The Forde Report what should happen now?

No, I was thinking of Boris Johnson and Reese Mogg.

I certainly do not believe the voting public check where a candidate was educated
Maybe not (although you were the one to bring up the educational background of Blaier et al ); but the advantages of a public school/Oxbridge education are obvious, and people don't need to look them up. By the time MPs get anywhere near the Cabinet the media has made sure that we know.

Many people are impressed by that sort of thing. Look how many posts on all sort of topics on here reference the RG/Redbrick/Oxbridge universities that their children/grandchildren/husbands attended, and disparage 'ex-polys'/'provincial universities and so on.

Interesting though that Harold Wilson who could speak BBC English when he chose always used a Northern accent in his speeches.
I think that politics generally has taken a massive step to the right and what was centre left for Tony Blair is now seen as the loony left. I just wonder how far to the right we can go and if it will take people dying of cold and starvation before sensible policies which limit profits, pay reasonable wages and provide proper support for the weakest and poorest are re-introduced.

You need a labour government for that.

Galaxy

You need a labour government for that.

You would think so Galaxy but sadly I can see nothing in any of the Labour party's statements that leads me to believe they would act to change things. If Starmer were making the same remarks now being made by TU leaders I might have more faith in that.

I agree with you Glorianny. When people list the good things that the Labour party did in office, of which there are many, I do wonder whether the current Leadership would do anything like those good policies, they are certainly a lot further to the right than in 1997.

The demise of night school and the underfunding of further education colleges has hindered adults who would like to improve their qualifications. The last Labour manifesto had a policy for lifelong learning and I hope they have kept that one. I must check but the timer is ringing on the oven!

Glorianny

Interesting though that Harold Wilson who could speak BBC English when he chose always used a Northern accent in his speeches.
I think that politics generally has taken a massive step to the right and what was centre left for Tony Blair is now seen as the loony left. I just wonder how far to the right we can go and if it will take people dying of cold and starvation before sensible policies which limit profits, pay reasonable wages and provide proper support for the weakest and poorest are re-introduced.

Can you say what your comments are based on? Labour publications or just 'feelings'?

MaizieD

Glorianny

Interesting though that Harold Wilson who could speak BBC English when he chose always used a Northern accent in his speeches.
I think that politics generally has taken a massive step to the right and what was centre left for Tony Blair is now seen as the loony left. I just wonder how far to the right we can go and if it will take people dying of cold and starvation before sensible policies which limit profits, pay reasonable wages and provide proper support for the weakest and poorest are re-introduced.

Can you say what your comments are based on? Labour publications or just 'feelings'?

Privatisation and profits mostly along with a real lack of commitment to the Trade Union movement, no policy to provide adequate social housing and regulate the private rental sector, along with no real commitment to keep the NHS a public service and reverse the privatisation already in place. Not to mention the growth of academies and other places of education which are of course intent on paying huge salaries to the top people and the lowest possible to the grass roots workers. (Can you see a theme here?)
Blair remember only just managed to get rid of Clause 4 in the face of much objection. Even mentioning public ownership now causes the leader to have apoplexy.

Glorianny

MaizieD

Glorianny

Interesting though that Harold Wilson who could speak BBC English when he chose always used a Northern accent in his speeches.
I think that politics generally has taken a massive step to the right and what was centre left for Tony Blair is now seen as the loony left. I just wonder how far to the right we can go and if it will take people dying of cold and starvation before sensible policies which limit profits, pay reasonable wages and provide proper support for the weakest and poorest are re-introduced.

Can you say what your comments are based on? Labour publications or just 'feelings'?

Privatisation and profits mostly along with a real lack of commitment to the Trade Union movement, no policy to provide adequate social housing and regulate the private rental sector, along with no real commitment to keep the NHS a public service and reverse the privatisation already in place. Not to mention the growth of academies and other places of education which are of course intent on paying huge salaries to the top people and the lowest possible to the grass roots workers. (Can you see a theme here?)
Blair remember only just managed to get rid of Clause 4 in the face of much objection. Even mentioning public ownership now causes the leader to have apoplexy.

What I really meant was: 'What is the source of your comments?'

I know you were not asking me but I don't understand the question about sources. Surely it is obvious from any news outlet that academies are more numerous, that there is no policy for social housing and no rent regulation. Private providers are well ensconced in the health service. There is even a cap on the amount of social security that a family can receive, it is no longer based on need when surely it was intended to be based on need.

Ilovecheese

I know you were not asking me but I don't understand the question about sources. Surely it is obvious from any news outlet that academies are more numerous, that there is no policy for social housing and no rent regulation. Private providers are well ensconced in the health service. There is even a cap on the amount of social security that a family can receive, it is no longer based on need when surely it was intended to be based on need.

There’s a Labour Government in Wales Ilovecheese, and there are no academies, no private providers ensconced in healthcare, and different regulation for social housing to England, not perfect but much better. The Welsh government can’t legislate to improve social security payments. It’s not as black as you’re painting it.

Sorry, I didn't know we were talking about Wales.
I was referring to England.
I have a great respect for Mark Drakeford and wish he could be leader of the English labour party.
I keep getting in a muddle on this thread.

