The first 100 days.

I am very concerned about the new approach to freedom of speech, is this the way they are going to go. Its just drip drip drip of erosion of free speech. Of course the people impacted most are minorities and women.

Thank you WWM.

Loving these posts, WWM- please keep them coming. Great to feel informed.

I’ve just been perusing this thread from the start, and realise how my posts have changed.

At the beginning it was easy to post stuff, but gradually as the days have gone on, the amount of information has risen to such an extent that the only way I can keep up is to copy/paste the information, which I really prefer not to do but is the only way I can keep up.

So I am sorry about that but at least we are keeping up (well puffing in the slip stream!) as the government whizzes along.

Perhaps it will calm down during recess?

Tory “freedom of speech” act not fit for purpose

Powers introduced by the Conservatives to protect freedom of speech in universities have been halted by the new government in a dramatic about-turn, paving the way for ministers to scrap the legislation.

Bridget Phillipson also announced major changes to the work of the higher education regulator in England, the Office for Students (OfS), in order to prioritise financial stability in the sector, as many universities struggle in the face of a mounting financial crisis.
The legislation, which faced bitter opposition from the point of its inception, required universities and student unions to take “reasonable steps” to promote free speech, or face sanctions by the regulator including possible fines.
Phillipson said the legislation was not fit for purpose and risked imposing heavy burdens on institutions. “For too long, universities have been a political battlefield and treated with contempt, rather than as a public good, distracting people from the core issues they face.”
She said the government remained “absolutely committed” to freedom of speech and academic freedom, adding: “This legislation could expose students to harm and appalling hate speech on campuses.

Phillipson’s decision was welcomed by many in the sector who disputed the previous government’s narrative of a freedom of speech crisis in universities, and its claims that “cancel culture” and “no platforming” were undermining academic freedom. In sharp contrast to Tory claims, a survey of students by the OfS last year found nearly nine in 10 students in England felt free to express their opinions and beliefs.

Super rich and off shore pension schemes

Rachel Reeves is facing calls to crack down on the super-rich using offshore pension schemes to avoid multimillion pound inheritance and capital gains tax bills, following a Guardian investigation.
On Thursday, undercover filming revealed how ultra-wealthy individuals are being advised how to use a loophole in pensions investments to shelter their wealth from Labour’s clampdown on large-scale tax dodging.
The promoter of one scheme told an undercover reporter that the government would not legislate to close the schemes down as ministers have “bigger fish to fry”.
He said a client had placed £30m into a pension scheme to protect it from inheritance taxes, implying almost £12m of taxes saved by the client’s children.

A spokesperson for the Treasury said the government would use the budget to provide an update on its plan to close the tax gap and added that it was “fully committed to cracking down on those who fail to pay their fair share”.
Responding to the Guardian’s investigation, Dan Neidle, the founder of the campaign group Tax Policy Associates, said: “These offshore pension funds … are being widely used as tax avoidance vehicles. I expect the rules will change in the budget”.
The Guardian’s filming suggests that multimillionaire UK residents are being pitched a little-known offshore product called a qualifying non-UK pension scheme (QNUPS), which is said to legally protect their fortunes from inheritance tax (IHT) and capital gains tax (CGT).

Labour has promised to renew the focus on tax avoidance by “the wealthy” to “ensure everyone pays their fair share” as it grapples with what it says are threadbare public finances and growing demands to settle long-running disputes over public sector pay and benefits.
Arun Advani, an associate professor at the University of Warwick, who co-authored a 2023 Institute for Fiscal Studies paper called Reforming Inheritance Tax, said: “The tax relief against inheritance tax, on top of already not paying national insurance contributions and capital gains tax, has always been difficult to justify. It means pensions are increasingly used as saving for one’s children, rather than saving for old age. The use of these foreign schemes means there is even more revenue that would be available from removing this tax break than previously estimated.”

