going to be funded as yet?
They were forced by NATO to up their spend to 3.5% of GDP to keep the US onside, so let's not play that silly game. Haven't looked too much into the new deal with the EU, but let's be clear, all of his deals with India and the US have been awful, so I don't hold out much hope. I would put money on it being economically flawed.
Labour has always invested in the armed forces. They had a manifesto promise to do it and they're doing it. People would be super quick to knock them if they didn't! And they're not 'his' (presumably you mean Starmer) deals. Half the problem with modern politics is this cult of personality that people like Boris and Farage lean into. The technical negotiations are largely done by trade negotiators working for the civil service. The only people annoyed with these deals are fringe politicians who like to spin a story we can do everything alone and need rely on no one ever.
Are the "political prisoners" you are referring to the ones that have been convicted under Tory laws and Tory sentencing guidelines by our independent judiciary? Labour have not changed any laws or sentences guidelines relating to these convictions. These are not political prisoners or anything to do with Starmer or the Labour government. If you believe otherwise you are parroting fake news from the usual grifters.
Only partly I believe. They've cut 0.2% from the the overseas aid budget to fund a chunk of it. They're only committed to get to 3% GDP defence spending by the end of the debate, not 3.5% I think. I suppose the rest will come from general taxation - expect the MOD will get a chunky budget uplift in the spending review next week.
You forgot the deals with the USA and India the brexitwers promised but bener delivered. UK steel and now exempt from higher tariffs. Bubble and others will no doubt think the India deal was selling out dut like to the NI arrangement which is exactly the same as every other deal we have with dozens of countries. Bubble does care what labour has done. He feels strongly that they haven't and that's more important. Better vote for reform who have zero record of delivery, and since winning local councils have had many of them step down in a month. If labour are t taking any actions how is the actions on winter fuel payments so bad? A U-turn is a childish way of describing a government making a small adjustment to a policy. The policy was to means test it. It's staying means tested.
Parliament. There will be political decisions and trade offs in there taken by Starmer and the cabinet, sure. But most of the detail is negotiated lower down. I've not seen anyone independent or reputable say they're awful deals either.
Nonsense. "NATO" hasn't forced anyone to do anything. I know the media you consume likes to make it look like trump is a master negotiator pulling the strings but it's not the reality Labour are all words and no action or they make awful deals and action? Which is it?
U-turn or not, they've made a complete hash of it. They're deservedly taking political pelters for it now.
A complete head because they underestimated how much entitled pensioners, who don't understand how much they get from their children's generation in comparison to what they paid to their parents state pensions, would whine like big ******* babies for months on end. Should have just put all end date on the triple lock for the capital it cost them
USA deal isn't closed yet, it's just preliminary agreements - think we're due more info before 9th July. I'm not judging it until the inks dried as Trump is Trump and a month is a long time in his world. A "small policy adjustment" is a stretch. It was a very stupid move in the first place for very little gain. Be nice if a party could actually front up and say we acknowledge we messed up, and took action to rectify it, but that's part of the issue in politics nowadays.
In any sensible country, means testing a £200/300 bonus payment to pensioners which was in introduced 18 years ago, now even audjusted for inflation the state pension has increased about 30%, wouldn't be a very stupid move. It would barely make headline news for one day yet alone months. We can wait and see what the changed are but unless they award it to everyone again, it's not a U turn to me.
What's your thoughts though on Labour in opposition warning the government of deaths if it's cut, to then cutting it in the very first weeks of getting in? The state pension is low as it is for many, a little over £200 a week doesn't go far nowadays with food/utilities, transport cost (if they have a car or taxis) and having emergency fund for the one offs which occur - there's a discussion that pensioners are super rich - some are - a small number have very nice final salary pensions and wouldn't miss the 2/300 - many have wealth tied up in their property, but haven't got a lot of disposible cash. I don't see it reasonable that they should sell their property just to afford to pay over inflated electric and gas bills, they've had their turn and paid their way. There's some surprising stats too on how much savings the average British citizen has as well. The savings it made were miniscule in the wider scheme as well. To me there were other options they could have done, and still could do to more than cover that rather than going after the elderly.
Why shouldn’t BRITISH PATRIOTS be allowed to smash up town centres because a repeated convict spends his life looking for things them to pretend to be riled up over as an ethical basis for their actions?
No, I get that, however, any deal put together by Labour would be with the full backing and final say of Starmer.
