Labour party conference, is no-one else interested?

This has been mentioned before but before the last GE various focus groups were given a list of policies, such as re-nationlisation, building affordable homes, etc etc. Invariably the groups were generally in favour until they were told that they were LP policies. Of course they all believed that Labour would bankrupt the country, as told by the right wing press.

People like Jo Whiley's sister were also given automatic DNR orders under the coronavirus act, passed in parliament quickly. The disability news service is a good place to look re disability issues

Shelbel

Scones - it depends on how people are defining it and how it is done. 1 find much of the woke ideology racist and sexist against white males mostly. Other ideas like the kier Starmer saying it was wrong to say 'women have a cervix' is just biologically wrong.

But this thread is for talk about the Labour conference in general and its being derailed into for or against woke. Yes I brought it up because that's my opinion. If they win an election I'll eat my hat.

It bloody well isn't wrong and it is wrong to say "women have a cervix." I'm a woman, I've given birth to 4 children but I do not have a cervix.

Please stop with this, some of us had to have surgery including removing the cervix in worrying circumstances. To be told I no longer qualify as a woman is very insulting and incredibly insensitive.

If anyone thinks the only thing that makes them a woman is
that they have a cervix it is very strange.

I agree theworriedwell
and some women wont even know they have a cervix so....they can do one with that

JaneJudge

People like Jo Whiley's sister were also given automatic DNR orders under the coronavirus act, passed in parliament quickly. The disability news service is a good place to look re disability issues

I’ve just been listening to her talking about it in Simon Armitages blog ‘the poet laureate is in his garden shed’ which I’ve just discovered.

PippaZ

rosie1959

In answer to your question Maybee I must admit I have limited experience of a labour government I have been eligible to vote for 43 years and Labour has only been in power for around 8 of those years
I do not wish to live in a nanny state and I prefer the Conservative ethos.
The economy in my opinion has been better under a Conservative government and will prosper despite Brexit
In the last election there was no way I would vote for Corbyn the man was a total liability who couldn't take a firm stand on Brexit which was his downfall

I prefer the Conservative ethos.

Do you realise that ethos is the Greek word for "character"? So let's look at the character you want to follow.

*Shambolic
*Scruffy in his dress
*careless in public and private life
*finding it impossible to govern by bluster
*prone to crises
*quite happy with cronyvirus
*surrounded by sleaze
*an entrenched belief that there is one rule for him and to hell with everyone else.

So, as the Conservatives voted him leader, we can assume he is the very epitome of their "ethos".

If, on the other hand, you meant you think the economy has been better under the Conservative ideology, then do feel free to explain that for us.

Well we are unlikely to agree on this one whether Boris Johnson is the very epitome of the Conservative party ethos could be debatable but he won a ruddy great landslide at the last election and I actually quite like him faults and all
Now I do have to remember the last time Labour were in power it was quite a while ago but I can remember the chaos in the economy we are Mortgage brokers and it nearly took us under
But if Labour are as good as they seem to be fairing on GN then I am sure they will have no problem what so ever winning the next election

MayBee70

Nanny state = caring state. imo

You may well be right MayBee unfortunately the electorate didn’t agree with Labour at the last election. Perhaps next time

With regard to the cervix quote, the quote you are arguing about is not the quote that was said.

Galaxy

With regard to the cervix quote, the quote you are arguing about is not the quote that was said.

Well it was said on here and it has been said before. It is insulting and othering and I think it is appropriate to point that out to people. I have a friend who had a breakdown after her op, we all had to be very careful what we said for several years after her op. I'm sure no one on here wants another woman to suffer even more than she has already so we should all be aware of that.

I listened to Keir Starmers speech which went on and on. Fir a leading Barrister he is a tad boring in delivery. I think he is a very principled man, but the divisions in the party are very obvious. I could never vote for ANY PARTY who denies that I am a woman. I have a cervix and was born with ovaries Fallopian tubes and a uterus. I am a woman and no man can ever be a woman without extensive surgery. Thinking you are a man or a woman is not sufficient fir me. The Trans group are tiny but they seem far too influential. Labour does not support WOMEN!

Anniel not even surgery can turn a man or male into a female or woman.

theworriedwell

Galaxy

With regard to the cervix quote, the quote you are arguing about is not the quote that was said.

Well it was said on here and it has been said before. It is insulting and othering and I think it is appropriate to point that out to people. I have a friend who had a breakdown after her op, we all had to be very careful what we said for several years after her op. I'm sure no one on here wants another woman to suffer even more than she has already so we should all be aware of that.

The quote, 'people with cervixes' actually came from, of all places, The Lancet. It's the avoidance of the word 'women' so as not to upset a certain lobby.

I'm really sorry if I upset anyone. I only posted it as a joke...

^ but I can remember the chaos in the economy we are Mortgage brokers and it nearly took us under^

Global financial crisis? Nothing to do with Labour.

rosie1959

MayBee70

Nanny state = caring state. imo

You may well be right MayBee unfortunately the electorate didn’t agree with Labour at the last election. Perhaps next time

.....or perhaps not.

