Reform admits their proposed tax cuts are just an ASPIRATION

Reform would be much worse in gov't, they have a lot of ex Tories amongst them and the electorate threw them out in disgust at the last election because of the decimation they had made to our welfare state, especially the NHS.
Someone said to me that Farage was to Tory as Corbyn was to Labour, just too extreme.
I sincerely hope they never get in power, Farage says the NHS needs reform by which I believe he means cuts, they can afford private health care and don't want to contribute any part of their money to someone else's health.
Brexit has been an expensive mistake, I can't see why anyone would trust Farage with our money

mum2three

I think perhaps things have happened a bit too quickly for Reform and they haven't had time to get their act together properly. The support they are getting is an indication of the strength of feeling in this country.
What is needed is for the current government to be suspended and a caretaker installed until the parties are ready for a General Election.

So who do you think that ‘caretaker’ should be?

Simply an aspiration? That's alright then...

I agree that Reform hasn't got its act together properly but also with Grannygravy that the current government was democratically elected and thus remains in office until the next GE.

mum2three

I think perhaps things have happened a bit too quickly for Reform and they haven't had time to get their act together properly. The support they are getting is an indication of the strength of feeling in this country.
What is needed is for the current government to be suspended and a caretaker installed until the parties are ready for a General Election.

The current UK government was democratically elected, why on earth should they be suspended?

Disclaimer - I didn’t vote for them

MaizieD

^Following through whist in power is a different kettle of fish, as those who have gone before them have found out.^

In the instance of Reform I'd far rather that we (i.e the UK) didn't get any opportunity to find out just what a disaster they would be in government.

Oh yes 👍🏻

I think perhaps things have happened a bit too quickly for Reform and they haven't had time to get their act together properly. The support they are getting is an indication of the strength of feeling in this country.
What is needed is for the current government to be suspended and a caretaker installed until the parties are ready for a General Election.

PaynesGrey

All political parties make claims about savings.

If you look at the Labour manifesto from 2024, it lists:

Changes within departmental spending plans

We have identified waste and other efficiencies which will be used to fund further public service priorities.

labour.org.uk/change/labours-fiscal-plan/

The difference is the used to fund public service priorities whereas Reform want(ed) to give tax cuts which would have favour the wealthy far more than the poorest.

But it's all nonsense, paynesgrey, which ever party says it and whatever purposes they claim that 'saved money' is put to.

We have identified waste and other efficiencies which will be used to fund further public service priorities.

This is ridiculous. Governments have been imposing 'efficiency cuts' since 2015 and all we have now is crumbling public services. And a very discontented population. The Labour manifesto statement was just a way to disguise their intention to make further cuts.

How on earth does cutting public services in order to fund public service make any sense whatsoever?

I did try to address the Reform issue at 23.29 yesterday, as that seems to be what the OP wants to concentrate on.

All political parties make claims about savings.

If you look at the Labour manifesto from 2024, it lists:

Changes within departmental spending plans

We have identified waste and other efficiencies which will be used to fund further public service priorities.

labour.org.uk/change/labours-fiscal-plan/

The difference is the used to fund public service priorities whereas Reform want(ed) to give tax cuts which would have favour the wealthy far more than the poorest.

LadyGracie

Can they be any worse?

Yes.

Can they be any worse?

MaizieD Tue 14-Oct-25 09:43:14
"My quuestion was ""Why should any government need to 'make savings'. LemonJam? when 'savings' actually damage the economy?"

You quoted it in your 'non answer' post at 22.21...

I'm not trying to make an issue of this; it was just that having quoted my question you didn't actually answer it. Not that you're obliged to, I just thought it a bit odd".

You directed a question specifically to me personally and I actually did give an answer, in the context of this post about Reform's proposals. However you found my answer a "none answer" and a "bit odd". I can live with that.

Who knows what the answer to your question is specifically? I would have thought the "any government" to which you refer in your question should provide you with your answer as to their reasons.

Following through whist in power is a different kettle of fish, as those who have gone before them have found out.

In the instance of Reform I'd far rather that we (i.e the UK) didn't get any opportunity to find out just what a disaster they would be in government.

My quuestion was ""Why should any government need to 'make savings'. LemonJam? when 'savings' actually damage the economy?"

You quoted it in your 'non answer' post at 22.21...

I'm not trying to make an issue of this; it was just that having quoted my question you didn't actually answer it. Not that you're obliged to, I just thought it a bit odd.

I agree with you GrannyGravy13.

In my opinion Reform is beginning to get worried.

They are riding high in the polls.

The prospect of having a sway in parliament and or forming the next government has made them realise that being a minor opposition party you can say what you like.

Following through whist in power is a different kettle of fish, as those who have gone before them have found out.

Quote MaizieD Mon 13-Oct-25 23:29:48
Well, that doesn’t answer my question, does it?

Is your post directed at me MaizieD?

If so which of your particular questions have I not answered to your satisfaction as I made my position clear in my response to the OP questions in my 19.36 post yesterday.

Well, that doesn’t answer my question, does it?

Reform aren’t the only party who talks about ‘making savings’. our current government is saying it.

I think we’re talking at cross purposes. But, all that Reform’s proposed ‘savings’ would do would be to perhaps reduce the deficit (though, as has been pointed out, there would be an increased cost in benefits to those who lost their jobs, spending just moving from financing the public sector to financing benefits.

There would also be a big loss of private sector earnings as they lose business supplying the public sector and the money that the now unemployed public sector workers spent in the private sector. So probable job losses there, too.

Tax cuts are no use to the unemployed.

Where would the tax cuts fall? On the poorly paid or on the higher income groups? If they fell on the former group, would the money that the now smaller pool of employed people gain be enough to compensate the private sector for its loss of government business? If they fell on the already well off, who are more likely to save, rather than spend, their extra money, how would the economy benefit?
,

MaizieD Mon 13-Oct-25 21:33:42
"Why should any government need to 'make savings'. LemonJam? when 'savings' actually damage the economy?"

Farage/Reform are not in government. Farage/Reform propose £350bn public sector cost savings most likely to persuade the electorate to vote Reform into government in order to then offer tax cuts as a result of making those savings.

MaizieD

^PS. For some reason known only to GN, I've been given my old name back! Weird!^

You've thoroughly confused me now. What was your 'new' name? I just thought you'd gone awol

I've sent you a PM.

Why should any government need to 'make savings'. LemonJam? when 'savings' actually damage the economy?

PS. For some reason known only to GN, I've been given my old name back! Weird!

You've thoroughly confused me now. What was your 'new' name? I just thought you'd gone awol

It's nonsense, but presumably Reform policy makers thought that cutting back spending on public services would appeal to potential voters. Were the policy makers wrong about the appeal of cuts?

PS. For some reason known only to GN, I've been given my old name back! Weird!

Thanks MaizeD for clarifying. I don't think Reform will actually be able to achieve the savings proposed. Neither would I want to see any services cut to make savings just wandered whether anybody else thinks it is possible.... so far not which is reassuring.

LemonJam

MaizieD

They are Farage/Reform proposed spending cuts not mine. He proposes to make the cuts and then when successful use the savings to make tax cuts.

You asked in your OP what public services we would be happy to see downsized.

I have said none at all and explained why. Also why the notion, whether proposed by Reform, Labour, or the Tories is imbecilic as far as the economy is concerned.