We are talking about the UK as I understand it Ilovecheese. I made the point about Wales because I was illustrating that peoples fears about a Labour Government in Westminster achieving nothing in terms of social reform are unfounded. Mark Drakeford is not at all charismatic, but he’s an honest and decent person who cares about people and admits when he gets things wrong - and he’s a good manager who is respected by the other parties in Wales. That’s what we need in Westminster.

Ilovecheese

I know you were not asking me but I don't understand the question about sources. Surely it is obvious from any news outlet that academies are more numerous, that there is no policy for social housing and no rent regulation. Private providers are well ensconced in the health service. There is even a cap on the amount of social security that a family can receive, it is no longer based on need when surely it was intended to be based on need.

But all the things that you cite are things that Labour has no power over in England. Thanks to devolution, as Casdon points out, there are things that Labour can do in Wales, but only when they are within its remit. So they can't do anything about social security.

But what I am interested in is assertions that Labour doesn't have any policies that are 'socialist'. News outlets as a source of these assertions are 'secondary sources' and can be suspect. I'm asking really if you, and the others, have looked at what the LP has written about various topics? If you have, are you basing what you say on what it has omitted to say? Or perhaps you just don't believe them?

I am exercised by this idea that the LP has abandoned socialism and I'm interested in knowing what proof there is of this. It seems fair to look at what has actually been written by them.

I'm not trying to be confrontational about this. I'm just interested. I liked the 2019 manifesto but I can well understand the need for caution when the media can be so vociferously anti....

There was a serious gap in the Labour Party's 2019 manifesto - support for electoral reform and a change to PR.

Let's hope that gets fixed before the next GE.

There may be two years before the general election, why the need to set everything in stone now ,

So, Casdon do you see Keir Starmer as being like Mark Drakeford? I would like to believe that.
MaisieD
I will have to have a think about what I have seen the Labour party say.
One thing I remember is Wes Streeting saying that they would continue to use private providers in the NHS because the public liked it. It was on a radio interview but maybe it was out of context?. Then there is Keir Starmer not wanting to nationalize the energy companies when this seems like the perfect time to be in favour of a policy which would help so many people, like has happened in France.

But I suppose what still hurts is Rachel Reeves saying that she is glad that people like me have left the party, or Wes Streeting calling people like me barnacles. Or the inference that people like me are anti semitic. Those sorts of remarks are the sort of thing that makes me feel that I just can't be bothered with that sort of Labour leadership.

Seems to me that, if Labour are too clear about their policies at the moment, it will just give the new PM time to copy them.

This is what I mean by a 'source'

We need a New Deal for Working People, at the heart of which should be the commitment that workers have full rights from day one on the job. We should see an end to multiple different categories of employment under which working people are denied basic access to rights and protections such as Statutory Sick Pay (which should increase from its current levels), National Minimum Wage entitlement, holiday, paid parental leave and protection against unfair dismissal, depending on their status[22], with bogus self-employment used to exploit workers and drive down pay and standards across the board. It means strengthening workers’ collective rights through removing the restrictions on trade union activity so unions can support and empower working people. It also means the end of the appalling practice of ‘fire and rehire’, where workers are issued redundancy notices and then offered new contracts on worse pay and conditions. These bully-boy tactics are wrong: they punish good employers, hit working people hard and harm our economy[23]. Tackling these kind of challenges is central to the work being undertaken by Labour and our affiliated trade unions in the Power in the Workplace Task Force

Anniebach

There may be two years before the general election, why the need to set everything in stone now ,

Yes, it would be very foolish to do so in the current situation which is so volatile.

MayBee70

Seems to me that, if Labour are too clear about their policies at the moment, it will just give the new PM time to copy them.

And give the right wing press plenty of time to thoroughly diss them...

WRT Ilovecheese's sad comments about Reeves and Streeting, I understand how she must feel. It's to be hoped that they reflect on the Forde Report and look to apologising and achieving consensus.

MaisieD that sounds great. So why not show that sort of support to the people who have taken the difficult decision to strike. Be seen with them.

I was listening to Starmer talking about his plan for Labour which is in 3 parts. Initially because of the devastating defeat, it was largely considered that it would take at least a decade to get back to being a party fit for government

The first was to rebuild and reform the Labour Party after the biggest defeat for donkeys years. Starmer then went on to describe the action he has taken to achieve reform and discipline.

The second was to take the fight to the Tories, however the Tories have largely done the job for them.

Lastly Starmer has been actively formulating policies, employing the help from experts on various subjects.
Labour policy will gradually be released before the next election, and a manifesto formulated.

I was listening to a podcast today ( can’t remember which one; listen to so many…might have been Rory Stewart/ Alastair Campbell) which pointed out that Neil Kinnock said elections are won over years not weeks.

Ilovecheese

MaisieD that sounds great. So why not show that sort of support to the people who have taken the difficult decision to strike. Be seen with them.

I know what you mean, and in many ways I agree that support from Starmer would help - it's frustrating. But if he came out in support the Tories would jump on it immediately. There have already been comments in PMQs and elsewhere about the winter of discontent, and how the LP would drag us back to the 70s, and many people take these things at face value, despite the fact that conditions then were very different from now.

When Starmer took over as leader he had a huge hill to climb, and it would be a shame if he lost the ground he's gained by alienating possible votes.