The ICC and Israel

Labour has announced its biggest step yet in overhauling the UK’s approach to the Middle East, dropping its opposition to an international arrest warrant against Benjamin Netanyahu despite pressure from Washington not to do so.
Downing Street announced on Friday that the government would not submit a challenge to the jurisdiction of the international criminal court, whose chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, is seeking a warrant against the Israeli prime minister.
The move makes it more likely that the ICC will now grant Khan’s request, in what would be a stunning international rebuke for Israel over the way it has conducted the war in Gaza and put Netanyahu at risk of arrest if he travels abroad.
It also reverses months of British policy after the previous government was steadfast in its support of Israel and its desire to stick closely to the US position.
Ministers are expected to announce further changes within days, including the results of a review of Israel’s compliance with international law. The foreign secretary, David Lammy, has also signalled that he is considering banning some arms sales to Israel.

The UK’s new position does, however, signal that it will be a stronger critic of Israel under Labour.
Lammy announced last week that the UK would join other countries in restoring funding to the UN’s relief agency in Palestine, Unrwa, overturning the previous government’s suspension.
He is also preparing to announce the results of a review into whether Israel is breaking international law, and sources have also told the Guardian ministers are considering a partial ban on the sale of weapons to Israel.
One source said Lammy was preparing to ban the sale of “offensive” weapons, but not “defensive” ones that could be used to defend Israel against attacks from abroad.

Public Sector

Millions of public sector workers are set for an above-inflation pay rise due to be announced by Rachel Reeves next week after more than a decade of austerity.
The chancellor is expected to accept the recommendations of public sector pay bodies for pay increases on Monday – a move economists believe could cost up to £10bn.
The NHS and teaching pay bodies are reported to have recommended a 5.5% rise, and similar advice is likely to have been given by other pay review bodies, covering workforces such as doctors and dentists, armed forces, prisons and police officers.

The pay rises would help reverse years of declining wages, deal with staff shortages and see off the threat of industrial action.

Assisted Dying

A bill which would allow terminally ill adults with six months or fewer to live to get medical help to end their own lives has been introduced in the House of Lords, by former Labour Justice Secretary Lord Falconer.

blue14

I have been following this thread with great interest since it started.
Whitewavemark2 thank you BUT I hope you also have time to sleep!
I see you've been posting in the middle of the night.

Thank you for saving me the trouble trawling through all the publications and finding the information for myself.
You've certainly given yourself a tough job! I appreciate all your hard work.

😀😀 I have weird sleep pattern - so when it’s quiet I use it to post stuff.

A reporting thread reports what the media say ronib. Whitewavemark2 has been using standard media reports from the mainstream press. There are plenty of political threads, and you could start more if you want to dispute what the media are saying, this isn’t the place for it because it derails a thread which many people are finding to be a useful record of what is happening, that we can all look back on to compare after the 100 days. Opinions are not relevant here.

Casdon

The point is ronib that this is meant to be just a reporting thread? If you want to discuss all the things you believe Labour is doing wrong since coming into power why don’t you start a thread about that specifically instead of constantly trying to derail a thread that is just facts from various sources about what Labour are striving to achieve in the first 100 days.

Casdon if this is just a reporting thread fine - doesn’t mean to say that it’s beyond question. So future statements on actual progress need to be backed up to avoid inaccurate information surely? Assuming there is progress.

MayBee70

I think it’s a bit much comparing this government with Boris Johnson!

Once bitten twice shy MayBee70 and don’t forget that only 20 per cent of the population voted for this government.

Rachel Reeves was saying yesterday the Tories had left a lot of debt to be handled, we knew in advance this was going to happen Sunak did this deliberately to give himself more short term cash.

I hope we dont get more cuts to services but it’s clear it’s not going to be easy to balance the books, as for £19bn maybe that is what is needed, wether they can get it is another matter. Probably a lot of spending and benefits have got to be trimmed as well as tax rises.

I have been following this thread with great interest since it started.
Whitewavemark2 thank you BUT I hope you also have time to sleep!
I see you've been posting in the middle of the night.

Thank you for saving me the trouble trawling through all the publications and finding the information for myself.
You've certainly given yourself a tough job! I appreciate all your hard work.

I think it’s a bit much comparing this government with Boris Johnson!

The point is ronib that this is meant to be just a reporting thread? If you want to discuss all the things you believe Labour is doing wrong since coming into power why don’t you start a thread about that specifically instead of constantly trying to derail a thread that is just facts from various sources about what Labour are striving to achieve in the first 100 days.

