The first 100 days.

If we look back on everything over the past 15 days, and I admit that there has been no let up in the work ethic, a lot of valuable time has been spent drivelling on about the failings, faults, shortcomings and damage etc of the previous government. Fair enough, but hopefully in the next 15 days there will be more energy put into actually moving plans forward rather than playing the blame game.

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.

Civil Service

Pat McFaddon has told the civil service thst there will no longer be a culture of beating up civil servants for policy failures.

Ministers will take responsibility.

McFadden said this approach will be a marked change from that of the previous government, who he accused of “going around beating the civil service up.”

“There are new ways of policy innovation that have to happen and, frankly, I think it should make being in the civil service a richer, more rewarding experience, rather than being blamed for the failures of ministers,” the Cabinet Office minister said.

McFadden could be referencing any number of incidents over the last few years, from allegations that former justice and home secretaries Dominic Raab and Priti Patel had bullied civil servants, to then-Conservative Party chair Oliver Dowden telling civil servants working from home to “get off your Pelotons and back to work”.

nanna8

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

They’ve been in power for 15 working days.

Go back over this thread and work out actual actions carried out.

So

Strikes averted

Rwanda stopped

Failed asylum seekers deported

GB Energy set up

Trains beginning to be nationalised

Prisons crises averted

Parliament beginning to be cleaned up

European relations put on a more even keel

Boring government - don’t scoff - we’ve had nothing but psychodramas for the past 5 years and returning to boring where we can be confident that the government is focused on the good of the country brings a huge sense of relief.

Plenty more achieved in just 15 days.

We will find out even more once the spending review, spending plans snd budget have been decided.

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

Health

Wes Streeting has called England’s healthcare watchdog “not fit for purpose” after an interim report found significant failings were hampering its ability to identify poor performance at hospitals, care homes and GP practices.
The health and social care secretary promised to “grip the crisis” at the Care Quality Commission (CQC) by taking immediate action to increase oversight of the body and giving patients more confidence in their care.
He announced four immediate steps the government and CQC will take to restore public confidence and give patients a more accurate picture, including recruiting a senior cancer doctor to review the body’s assessments.

The interim report, led by Dr Penny Dash, the chair of the North West London Integrated Care Board, revealed that inspection levels were still well below pre-Covid levels, that there was a lack of consistency in assessments, and that there were problems with a faltering IT system.
She found that around a fifth of the locations the CQC has the power to inspect had never received a rating, while other organisations had not been reinspected for years. One inspection was around a decade old.

Health officials said the watchdog’s failings meant it was unable to consistently judge the quality of health and care services, including those in need of urgent improvement.

initial steps include the appointment of Prof Sir Mike Richards, the CQC’s first chief inspector of hospitals in 2013 and a senior oncologist, to overhaul the inspection and assessment system.
The government wants to increase the transparency with which the CQC determines its ratings for health and social care providers, to rapidly improve operational performance, and to increase oversight. The body will be expected to give regular updates on its progress to the department.

Finance and Public Spending

Rachel Reeves is expected to reveal a £20bn hole in government spending for essential public services on Monday, paving the way for potential tax rises in the autumn budget.

The government pointed to spending concerns on the asylum system, welfare, defence and prisons. However, work is still being done on the audit and the final figure of £20bn could shift as officials examine the spending commitments of each department.

Experts expect she will be forced to announce tax changes in the budget, with options including capital gains or inheritance taxes and slashing other tax reliefs. Reeves has ruled out changes to income tax, VAT, national insurance and corporation tax – the largest revenue raisers.

The prime minister, Keir Starmer, told business leaders this week that the public finances were “in the worst place since the second world war”.
A Labour source said: “On Monday, the British public are finally going to see the true scale of the damage the Conservatives have done to the public finances.
“They spent taxpayers’ money like no tomorrow because they knew someone else would have to pick up the bill. It now falls to Labour to fix the foundations of our economy and that work has already begun.”

As well as setting out the major gaps in public spending projections, which experts had already said were likely to require austerity-level cuts, Reeves will highlight wasted opportunities for growth, including planning and investment.

I hope we all live to see the improvements we all need Whitewavemark2 but the truth - alas - is some will take a long time.

It's all about the land isn't it? If you want to understand British culture and heritage, look no further than who owns the land you live, work and will be buried on. There is no escaping it.

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.

Only 12% of any profits would go to the Monarchy.

"The Crown Estate is owned by the Monarch “in right of the Crown”. This means that while the King owns the estate during his reign, it is not his private property and he does not manage or make decisions about its assets.

This dates back to 1760 when George III surrendered the management of Crown Lands to Parliament for a fixed annual payment.

Later in the Crown Estate Act 1961 the modern-day independent and commercial organisation was created. Our profit is delivered to the Treasury, who then decide the annual payment to the King (the Sovereign Grant)." which used to be called the Civil List. From it the Monarch pays the expenses of his/her position.