MaizieD

^ but I can remember the chaos in the economy we are Mortgage brokers and it nearly took us under^

Global financial crisis? Nothing to do with Labour.

A bit like the global pandemic nothing to do with Conservatives

rosie1959

MayBee70

Nanny state = caring state. imo

You may well be right MayBee unfortunately the electorate didn’t agree with Labour at the last election. Perhaps next time

No, they didn't. Boris lied. He told them to leave the EU. He, Boris, would turn the UK into a magical land if they did. They are beginning to see it isn't and he can't. He told them (nanny-wise) that he would level up their lives - he won't.

This winter, unless this government U-turn again, people will have an unnecessary cost of living squeeze. The people in the North, promised levelling up, will be the worst hit by the heating crisis. Some will be left without a job as the furlough system ends. They will go onto a level of Universal Credit which has had its legs chopped off.

You blame the Labour for the International Finacial Crisis - where the world thought Labour had done well - because you only judge by the personal effect it had. Why do you think the man who led the country with the highest deaths in Europe will be forgiven? Do you think the Prime Minister of the government that said they would level up and make things better but leaves people worse off than they have ever known, will be forgiven? Why do you think the government that is about to push many people into almost impossible poverty or unforgivably low paid jobs they cannot keep families on won't feel just as you did and take it personally? These people do have a vote. Do you think Conservatives will be forgiven by them?

You think that he will still "win" because you are a true Johnson Conservative. It is one rule for you while the poorest and most deprived should not complain. You do, indeed, share the ethos of Johnson.

PippaZ you obviously know all about me making the exchange of views very personal
I tend not to rant on and tell other people what they should think
Most importantly I do not berate people for different views I don't need to

rosie1959

PippaZ you obviously know all about me making the exchange of views very personal
I tend not to rant on and tell other people what they should think
Most importantly I do not berate people for different views I don't need to

You were the one who made it personal rosie. You cannot put forward an argument based on such a personal reaction to the Financial Crisis and not expect anyone to comment.

Mind you, that is exactly what Boris does, isn't it. All comments he doesn't like are either not replied to or "it's done" or I don't agree with the law, etc. Yep. I think you are very much in the right party.

The difference is PippaZ I gave a personal experience I would not attack your character assuming I know all about you that would be rude and unnecessary and would definitely not make sarcastic comments about your political preference.
If you cant see this difference then I may be a Conservative voter but I prefer not to make comments about someone I don't actually know

I don’t see how Starmer can be blamed by Momentum types for failing to unite the party. They don’t want a braid Church or consensus reaching. It’s their way or you’re wrong. When Corbyn was leader, he and his cohort demanded total support. Something he failed ever to give to party leaders ever.

The conference went well all things considered. The idea that some posters here prefer an incompetent shambolic reactive dishonest individual as PM than an intelligent, hardworking man with a good career record and integrity shouldn’t surprise me.

MaizieD

^I do not wish to live in a nanny state ^

I've always been a bit puzzled as to what a 'nanny state' is, rosie1959

Would you care to explain what you mean?

I think it includes the government's helping people out when there's a crisis, for example by introducing a furlough scheme when people can't work, temporarily raising benefits for people facing additional costs or who can't find a job in the current circumstances, helping some self-employed people who can't operate their businesses as a result of a crisis, spending billions on a vaccination programme which people need .... Hmmm ....

Bad nannies dump their charges when it suits them. Good nannies carry on with the nurturing (ask Jacob Rees-Mogg).

growstuff

MaizieD

I do not wish to live in a nanny state

I've always been a bit puzzled as to what a 'nanny state' is, rosie1959

Would you care to explain what you mean?

I think it includes the government's helping people out when there's a crisis, for example by introducing a furlough scheme when people can't work, temporarily raising benefits for people facing additional costs or who can't find a job in the current circumstances, helping some self-employed people who can't operate their businesses as a result of a crisis, spending billions on a vaccination programme which people need .... Hmmm ....

I so wanted to hear rosie1959's examples of what constituted a 'nanny state' but we got sidetracked

I don't think your example counts, growstuff because nanny plans to extract as much of that bounty as possible back from its recipients It's more like usury than nannying...

Well, given that our covid infection rate seems to be the worst in Europe we certainly don’t seem to be living in a nanny state at the moment do we ( mores the pity)….

True Maizie (and I'm sure much of it was a con) but it's a fact that the state did step in and the country would be in a far worse state if the situation had been left to the "market" to sort out or survival of the fittest. Some Tory backbenchers and anti-lock downers object to the state acting as a "nanny", but there are times when the state has to intervene. I would include homelessness, supporting the poorest and most vulnerable, education/training and kickstarting business in the state's responsibilities as a "nanny" state - the "market" will never provide solutions. Maybe Conservatives don't care about the homeless, poorest, most vulnerable and the unemployed.