Labour party conference, is no-one else interested?

trisher

Have I actually said I wouldn't vote for the Labour Party? Isn't it funny how those who were slagging Corbyn off now come back with the pathetic excuse that they voted Labour anyway. If you are accusing me of turning people against Labour didn't the same happen under Corbyn? Why was it OK then but not now?
You missed out 2017 on your GE results Annie I wonder why?

You’re doing a damn fine job of persuading everyone else to not vote Labour, though….

Sadly I feel that people forget what Labour achieved during the Blair/Brown era. The following is a fact checked from Full Fact.

Labour's record on inequality and social mobility: 1997 to 2010
17 June 2019
What was claimed

The largest peacetime investment in public services happened between 1997 and 2010.
Our verdict

Total government spending as a share of the economy increased by 9.6 percentage points, a record compared to any other 13 year period since 1955 (the earliest we have data for).
What was claimed

The average wait for hospital inpatient care fell from over 13 weeks to four weeks between 1997 and 2009.
Our verdict

Correct for England.
What was claimed

There were over 44,000 new doctors in the NHS and 80,000 more nurses between 1997 and 2010.
Our verdict

The total number of FTE qualified nurses working in general practice and NHS hospitals increased by 79,000 and the number of doctors by 48,000.
What was claimed

Teacher numbers rose by 50,000 between 1997 and 2010 and support staff by 200,000.
Our verdict

Correct in England.
What was claimed

By 2010, 76% of pupils in England were achieving five good GCSEs, compared to 45% in 1997.
Our verdict

Correct.
What was claimed

The London Challenge for schools saw the most dramatic improvement in any major capital city anywhere in the world.
Our verdict

The London Challenge scheme did see an improvement in schools in the capital, but we don’t know of any way to benchmark this against schools in other major cities.
What was claimed

In 1999 the Labour government agreed a £2 billion settlement for miners suffering from bronchitis and emphysema. By 2005, 350,000 had received compensation.
Our verdict

The government did agree this settlement, as part of the liability they took on for British Coal. By January 2005, 172,000 claims had been settled and another 180,000 had received a final offer. In total the government expected payouts to miners for industrial injuries (not only from COPD) to total around £7.5 billion.
What was claimed

The Labour government lifted over a million pensioners and a million children out of poverty.
Our verdict

The exact level depends on the measure of poverty you use. Looking at absolute poverty the number of pensioner and children living in poverty both fell by well over a million. Meanwhile the number of pensioners living in relative poverty, after housing costs were accounted for, fell by over a million. The number of children in relative poverty fell by less than a million.
What was claimed

A report shows the poorest 10% of households gained around 13% in their incomes due to tax and benefit changes under Labour, while the richest lost almost 9%.
Our verdict

Correct.
What was claimed

A 2018 OECD report on social mobility showed from 1997 to 2010 found the UK had the largest fall of any nation in immobility and biggest rise in social mobility.
Our verdict

There are various measures in the OECD report. Looking at one of them, this is correct: the likelihood of someone still being in the poorest 20% of people in the UK after four years fell from 56% in the early 1990s to 45% in the early 2010s.
What was claimed

Labour tripled the amount of help to the poorest countries and the UK became the first major developed nation to achieve the 0.7% of GDP aid target.
Our verdict

It’s correct the amount of foreign aid from the UK roughly tripled between 1997 and 2010. The UK was the first country in the G7 or G20 to spend 0.7% of GNI on foreign aid, but this only happened in 2013 - after Labour left office - and several other European countries achieved this earlier.

My question is what did Labour achieve between 1979 - 1997 and 2010 - 2021 when they were out of power? It is not about "policies" it's about trust and the bottom line is not enough voters trust the left wing of the labour party. Blair (and Brown) recognised this and I think Starmer does too.

foxie48

Sadly I feel that people forget what Labour achieved during the Blair/Brown era. The following is a fact checked from Full Fact.

Labour's record on inequality and social mobility: 1997 to 2010
17 June 2019
What was claimed

The largest peacetime investment in public services happened between 1997 and 2010.
Our verdict

Total government spending as a share of the economy increased by 9.6 percentage points, a record compared to any other 13 year period since 1955 (the earliest we have data for).
What was claimed

The average wait for hospital inpatient care fell from over 13 weeks to four weeks between 1997 and 2009.
Our verdict

Correct for England.
What was claimed

There were over 44,000 new doctors in the NHS and 80,000 more nurses between 1997 and 2010.
Our verdict

The total number of FTE qualified nurses working in general practice and NHS hospitals increased by 79,000 and the number of doctors by 48,000.
What was claimed

Teacher numbers rose by 50,000 between 1997 and 2010 and support staff by 200,000.
Our verdict

Correct in England.
What was claimed

By 2010, 76% of pupils in England were achieving five good GCSEs, compared to 45% in 1997.
Our verdict

Correct.
What was claimed

The London Challenge for schools saw the most dramatic improvement in any major capital city anywhere in the world.
Our verdict

