Yes. Totally agree that it is better to disagree peacefully than call up a riot mob.
In this case, it only takes 100,000 signatures for Parliament to schedule a debate to discuss it - the petition continues to garner more signatures but the Parliamentary debate has already been secured.
MPs will debate an online petition calling for a re-run of July’s general election, A debate has been scheduled in Westminster Hall, a secondary debating chamber where such petitions are discussed, on 6 January 2024.
Where in their manifesto did it say they would be stopping the WFA? Where in their manifesto did it say they would be raising employers N.I. contributions ( meaning many will delay taking on new employees)? Why haven’t they published details of this “black hole”? The only people with “more money in their pockets” are their union paymasters. I note the only MP who has stated he will not be claiming the “energy” allowance is Nigel Farage - and I am not a fan of his at all
Same old, same old…I bet Starmer is already making excuses up for the end of their term when nothing has been done and it will probably be all down to the tories. Our present political system reminds me of an episode of ‘Tom and Jerry’…
I just had a look and they said they would not be increasing taxes for working people - NI, Income tax etc. But they didn’t say anything about not increasing tax employers pay… in no part of the manifesto did they say that pensions benefits would be means-tested. So that is the main betrayal.
Yesterday I read that there is a proposal to impose an exit tax on people who leave the country to live Non-dom and avoid capital gains and other taxes by selling assets once they are no longer resident. I’m not aware that has been formally discussed but it was in the paper as a pros-cons discussion.
Ha,ha, ha ! Can you imagine that happening nowadays?!
Considering how things turned out for Charles I, it’s not a healthy unilateral decision for a Monarch to make!
William IV only did it cos the Prime Minister of the Day urged him to, I think? - I can’t see Keir Starmer asking our King Charles to dissolve Parliament and have another General Election when Labour already have such a huge majority - that would be daft.
Yes. seriously. There is 650 MP Seats in Parliament and Labour MPs hold 402 of them. That is a huge majority in Parliament, which can enable them to get Bills passed.
When the PM, Lord Grey, asked William IV to dissolve Parliament, it was to initiate another General Election because he couldn’t get his Reform Bill through Parliament.
Sorry boot, by support I thought you meant the number of votes they received at the last GE, it was very poor compared to other general elections. The turnout was low and people just wanted to get the tories out but had nowhere else to go. I wouldn’t say labour had much support by the people…Even less so now.
I’m not sure why you thought I was talking about the popular party vote when the context of my post was all about Parliament and Labour’s majority.
I think that everyone is fully aware that Labour hold nearly two thirds of the MP Seats in Parliament, despite receiving just under a third of the party votes cast.- it has been the talk of the wash house since July!
My answer to that is that if folk support the FPTP voting system, they have to be prepared for these undemocratic results.
I don’t know if I have mentioned it before in this thread but if folk want a more democratic outcome, maybe getting Proportional Representation would give you a more democratic result than just getting another General Election under the same old rules.
It’s not too late to sign the current Petition calling for PR - I’ve signed it. It may get more signatures if one of the “celebrities” on social media saw it and shared it and it went “viral” - that seems to be how people decide what to vote for these days!
You could be that “celebrity” Foxy, if you signed and shared it! - Nigel Farage supports PR, so …. Go on … sign it … let’s fight for more democracy!
That Compass Report was an interesting read, Cinders.
I agreed with most of it, especially their Recommendations - if Labour took notice of it, I’d be made up!
For anyone who wants to read a Summary without downloading the whole report, there’s a fair summary of it here
It was interesting.
Now the challenge is that the Labour needs to be seen to be benefitting low-middle income people and do that quickly. Yes it needs to support the NHS, yes it needs to improve education, and improve support for the vulnerable, and improve local services. The list is quite long. But surely decent jobs and decent pay is the core issue that most people vote for.
Unfortunately, to drive up employment and wages through direct investment would risk inflation and increased borrowing. So the plan has been to try to drive growth and trust that growth will be big enough to address employment and pay. However, I suspect that growth will take longer than one term in office.
If it was me, I’d risk increasing debt. I’d argue that the last 40 years has seen the Conservative party recklessly throw away so much - oil revenues, public companies, public assets, tax revenues, trade relations. The poor state of the country and the country’s economy is by a significant measure down to their reckless actions. So a bit of Labour recklessness with borrowing might not be so bad. After all, under Tory rule hundreds of billions was spent on quantitative easing. Who ever voted for that? And who benefitted from that? (Answer - property owners)
