The continuation of the first 100 days.

Ilovecheese

Good about the water and the hereditary peers.
Very dissapointed that the slum landlord is not losing the whip, unlike the decent MPs who wanted to lift children out of poverty.

Can you imagine if it had been one of the tories renting out those mouldy flats- or heavens above, a Reform mp- we would never have heard the last of it- all hypocrites as far as I am concerned- AR maybe, going to stop people having the right to buy their council home- is that not how she got on the ladder?

Last IPSA report Feb 23 gave expense details and gave a 2.9 pay rise in line with public sector pay rates:
but I agree in current circumstances the expenses should be reviewed and the government could I presume request this review.

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.

Milest0ne

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.

I think there should be some type of election for the upper house. There are some excellent peers with great knowledge needed by the government , but it would be too easy for the incumbent government to create peers to make the upper house unrepresentative of the country but biased in favour of the government ,

The appointment of peers should be based on what they can bring to the chamber I think, rather than their political allegiance. I don’t agree with putting another layer of bureaucracy into the system, but a free vote on nominations to the peerage for all MPs would be a fairer way of assessing than government nominations. I do agree with abolishing hereditary peers. I also think they should only serve up to a set age.

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.

I think there should be some type of election for the upper house. There are some excellent peers with great knowledge needed by the government , but it would be too easy for the incumbent government to create peers to make the upper house unrepresentative of the country but biased in favour of the government ,

I read all about IPSA, but the truth is that this government, or any government, won’t act to refuse to accept any pay increases until they’ve settled other pay claims, cut down on their own expenses, reduce the subsidised meals in the HoC or cancel their own heating allowances.
Being able to pass the buck and say “it’s up to IPSA” is useful.
Hearing that the LP would do something about those matters would be very impressive, but it’s not going to happen is it?

As a LP voter I'm hoping that here will be an adjustment to WFA along with many other members.

I also agree about the MP expenses - it was discussed on another thread, but bear in mind the government of the day is not who decides on such matters, its an independent body

Since 2010, responsibility for deciding the salaries and expenses of Members of Parliament has rested with the IPSA. IPSA is a public body which was established by statute. It works independently of the Government and any Members of Parliament"

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.

This is the sort of news that just doesn't jump into headlines but shows that the government are acting on commitments - but its going to be uphill work.

Good news on the carbon front.

Great Britain’s electricity system has recorded its greenest ever summer after growing numbers of wind and solar farms cut the need for gas power plants to fresh lows.
Analysis of energy generation data, commissioned by the Guardian, revealed that Britain’s reliance on gas generation fell in August to less than one-fifth of all electricity, or 4 terawatt hours (TWh), its lowest ever level for a one-month period.
This allowed the carbon intensity of the power grid to plummet to the lowest level recorded for a single month, at 144g of CO2 per kilowatt-hour in August, 40% lower than in the same month last year, according to the analysis.
The data, analysed by the energy thinktank Ember, showed that the record lows were sustained even when averaged over the summer months from June to August, meaning the grid experienced its greenest summer ever.
The Labour government aims to run the UK’s power grid on virtually zero carbon electricity by 2030 thanks to a surge in new wind and solar farms. Its flagship auction this week for renewable energy subsidies awarded contracts for 131 new projects, or enough new clean electricity projects to power 11m UK homes. However, it secured just half the offshore wind capacity needed every year for the rest of the decade if the government is to hit its net zero target.

I certainly applaud the new measures for rental properties.

And on relationships with Europe, too, although this will be a slow process.

More protection for renters and forcing landlords to be considerate is very welcome news and I hope these laws will be passed in Parliament, I don’t forsee problems with it but you never know.
Whitewave I think Larry the cat will take one look at the ‘Sibby’ and vanish back through his catflap.😄

No fault evictions.

Landlords will soon be banned from removing tenants without cause as the government prepares to launch a long-delayed package of measures for renters including stopping no-fault evictions within months.
Ministers will bring the renters’ rights bill for its first reading in the Commons next week, sources have told the Guardian, as they look to rush through key parts of its housing changes.
At the heart of the bill, according to several people with knowledge of its contents, will be an immediate end to so-called section 21 evictions, where a landlord can oust a tenant for no reason, to be brought into force as soon as the bill is granted royal assent.
It will also include other protections such as requiring landlords to give more notice before they evict a tenant and preventing them from inciting bidding wars by encouraging prospective tenants to bid more than the listed rental price.
And ministers will seek to enact Awaab’s law, which will force landlords or agents to carry out crucial repairs within a specified period of time, with the exact period likely to be decided after a consultation.

Under Labour’s revived proposals, the no-fault eviction ban would start as soon as the bill becomes law. The government is also planning a series of other protections for renters, including longer notice periods before they have to move out of a property if a landlord wants to sell it or move back in.
Ministers also want to bring in a law to stop landlords and letting agents starting bidding wars by asking or encouraging renters to bid more than the listed rental price, though they plan to allow renters to make a higher offer of their own accord.