The London Challenge scheme did see an improvement in schools in the capital, but we don’t know of any way to benchmark this against schools in other major cities.
What was claimed

In 1999 the Labour government agreed a £2 billion settlement for miners suffering from bronchitis and emphysema. By 2005, 350,000 had received compensation.
Our verdict

The government did agree this settlement, as part of the liability they took on for British Coal. By January 2005, 172,000 claims had been settled and another 180,000 had received a final offer. In total the government expected payouts to miners for industrial injuries (not only from COPD) to total around £7.5 billion.
What was claimed

The Labour government lifted over a million pensioners and a million children out of poverty.
Our verdict

The exact level depends on the measure of poverty you use. Looking at absolute poverty the number of pensioner and children living in poverty both fell by well over a million. Meanwhile the number of pensioners living in relative poverty, after housing costs were accounted for, fell by over a million. The number of children in relative poverty fell by less than a million.
What was claimed

A report shows the poorest 10% of households gained around 13% in their incomes due to tax and benefit changes under Labour, while the richest lost almost 9%.
Our verdict

Correct.
What was claimed

A 2018 OECD report on social mobility showed from 1997 to 2010 found the UK had the largest fall of any nation in immobility and biggest rise in social mobility.
Our verdict

There are various measures in the OECD report. Looking at one of them, this is correct: the likelihood of someone still being in the poorest 20% of people in the UK after four years fell from 56% in the early 1990s to 45% in the early 2010s.
What was claimed

Labour tripled the amount of help to the poorest countries and the UK became the first major developed nation to achieve the 0.7% of GDP aid target.
Our verdict

It’s correct the amount of foreign aid from the UK roughly tripled between 1997 and 2010. The UK was the first country in the G7 or G20 to spend 0.7% of GNI on foreign aid, but this only happened in 2013 - after Labour left office - and several other European countries achieved this earlier.

My question is what did Labour achieve between 1979 - 1997 and 2010 - 2021 when they were out of power? It is not about "policies" it's about trust and the bottom line is not enough voters trust the left wing of the labour party. Blair (and Brown) recognised this and I think Starmer does too.

But, foxie48 IRAQ!

Let us remember that the Tories supported the Iraq war but thew Liberal Democrats strongly opposed it.

* MaizieD* I haven't forgotten Iraq, my point is a centrist labour govt achieved more than a left leaning but out of govt labour did or indeed ever could. What we will never know is what a Conservative govt would have done in the same circumstances!

Blair left no lasting legacy all about him and his ego.

Lots of people trusted a left Labour in 2017 and the transformattive polices that this country needs. But the right wing in the party was working against a labour victory.

People's Front of Judea or the Judean People's Front.

Remember?

Do people really believe that Labour people didn't want Labour to win? Holy smoke.

Alegrias1

People's Front of Judea or the Judean People's Front.

Remember?

Do people really believe that Labour people didn't want Labour to win? Holy smoke.

Alegrias1 there is pleny of documented evidence about this. The right wing officials working in the LP office worked to prevent a Labour win and were very disappointed at how close the vote was. They were suspended and an investigation ordered.. Starmer reinstated them.

I googled it. Too blooming complicated.

Can you just sort yourselves out before the next general election please?

foxie48

* MaizieD* I haven't forgotten Iraq, my point is a centrist labour govt achieved more than a left leaning but out of govt labour did or indeed ever could. What we will never know is what a Conservative govt would have done in the same circumstances!

It was meant as a joke, foxie48. Sorry, I couldn't quite think how to convey that...

Sorry MaizieD totally missed that! I think it's a pity that so many people focus on the Iraq war when they think about the last Labour govt. The LP did lots of very good things which changed the lives of people. They also forget the strength of feeling in the House of commons, the vote was carried 412 - 149, (quarter of labour MPs and the libs voted against). Clearly the majority of MPs that the electorate voted to represent them thought there were WMDs in Iraq. Only Cook resigned from the front bench. I also think Blair genuinely thought there were WMDs and I don't believe he lied, but others do! It's so easy to condemn with hindsight but so is "throwing the baby out with bath water". Has the Western world learned anything since then about interfering in the middle East? Looking at recent events, I'm tempted to say "No".

Alegrias1

I googled it. Too blooming complicated.

Can you just sort yourselves out before the next general election please?

If the present leader had actually bothered a bit and dealt with the people involved things would have been sorted so much more easily. As it is he's left anyone who was bothered about the 2017 result with a real feeling that not only was there underhand shenanigans but that he actually approved of them. Which basically means that the present leader of the LP was complicit in bringing about the 2017 result and keeping the Tories in power.

Because some had ‘a real feeling’ is not proof that the present
leader was complicit in allegedly bringing about the result of
the 2017 election or there was a conspiracy to keep the tories in
power.

Sorry MaizieD totally missed that!

Not to worry. It's just that I am so used to social media where any mention of Blair is subject to shouts of 'Iraq', as if one, admittedly dreadful, mistake negates all the good that was done by Labour during his government.

