The continuation of the first 100 days.

Interesting , that there are ‘no’ current conversations regarding today’s vote in WFA .
I for one am very interested !

I am away walking in the New Forest for a few days, so will catch up when I get back.

Actually not a lot to report.

Peter Kylie announced that the governments attitude towards universities will change from the brick-bats that they have been receiving recently to a more supportive environment - recognising their contribution to innovation and development.

There is other gossipy bits but nothing much. Unless anyone knows better😊

It’s encouraging to read that the unofficial opposition has stepped up to the plate. The trade unions might be the last hope for some sense in government. Whoever would have thought it?

No you aren't Mollygro as I asked them the same question and was fobbed of!!

Bridie22

I would like people to have access to MPs, no sign of our labour MP since they were elected !

Same here and no response to emails.
Mind you the Green Party who asked me to vote didn’t respond when I asked them what their position was on the ability to change sex. Perhaps I’m asking the wrong questions ITO.

That's a worthwhile reminder Maizie - as was the reminder above that MP's can only claim heating expenses on one home if they reside outside of London, but I think it would be a good gesture to publicly forgo an element of it.

I don't expect to see my MP unless I choose to go to an event, but I have always had emails answered, and she gets 100's every week.

I would like people to have access to MPs, no sign of our labour MP since they were elected !

The whole purpose of subsidising MPs' expenses was to ensure that the opportunity to become on e of the nation's legislators was open to all, regardless of their personal wealth. It was to democratise the system, which was traditionally confined to people with wealth. Who, naturally, mostly ran the country in a way which favoured them...

While some MPs have been prepared to game the expenses system I am not willing to believe that this is common to all MPs. And I am happy to accept that the expenses are needed to keep access to being an MP open to as many people as possible.

There’s always a pile on. Just that this time it’s about Labour.

I did - myth busting. I'm not saying that it shouldn't be looked at on the current situation but I also did some googling and found similar accusations in Feb 2023 in DM and Express, except somehow now its Labour there is a pile on there wasn't before.

I'm glad that at least one person followed the Reuters Fact check link, Allira 😄

Mollygo

Whitewavemark2

The “fatal” motion will not succeed unless the government wishes it to do so.

So it doesn’t necessarily mean that this is the end of the issue, merely a spanner thrown into the works.

Starmer has a difficult choice.
Stand strong and support his minister who decided it is a good idea (even though Starmer thought it wasn’t under the previous government).
OR
Back down or at least defer the issue and look as if he really cares about pensioners.

My bet is that he will raise the pension credit level to help those marginal pensioners just above the threshold. An increase in pension level due to the triple lock has already been announced.

I will be amazed if many/any Labour MPs defy the whip on this issue

“MPs can claim for energy costs for their constituency office, as well as their residential accommodation (if they represent a non-London constituency),” the spokesperson added. “They cannot claim for utility bills on their private homes. Whilst there is no specific upper limit on energy claims for constituency offices and residential accommodation, MPs do have an overall budget cap they must stick to for office costs (36,550 pounds in London and 33,020 pounds elsewhere) and accommodation (29,290 pounds in London and 19,940 pounds elsewhere).”

So the £3,000 is not a specific amount but could be paid out of their overall expenses of up to £29,290 for accommodation.

Whitewavemark2

Thursday

The Constitution

The government is proposing to banish all remaining hereditary peers from the House of Lords in the biggest shake-up of parliament in a quarter century.
The UK’s 92 remaining hereditary peers – who have inherited their titles from their parents – will lose their right to sit and vote in the upper chamber under proposals put forward by ministers on Thursday.
The move would complete reforms first made by Tony Blair’s government, which revoked the 700-year-old right of all hereditary peers to sit in the Lords in 1999. Just 92 of them, elected from the whole group, were allowed to remain until an agreement could be reached to phase them out altogether.
All 92 hereditary peers who now hold seats in the Lords are white men, and their average age is just under 70. They have continued to top up their numbers by holding byelections when one of them retires or dies.