Sorry I should have edited the above post. It looks muddled.

Opinion

Sir Keir Starmer’s visit to Germany (Report, 28 August) is symbolic of the UK’s wish to improve relations with the EU. Symbolism matters, but what is the substance behind it? Starmer proposes a new treaty “to do with trade, defence, the economy, illegal migration etc” and equivalent to the Lancaster House treaty with France, which is primarily about defence cooperation, an area where bilateral arrangements are possible. EU member states cannot sign trade agreements, though there might be an indirect impact on trade through the UK becoming a less uncertain business partner and opening defence procurement.
EU officials insist that the first requirement is a renewal of trust, and a willingness by the UK to adhere to its commitments. But even as he enthused about the bilateral deal, Starmer insisted on his red lines of no single market, no customs union and no rejoining. This bilateral deal could open the way to a serious review of Boris Johnson’s flawed 2020 trade and cooperation agreement, and to new UK-EU agreements, eg on carbon pricing, aerospace, mutual recognition of professional qualifications, and youth mobility. However, only those next steps could make a real economic difference. To mitigate the damage done by Brexit, any new deal would have to be deep and wide-ranging, and contain commitments that the UK legally binds itself to and adheres to.
Ultimately, only an arrangement going as far as the European Economic Area would make Britain as predictable an environment for investors as we were prior to Brexit. This would be popular with Labour MPs and public opinion, but would involve Starmer preparing the public for another reversal on policy.
Dr Peter Holmes
Emeritus reader (economics) and fellow of the UK Trade Policy Observatory, University of Sussex
• The prime minister’s meetings last week with the German chancellor and the French president, with the aim of “resetting the UK’s relationship with Europe”, could be of great significance both to the UK and our European neighbours. In a recent British Council report on global perceptions, Germany was ranked as the top EU nation for working constructively with other governments, but the research also showed that young people across the G20 think the UK has the most trusted institutions and the most positive influence in the world. If we are to “turn a corner” on Brexit, as the PM has outlined, then building connections, understanding and trust between our nations has never been more imperative.
Scott McDonald
Chief executive, British Council

Oreo

There is no hmm about it, simply pinpoints the relevant MP.

I believe he has a name. You could have just used that. There was no need to mention his religion.

Oreo

growstuff

Oreo

It is just a token action taken just to placate MP’s who have large Muslim constituencies.
That’s why it’s wrong.

I don't believe it's wrong - and I don't live in a constituency with a high number of Muslim voters. You don't have to be a Muslim to see what's going on in Gaza and the West Bank.

You don’t believe it’s wrong but I do.
It’s a sop thrown to Muslim constituencies and Pro Palestine supporters is all.
It’s a very tiny percentage of arms and makes no discernible difference.

Where's your evidence that it's a sop? Or is this just an unsubstantiated theory?

The arrival of the Siberian cat – as yet unnamed in public – was revealed on Monday by the prime minister, who said his children had been pushing for a dog to join them at Downing Street.

As a consolation, the Starmer family may be cheered to know that “Sibbies” are regarded by experts as being more like dogs than other cats. They are known to be highly intelligent, inquisitive and can be trained,

They can be very dog-like in their behaviour. You can put a harness on them. I know of people who go camping with them and a couple who even go up the Cairngorms quite regularly with them,”

A more immediate challenge for the Starmers concerns the bedding-in of the kitten at a residence where it has become the third cat – alongside Jojo, the Starmer family cat, and Larry, who has been chief mouser to the Cabinet Office at 10 Downing Street since 2011.
Larry, for one, has form – infamously clashing outside No 10 in 2012 with Freya, who lived next door with the then chancellor, George Osborne.

halfpint1

As to councils buying back , I asked them to buy back my Mums' flat and they said they were too broke to do so.

I can only speak for my LA in Wales, but they have been buying back where they can when the houses are on existing council estates, because it makes sense for them from a maintenance perspective, obviously finances are necessary to do that, but housing has been prioritised by Welsh Government. Land is so expensive that it’s often cheaper to buy back than build on a new site.

That’s the trouble you see halfpint. The property will have gone up in price.

As to councils buying back , I asked them to buy back my Mums' flat and they said they were too broke to do so.

A bit of encouraging news on the implementation of the WFP.
news.sky.com/story/sign-up-for-pension-credit-doubles-after-being-made-requirement-for-winter-fuel-payment-13210729

Oreo

Mollygo I try to see the good and the bad ideas/ policies in the Labour Party, so many see four legs good and two legs bad IYKWIM.I’ll continue to either applaud or criticise what the government do.

👏👏👏

Mollygo I try to see the good and the bad ideas/ policies in the Labour Party, so many see four legs good and two legs bad IYKWIM.I’ll continue to either applaud or criticise what the government do.

Whitewavemark2

Oreo

There is no hmm about it, simply pinpoints the relevant MP.

As you wish

It’s not a matter of wishing, please stop stirring.