What the Ira war demonstrated for me was the unwisdom of tying the UK closely to the USA (seen yet again in the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan) and again it points up the foolishness of withdrawing the UK from a powerful bloc which is not so fixated on blindly following where the US chooses to go, in order to cosy up to the US.

Iraq (I've a sticky 'q' key)

Blair speaks of Iraq in the ‘Blair Brown’ documentary

Johnson and his crew, criminals misleading the country.

Starmer should have wiped the floor with this lot made more impact, what is stopping him?

Piers Morgan voted as best at holding government to account before he left the job and so is Marcus Rashford.

I mean Starmer is gifted this lying charlatan Johnson and he should have made much more impact at aposing him.

Grany what’s stopping him he is not in power

MaizieD

^Sorry MaizieD totally missed that!^

Not to worry. It's just that I am so used to social media where any mention of Blair is subject to shouts of 'Iraq', as if one, admittedly dreadful, mistake negates all the good that was done by Labour during his government.

What the Ira war demonstrated for me was the unwisdom of tying the UK closely to the USA (seen yet again in the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan) and again it points up the foolishness of withdrawing the UK from a powerful bloc which is not so fixated on blindly following where the US chooses to go, in order to cosy up to the US.

I wonder how things would be if they had found WMDs as the Intelligence reports said would be found or if we had not gone to war and WMDs had been used by Saddam Hussein. I would not have wanted to be a decision maker nor would I want to have had to live with the consequences of my decision! Much easier to an old lady pontificating with the benefit of hindsight!

foxie48

MaizieD

Sorry MaizieD totally missed that!

Not to worry. It's just that I am so used to social media where any mention of Blair is subject to shouts of 'Iraq', as if one, admittedly dreadful, mistake negates all the good that was done by Labour during his government.

What the Ira war demonstrated for me was the unwisdom of tying the UK closely to the USA (seen yet again in the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan) and again it points up the foolishness of withdrawing the UK from a powerful bloc which is not so fixated on blindly following where the US chooses to go, in order to cosy up to the US.

I wonder how things would be if they had found WMDs as the Intelligence reports said would be found or if we had not gone to war and WMDs had been used by Saddam Hussein. I would not have wanted to be a decision maker nor would I want to have had to live with the consequences of my decision! Much easier to an old lady pontificating with the benefit of hindsight!

You might wonder where Saddam got the weaponary he was supposed to have- particularly chemical weapons. He was sold them by Western countries who wanted them used against Iran (and they were). Possibly that is why Blair thought they were still there
According to Iraqi documents, assistance in the development of chemical weapons was obtained from firms in many countries, including the United States, West Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and France. A report stated that Dutch, Australian, Italian, French and both West and East German companies were involved in the export of raw materials to Iraqi chemical weapons factories.

foxie48

MaizieD

Sorry MaizieD totally missed that!

Not to worry. It's just that I am so used to social media where any mention of Blair is subject to shouts of 'Iraq', as if one, admittedly dreadful, mistake negates all the good that was done by Labour during his government.

What the Ira war demonstrated for me was the unwisdom of tying the UK closely to the USA (seen yet again in the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan) and again it points up the foolishness of withdrawing the UK from a powerful bloc which is not so fixated on blindly following where the US chooses to go, in order to cosy up to the US.

I wonder how things would be if they had found WMDs as the Intelligence reports said would be found or if we had not gone to war and WMDs had been used by Saddam Hussein. I would not have wanted to be a decision maker nor would I want to have had to live with the consequences of my decision! Much easier to an old lady pontificating with the benefit of hindsight!

There were no WMD the weapons inspector told Blair government, somehow he was found dead shortly after. Then remember the dodgy dossier thought up by who knows who? Then the Chillcot report into the Iraq war by Blair and buddy Bush found Blair mislead parliament

So it was always has been an illegal war

The report does not question Blair's personal belief that there was a case for war, only the way he presented the evidence that he had.[41] The report cleared the Prime Minister's Office of influencing the Iraq Dossier (the "Dodgy Dossier"), which contained the claim that Iraq possessed the ability to launch WMD within 45 minutes, and instead laid the blame for the weaknesses in its evidence on the Joint Intelligence Committee.[42]

More specifically, the report blamed Secret Intelligence Service (better known as MI6) head Sir Richard Dearlove who presented so-called "hot" intelligence about alleged weapons of mass destruction provided by an Iraqi with "phenomenal access" to high levels in the Iraqi government directly to Blair, without first confirming its accuracy.[43] The investigators found that references to this intelligence in government reports were over-certain and did not adequately stress uncertainties and nuance. The informant was later found to have been lying. The Chilcot report states that "personal intervention [by Dearlove] and its urgency gave added weight to a report that had not been properly evaluated and would have coloured the perception of ministers and senior officials".[44] The day after the report was published, Blair conceded that he should have challenged such intelligence reports before relying on them to justify military action in Iraq.[43][45]

Poor Dr David Kelly wonder what really happened to him?

It was always an illegal war and Blair should have been charged as a war criminal. Instead he became a Middle East peace envoy!