The government’s bill will mean that there will no longer be any hereditary peers in the upper chamber. The earl marshal and the lord great chamberlain, who had been expected to keep their seats because of their ceremonial functions, will also be removed.

Should get rid of all of them £300 quid a day to sign in- scandalous

My point, Oreo, is that there is actually no such thing as a £3,000 heating allowance for MPs

This thread is perpetuating a distortion of the truth and encouraging negative thinking about MPs.

All MP’s get a really good allowance for not only their offices but for their houses. Bet they wouldn’t like that to be cut.

£2, 700 isn’t much less than the figure quoted £3,000 tho is it?
That’s what RR claimed on her office and residential expenses according to your link.

Why is this nonsense about MPs having. £3,000 allowance for heating their second homes being perpetuated? Did no-one do a fact check before posting it?

www.reuters.com/fact-check/uks-reeves-does-not-have-3400-pound-heating-allowance-contrary-online-claims-2024-08-06/

Oreo

Pippa22

Why not begin by removing the Winter Fuel Allowance from recipients who pay higher rate tax ?

Perhaps also remove the £3,000 plus that we all contribute to that MPs receive to pay towards heating their second homes ? That seems a very, very generous sum that they receive on top of other generous expenses.

After all “ We are all in this together “. Oh no we’re not , that was the other lot.

I think that £3,000 is an outrageous amount, and I know it isn’t set by the MP’s but they have accepted it.

😮 £3,000 pa towards the cost of heating their second homes?
£3,000 pa would more than pay to heat the homes of most pensioners!
One rule for them, another for the rest of us.

Whitewavemark2

The “fatal” motion will not succeed unless the government wishes it to do so.

So it doesn’t necessarily mean that this is the end of the issue, merely a spanner thrown into the works.

Starmer has a difficult choice.
Stand strong and support his minister who decided it is a good idea (even though Starmer thought it wasn’t under the previous government).
OR
Back down or at least defer the issue and look as if he really cares about pensioners.

The “fatal” motion will not succeed unless the government wishes it to do so.

So it doesn’t necessarily mean that this is the end of the issue, merely a spanner thrown into the works.

Thank goodness.

WFA

“The respected former pensions minister Ros Altmann has tabled a “fatal” parliamentary motion to kill off the government’s controversial plan to limit winter fuel payments, describing it as “one of the worst decisions I have ever seen”.
The move by Baroness Altmann, a crossbench peer and leading expert on issues affecting elderly people, comes amid growing pressure on the prime minister, Keir Starmer, from across the ­political spectrum, to drop or modify the plan ahead of a series of key votes this week.
Separately, a report by a cross-party group of peers has accused Starmer and his ministers of rushing through the changes “at a pace that does not permit the appropriate scrutiny” by parliament. The peers say they are “unconvinced” by the reasons given for the urgency.
The prime minister is facing a damaging rebellion by some of his own MPs in a vote on the issue in the House of Commons on Tuesday, with many Labour backbenchers reporting that their inboxes have been ­bursting with complaints from pensioners anxious about keeping warm this winter.
One Labour MP said: “They have to give way on this or old people will die. It is better to back off now. Even cabinet ministers know this is a ­disaster for the party if we don’t change course.”

biglouis

Tenants were afraid to speak to reporters and asked for their names to be witheld. They were reluctant to go to the council about the conditions in their flats. They were also told that if they applied for benefit they would be evicted. Dont we have legislation to deal with "revenge" evictions?

I'm not allowed to apply for benefit help, states this in my tenancy.. included c/tax help too so watching with interest...

The Darzi Report.

“Streeting is expected to use the report as the foundation for his own blue-sky thinking on reform. The current NHS England long-term plan introduced in 2019 was drawn up before the pandemic, which has caused waiting lists to lengthen to a point where 6.39 million people are waiting for 7.62m treatments.
Streeting said last year that he believed the NHS required three big shifts, from sickness to prevention, from hospitals to GPs and community services, and from an “analogue service to one that embraces the technological revolution”.

IMO this should be seen as a watershed moment for the NHS and I am of the opinion that if this is now not grasped and dealt with properly, we will undoubtedly lose the NHS for good.