Continuation Tories
That’s the line Conservatives push to liberals to try and get them to not vote at all. While at the same time calling Labour dangerous radicals to rich old white people.
It’s also the truth. The first part.
Republicans in the US are doing the same with liberals in the US. The US liberals are fooling for it too.
Couldn’t give a rats arse about US Republicans.
I’d like to not, but what happens in the US affects all of us.
Starmer is a coward and a dud.
What policies does he actually have now? And when will he scrap those too?
Planning reform, improved workers’ rights, closing various tax loopholes. Also, he’s still going to invest in the green thing, just not necessarily spend £28bn on it.
As to when he’s going to drop them, I guess it depends what Streeting and Reeves get a bee in their bonnet about next, as they seem to be calling the shots.
he’s still going to invest in the green thing
You mean the one a senior Labour MP recently said was going to be scrapped?
As to when he’s going to drop them, I guess it depends what Streeting and Reeves get a bee in their bonnet about next, as they seem to be calling the shots.
Am I sensing cracks in your Keir-Labour romance?
You mean the one a senior Labour MP recently said was going to be scrapped?
No one said it was going to be scrapped. As usual, your understanding of what’s going on goes as deep as the headline. I suggest reading the rest of the article, in future.
It’s pretty wild to me that such a modest investment is deemed risky with the electorate.
That said, it’s clear the sun, the mail, the express, the telegraph will be looking for the tiniest arguable removed in Labour’s armour. So to my mind, this is more telling of embarrassingly low horizon of national ambitions coupled with a very aggressively right wind media. So, I can also understand the need to appear very very fiscally restrained.
Ah I’m new to lemmy. Seems I got censored for using a word which means a weakness or gap in armour, but I guess in the right context could be a racial slur lol
FYI, that’s an instance specific thing.
The media’s deliberate economic illiteracy is actively damaging the country at this point!
If you can’t defeat this unless bucket of tory rejects that were never supposed to advance further than the back bench with policy, and have to build a “bulletproof” manifesto. Then you’ve no hope.
Unfortunately that’s the general environment with the news, and I don’t want to see another round of billboards saying “Labour want to murder your babies, kill your military, and shut down your hospitals” when talking about a modest proposal.
Did you say the same last election? I’d rather the other parties take things as seriously as possible rather than being complacent.
In addition, despite Keir Starmer’s previous promises to abolish the Lords in a first term, it is expected to commit only to limited changes. This is likely to mean legislating only for the abolition of the remaining 91 hereditary peers.
Aren’t the hereditary peers usually the ones speaking out against bad policy from the Commons? The remaining peers are the like that Boris and others installed.
I actually think the caution is a good thing, overall. Look what happened to Theresa May’s poll lead in 2017! Absolutely terrifying prospect that could happen to Labour.
Having said that… dropping the £28bn pledge is too cautious. May got sunk by incautiously launching a new policy during the campaign. Labour’s green industrial pledge clearly isn’t damaging them in the polls, so why water it down? I don’t think it could damage them. People know Labour will spend money and we want them to do it!
Funny you should pick 2017 since the thing that killed May’s majority was a radical leftwing manifesto!
And Labour were offering a radical left-wing manifesto at the same time…
Interesting take, huge if true!
Bloody Red Tories.
“Bombproof?” Maybe we should… test that out…
They’re getting ready for the Tories to play really dirty I reckon.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Shadow cabinet ministers have been given until 8 Februaryto make policy submissions for the manifesto, as Keir Starmer’s party gears up for an election that, according to opinion polls, looks likely to return it to government for the first time since 2010.
The Observer understands that as well as backing away from its £28bn a year commitment on green investment (while sticking to the overall drive to achieve clean energy by 2030), Labour will not seek to legislate on the creation of a new national care service in its first king’s speech.
With its green prosperity plan now being talked down, Labour’s new “flagship” policy is increasingly seen as its new deal for working people, which involves handing workers new rights from their first day of employment, as well as the abolition of zero-hours contracts.
Another bill that is likely to be prioritised will be a “fiscal lock” that will force government to submit all tax and spending plans to the Office for Budget Responsibility for its judgment before pressing ahead.
There are also hopes internally that a big childcare pledge could form part of Labour’s programme in a first term, with the party keen on expanding the number of nurseries attached to primary schools to tackle a huge shortage of places and staff.
However, some in the party are said to be keen to water down the plan, fearful of deterring investment and denting Labour’s pledge to make the UK the fastest-growing economy in the G7 group of developed countries.
The original article contains 884 words, the summary contains 251 words. Saved 72%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