Wwm2. Your post at 3.39 is misleading.
I resent being told incomplete truths - for example, how many failed asylum seekers were deported the moment Labour came into power? Would the previous government not have had to prepare paperwork? By some miracle Labour just did it? Was it 55?

A lot of what is being written is very reminiscent of the approach Boris Johnson took - psyching up stuff that never happened. I also guess that Labour will repeal the cap on care home fees/ support for social care due to take effect in October 2025. Truth and government are poles apart.

nanna8

Sometimes you wonder why they don’t stop having meetings and pontificating and actually DO something. Typical government.

The meetings are to discuss what to do and to brief those who are delegated to do it. That has to be done face to face and with two-way conversations and Q and A sessions with ministers and other responsible people..

To pack in so many meetings and discusssions in 15 days has been an achievement in itself - maybe that always happens when a new government takes over, but from WW2 we are hearing detail about what conclusions were reached and what plans are being laid. Many thanks for this very informative thread.

Oh dear ronib you never let up do you😄

So I shall reiterate

All my headed information is drawn from either The Guardian/BBC or other publications like for example the Pat McFaddon one was from The Civil Service News published on 17th
I should put”””” around it but usually forget.

Other much fewer posts are my own thoughts.

So please don’t muddle the two.

If my reply to nanna is factually incorrect I would be pleased to read where you think it is incorrect t. However you are losing the argument by making it personal by calling me naive, Pollyanna and now subjective.

The idea in these threads particularly the N&P threads is to debate the SUBJECT not the person.

I do hope that helps.

To reply to your comments to my reply to nanna8

You are answering a different question to what was asked.

The poster questioned whether the government had done anything but talk. I went on to list actions. That is all. I didn’t say that the government will get everything right.

As far as the £19bn tax raid. Now that is factually incorrect. No one knows how much extra tax will be raised in order to avoid another period of austerity.

But when I voted, I did so with the knowledge that this would happen, and also with the knowledge that income tax, VAT , NI and corporation tax would not be touched.

But I am content to see tax raised in order to pay for welfare etc, rather than bring about greater austerity which has done so much harm to our country since 2010.

You need to stop clutching at those straws though ronib, because as you say, it’s only 15 days in.

Casdon no speech marks in the post at 3.39 in reply to nanna8. Definitely a very subjective interpretation. It’s clutching at straws time and only 15 days in….

ronib

Wwm2 it’s good that you are doing all this research and reporting back on how you see the first 100 days. I think by now you are losing an objective view. It makes better sense to say that strikes have been averted for now, and it’s far too early to say after 15 days that the government is getting anything right at all. The 19 billion tax raid is on the horizon.

Note the speech marks around what Whitewavemark2 posts. Reporting from other sources, not her losing an objective view. This is a reporting thread?

LizzieDrip

Regarding the Crown Estate, this from the Guardian, July 2023:

”Earlier this year King Charles asked for the profits from Britain’s growing fleet of offshore windfarms to be used for the “wider public good” rather than as extra funding for the monarchy”

If the above happens - brilliant! I would not be happy about any profit from wind farms going to the Royal family.

I’ll be keeping an eye on this! I’m not a royalist but, if the King does uphold what he’s said (above), I may look more kindly on the royals.

Sorry I didn’t read your comment before posting. I would like to point out that last year King Charles donated a huge amount of money from wind farm profits to the country. In addition to this the Sovereign Grant will be reduced to 12% next year. I will probably get a huge amount of flak but I wish more people would appreciate that we have a benevolent monarch and the next one seems to be the same.
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/19/king-charles-redirects-1bn-windfarm-profits-towards-public-good

Siope
I absolutely approve of state investment in green energy but I am not dead keen on taxpayer money being used to further enrich the Crown Estate.

I understand you may be anti monarchy but The Crown Estate belongs to the country not the monarch and next year 88% of the profits will go to The Treasury, I suspect the percentage will decrease further in future years. In addition to this King Charles gave a huge amount of wind farm income to the country last year. I would much prefer the Crown Estate to be under control of the monarchy than under a President or, worse still, sold off to foreign interests who would not have the good of the country foremost. My politics are to the left but since researching how the monarchy is funded I don’t support a Republic and I hope I don’t live to see it. Just my opinion.