Currently the Monarch gets 12% of Crown Land Income. It used to be 25% but was scaled back because of the increased profitability of the lands.

Apologies to all those who know all about this, but I have found that there are many, including people living in Britain, who are not aware of this and think that the Crown Estate still belongs totally to the King, along with all profits from it.

IMO it seems hypocritical, given Charles’ green ‘credentials’, for the crown to benefit financially from renewable power production.

Any profit made from wind farms on the crown estate should go to the people not to the already immensely wealthy royal family.

I agree it's a real shame he doesn't fund more community projects with his money, but possibly it's a matter not to be seen to "favour" any current government? (I may have muddled this and this isnt relevant).

Yes, I agree with you Siope, which is why I will be interested to know if Charles does actually act on his words in the future, particularly in light of the new GB energy project. He may or may not🤷‍♀️ … but I’m sure we’ll find out!

Lizzie not wanting to turn this into a complete threadjack, but last year the government adjusted the sovereign grant (from 25% of Crown Estate profits to 12%) because profits from renewables on Crown Estate land had soared, with half a billion pounds profit coming from offshore wind farms in the 2022-3 financial year, up from about £130m the year before..

Despite that cut, because profits increased so much, Charles ended up with the same amount of sovereign grant (£86 million). This year, the sovereign grant has remained at 12% of Crown Estate profits, which are now so high that Charles is getting an increase of over 50% - £45 million extra - to £132 million.

He could, at any point, have asked for the formula to be readjusted, or arranged a community benefit fund, or several other profit sharing arrangements, but has not.

Words, as they say, are cheap…

Crown Estate receives fees for granting permission to erect farms, the wind farms are owned by foreign operators and sell the power to us, any profit goes to them.

I think Milliband was proposing that GB Energy build and operate wind and solar farms, any profit staying in the UK. Currently we have virtually no renewable industry any infrastructure would have to be bought from overseas, the investment to build our own is going to be massive.

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.

For what it is worth I would also like to see an end to the cap, but understand the reasons for the delay

Me too.

Grantanow

Back to the OP: 100 days is an entirely arbitrary timescale on which assess a new government's progress and all the more so given the magnitude of the mess the Tories left behind. Some problems will take 10 years and more to resolve.

Yes I agree but 10 years😲😲😲 I might be dead by then unless someone else takes up the mantle.

I thought 100 days gave me a good chance of still being alive😄

Back to the OP: 100 days is an entirely arbitrary timescale on which assess a new government's progress and all the more so given the magnitude of the mess the Tories left behind. Some problems will take 10 years and more to resolve.

Siope

*WWM*, I’ll try.

Removing the whip from backbenchers who vote with their consciences and in line with the values their constituents elected them for against inconsequential amendments that are guaranteed to fail is frankly verging on despotic.

Their attitude and language around immigration and asylum seekers - see, for a very basic example, Cooper’s response to Anderson’s question last week - seems to be shadowing the divisive rhetoric of the past few years.

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.

Thank you for that. I’ll ruminate on your reply😊

Galaxy

I would like to vote for a party that can cope with people disagreeing on some issues, it looks weak to me, the left have zero power in the labour party currently, it was an over reaction.

Exactly. If you can’t afford to allow some people to disagree, it’s a sign of weakness. Bullies use that tactic.

For what it is worth I would also like to see an end to the cap, but understand the reasons for the delay.

WWM, I’ll try.

Removing the whip from backbenchers who vote with their consciences and in line with the values their constituents elected them for against inconsequential amendments that are guaranteed to fail is frankly verging on despotic.

Their attitude and language around immigration and asylum seekers - see, for a very basic example, Cooper’s response to Anderson’s question last week - seems to be shadowing the divisive rhetoric of the past few years.

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.

LizzieDrip

It was made clear by Labour during the election campaign, in their manifesto, and in the King’s speech that as things stand there will be no change to the 2 child limit cap.

Labour MPs knew this was the case when they campaigned in their constituencies. Voters knew Labour’s stance when they cast their vote.

I believe that Labour will at some point remove the 2 child cap - when the finances are there to do so. If KS said OK, we’ll do it now and increase tax / borrow money to fund it - one can only imagine the reaction to that🤷‍♀️

Absolutely agree.

Just like the right on the Conservative Party which tail wagged the dog to such an extent it ended up the total chaotic failure that lost them the election, so the same could happen to labour with the left.

I don’t want that to happen. But I would like to see the arguments continue within the party itself, whilst maintaining party discipline in parliament.

Starmer was perfectly correct in what he did. He couldn’t do much else.

It was made clear by Labour during the election campaign, in their manifesto, and in the King’s speech that as things stand there will be no change to the 2 child limit cap.

Labour MPs knew this was the case when they campaigned in their constituencies. Voters knew Labour’s stance when they cast their vote.

I believe that Labour will at some point remove the 2 child cap - when the finances are there to do so. If KS said OK, we’ll do it now and increase tax / borrow money to fund it - one can only imagine the reaction to that🤷‍♀️