Mainstream Labour

I think many measures have been brought in too quickly without enough thought; many are being adjusted or ameliorated but could have been thought through better in the first place.

The PIP changes are a good example, ie a much more graduated approach in the assessment system. Ditto the biggest initial one of course the winter fuel issue. So many of us in the LP wrote immediately and at length with alternative suggestions to the LP.

I don't feel as pessimistic as others as an insider: it's not blind faith, it's knowing some good people and as an insider having a voice.

I'm sad to read your post Iam.

Surely the point should be that it's really detrimental to the person who loses their job and to society, that THEY are given less benefit than THEY would be if they couldn't work because of mental health issues. A flawed system influences its adherents; they're victims, not villains. I think we have many flawed systems.

I talked on another thread about the curve of the last 70 or so years. We started so well, we worked with available provision and actual need. But after a rush forward for society in this country, we began to tweak systems originally adapted to provision divided by need so that they were adapted to groups of voters. From insurance for being unable to work to pension credit for the poorest pensioners to how we tax wealth income in comparison to work income it's time to go back to the basics, not the add-ons or the exemptions, setting up new systems that bring as much equality as possible, not division.

Promising to pay for government spending out of revenue IS utterly ridiculous and was never going to be achievable. If she sticks to it in the budget it will mean more austerity, no growth and even more reluctance on the part of private enterprise and private finance to invest in the UK.

Reeves has no understanding of how a national economy works, and thus not a clue as to how to stimulate it.

Anniebach

It wasn’t in the manifesto

The part that was in the manifesto was the committment that government spending would be paid for out of revenue. All the changes in benefits have now been abandoned, that seems unlikely to be achieved.

One of our local MP's voted against, the one I would have suspected, she has some special needs herself. She's great, I've been on Zoom committees with her oversight. I'll try and keep these going if it's within my power - I need to check current similar committees.

My mp did vote against the proposals on pip and disability benefits.

FWIW i would like to see a comprehensive review, constructive discussions within the party and necessary changes implemented. I’ve posted previously my concern that someone who loses their job is given less benefits than their next door neighbour who is given top benefits, a paid carer, and a mobility car because of mental health issues which are alcohol or drug dependence. Yes if course I understand the aim is to help the claimant to get to support services with the aim of getting them off benefits and back into work

My question remains, please tell us how successful this is. Identify the inventive to stop drinking, taking the prescribed methadone alongside street drugs, and start working

It wasn’t in the manifesto

I don't think though, that removing benefits from disabled people was in the manifesto.

Nor do I. It did cause a dilemma for Labour MPs. Even mine (who is diligent but loyal to the government) was considering voting against the Bill, and said so on social media.

All disabled people ?

MaizieD

^For a MP who has close links with his constituents it must be really difficult to go against their wishes due to being whipped by the leader of your party.^

One assumes that an MP has won their seat by being voted in on the strength of their party's manifesto. So may be it could be claimed that they are following the majority 'will' of their constituents (of course I know that this isn't an exact match, particularly when a government reneges on some of its manifesto)

I don't think though, that removing benefits from disabled people was in the manifesto.

For a MP who has close links with his constituents it must be really difficult to go against their wishes due to being whipped by the leader of your party.

One assumes that an MP has won their seat by being voted in on the strength of their party's manifesto. So may be it could be claimed that they are following the majority 'will' of their constituents (of course I know that this isn't an exact match, particularly when a government reneges on some of its manifesto)

A friend was a district and county councillor, until she tried to support local issues, deselected very quickly.

Anniebach

Pointless for Tory supporters to point fingers at politicians from other parties, criticising Mandelson will bring back Tory party names.

When speaking of integrity my thoughts were of voting in parliament and x number abstaining, loyalty to their party etc

I guess it’s a fine line between voting the way your constituents want or along party lines.

For a MP who has close links with his constituents it must be really difficult to go against their wishes due to being whipped by the leader of your party.

Pointless for Tory supporters to point fingers at politicians from other parties, criticising Mandelson will bring back Tory party names.

When speaking of integrity my thoughts were of voting in parliament and x number abstaining, loyalty to their party etc

DaisyAnneReturns

GrannyGravy13

Anniebach

Politics and integrity !

I feel that ships well and truly sailed, and sunk in the deepest ocean.

I don't think it ever existed.

We just hear about it now and social media blows anything it chooses out of all proportion very quickly.

KS and the Labour Party proclaimed in every interview pre election that they were the party against sleaze

They will be hung by their own petard, anti sleaze minister gone for being involved in sleaze along with six other ministers resigning before they were sacked.

Peter Mandelson was the last straw for me, if I knew he was a sleazy Machiavellian, and even he said that there were more revelations to come in an interview which went out before PMQ’s when we had to witness KS supporting him…

GrannyGravy13

Anniebach

Politics and integrity !

I feel that ships well and truly sailed, and sunk in the deepest ocean.

I don't think it ever existed.

We just hear about it now and social media blows anything it chooses out of all proportion very quickly.

Integrity refers to the quality of being honest, having strong moral principles, and maintaining soundness in character and conduct. It means adhering to ethical and moral standards consistently, acting with truthfulness and sincerity, and staying true to one's beliefs, even in challenging situations. In a more literal sense, it also refers to the state of being whole, complete, or in an unimpaired condition.

Whitewavemark2

Honestly -this is nothing new within the Labour Party, it has always happened.

Blair, Brown and he who should not be named were instrumental in forming the new Labour group in the 90s - to huge success.

Go further back and you can see it happening to lesser or greater success throughout Labour’s history.

It is because Labour membership is such a hugely broad church.

There will always be tension - particularly when the leadership is not performing as expected.

How lovely to read something that is not an "only my view matters" post!

Whitewavemark2

This isn’t a new party but a group of individuals working to try to steer Labour back to “first principles” it seems to me.

Well, I’m all for that, because unless Labour gets back on track, I like many others will find ourselves looking to cast our vote elsewhere.

The three headlined issues would be a good start.

I agree with this.

It is good that it is within the Labour party as a pressure group rather than some new fringe party setting out to be radical - these do have a strong tendency to be damp squibs.

I hope that they will help to steer the government back to the most important values that make people vote Labour.

Most politicians start off honest as soon as they get involved in party politics that goes out of the window they have to follow the party line

Mandelson was yesterdays man they always have baggage from past mistakes and are best left on the scrap heap

I am not being cynical,it isn’t possible in politics

I’m not quite so cynical about most politicians . I expect them to be like the rest of us, muddling through, doing the best they can.
I must stress though, how angry and disappointed I am by the shambles around the Epstein sacking. Starmer’s work at the DPP had me accepting his commitment to the safety and protection of women and girls. I was not pleased when Mandelson was appointed but acknowledged his dark skills may help manage Trump.
It seems McSweeny watered down the concerns expressed by the security services. Starmer seems to have lacked the necessary curiosity when the emails were released. He shiukd have sacked McSweeny and Mandelson, disappointed me ?

Never has been, never will

Politics and integrity ? Surely

Anniebach

Politics and integrity !

I feel that ships well and truly sailed, and sunk in the deepest ocean.