Big pronouncements

The current population of Norway is approximately 5.67 million people. This places Norway 119th among countries globally, with a very low population density of just 15 people per square km.

Apples and pears comes to mind….

I think it was Finland, rather than Norway, Whitewavemark - re housing schemes

I understand the minutiae of the arguments being put forward, but I think to a degree we are missing the point here.

The people Burnham is addressing are those folk whose interest in the nitty gritty of the economy and politics is virtually nil, but they are interested in headlines like VAT reduced to zero on electricity bills and ending rough sleeping.

What Burnham has to do now is ensure that these people’s lives are actually improved.

That will be an uphill struggle

The problem is GG that whilst I agree the country could well do without that , the majority of the media ( of all types) will be pulling every last thing apart generally based on deliberate misinformation and misinterpretation.

GG13 says with regard disagreement over a funding source, Someone has got it wrong

The real problem is that when the whole of the government message about how it is spending money into the economy is based on a the household economy myth so the whole of government accounting for spending has to conform to the myth.

Basically, it’s all wrong 😆

Government can spend whatever it needs to so long as it has the resources available to be purchased and that it is spending to benefit the whole nation (no knocking down part of No. 10 to make room for a ballroom please)

FriedGreenTomatoes2

The current population of Norway is approximately 5.67 million people. This places Norway 119th among countries globally, with a very low population density of just 15 people per square km.

Apples and pears comes to mind….

So how would you prefer to see homelessness tackled, FGT?

NotSpaghetti

I think it was Finland, rather than Norway, Whitewavemark - re housing schemes

Probably both then, as I’ve just come back from Norway and learned this after a conversation with a Norwegian journalist.

Finland was the first but the policy now applies virtually throughout Scandinavia.

I think the character of urban conglomerations is pretty much the same for us as for Scandi and they have made it work.

But I think the key difference is that when they get people off the street and into the flats they have the support services (health, mental health, addiction) to back it up and we do not. Which brings me back to the idea that this is where the government needs to start. Some rough sleepers have just fallen on hard times but most are addicts or mentally ill.

I think it is a good first target but I am worried about announcements that are going to be easily shown not to be true. I didnt for example believe for one moment believe starmer was going to halve violence against women and girls.

I agree FGT that different size populations and different population densities need to be considered in evaluating the usefulness of policy initiatives in other countries, it doesn’t actually mean that they would not be helpful in formulating possible solutions here.

If average households save £45 annually, it’s peanuts in the scheme of things.
Also the Uk has always had rough sleepers and the numbers are not huge thankfully. To make rough sleeping the signature tune for this new government, doesn’t inspire confidence. I’d be more impressed with a full on approach to getting the economy up and running - but maybe that’s for this afternoon?

This morning I put on R4 for the first time in months and months.

Nick Robinson was “interviewing” the new chancellor.

I quickly remembered why I have stopped listening.

Edward Stourton - Robinson is not.

Tuliptree

The problem is GG that whilst I agree the country could well do without that , the majority of the media ( of all types) will be pulling every last thing apart generally based on deliberate misinformation and misinterpretation.

If the government’s policy announcements are fully thought out and bullet proof then there will be nothing to pull apart.

It is the job of the media and political commentators to hold any government to account.

Whitewavemark2

I understand the minutiae of the arguments being put forward, but I think to a degree we are missing the point here.

The people Burnham is addressing are those folk whose interest in the nitty gritty of the economy and politics is virtually nil, but they are interested in headlines like VAT reduced to zero on electricity bills and ending rough sleeping.

What Burnham has to do now is ensure that these people’s lives are actually improved.

That will be an uphill struggle

Absolutely.

He needs to try to get people to see his initiatives as positive, instead of writing them off as 'flip flops', 'two tier' or the soundbite de jour. That is where the uphill struggle will be - too many people have bought into a cycle of negativity.

If Burnham can turn that round he will be in with a chance. He needs time and space to let his policies take root, or we'll find ourselves back where we were - discontent, constant sniping and maybe yet another PM. It might not be subtle at first, but you can't fight blatant propaganda with subtlety.

GrannyGravy13

Tuliptree

The problem is GG that whilst I agree the country could well do without that , the majority of the media ( of all types) will be pulling every last thing apart generally based on deliberate misinformation and misinterpretation.

If the government’s policy announcements are fully thought out and bullet proof then there will be nothing to pull apart.

It is the job of the media and political commentators to hold any government to account.

Of course they’ll be pulled apart regardless. And deliberately using misinterpretation and misinformation is nit holding the government to account at all. Just compare how the FT will report/comment on a policy compared with the DM

On here during Johnson tenure there was a daily post about the wrongs of the government, I am not criticising that poster in the slightest ( I think it might have been WW, I cant remember) but the labour government need to be able to cope with the same scrutiny and criticism. If people are discontent thus is due to the failings of governments and institutions not due to the failings of the people.

I suppose I'm just fearing the worst WWM and others.

I can't bear the glib announcements.
Yes, street sleeping did go down in Manchester but it's up again now.
Yes, Norway is doing well with a completely different system .

We all want improvements - and I want Burnham to succeed - but why oh why can't so many (most?) ordinary people see that everything is nuanced and complicated???
.... it drives me bonkers.

Luckygirl3 sounds a bit like me... I'd prefer our politicians to tell it as it is.
😕

Galaxy

On here during Johnson tenure there was a daily post about the wrongs of the government, I am not criticising that poster in the slightest ( I think it might have been WW, I cant remember) but the labour government need to be able to cope with the same scrutiny and criticism. If people are discontent thus is due to the failings of governments and institutions not due to the failings of the people.

Of course - but that is not what I am arguing about.

Criticism is healthy.

But what I am suggesting is that Burnham - in his first couple of announcements is not addressing the political/economics nerds - he is addressing those folk he met day in day out on the streets of Manchester etc.

They are interested not in the minutiae, but are interested in there being some hope and improvement from the daily grind of trying to meet the bills, feed the children etc.

Headlines like Burnham has just put out are positive, he now has the Herculean task of meeting those needs.

But his intention has been achieved.

Galaxy

On here during Johnson tenure there was a daily post about the wrongs of the government, I am not criticising that poster in the slightest ( I think it might have been WW, I cant remember) but the labour government need to be able to cope with the same scrutiny and criticism. If people are discontent thus is due to the failings of governments and institutions not due to the failings of the people.

Of course they need to cope with if but the die are loaded more against them and so the task is harder. There are different types of criticism but outright misinterpretation and misinformation is hard to fight. It’s easy to manipulate and foster discontents

It us just as easy to manipulate those who read the guardian and who vote Labour. Perhaps more so.

And no one should assume from my posts that I fully support AB.

I present I feel entirely neutral, but I am trying to understand his announcements and what he is trying to achieve.

Well i agree with that. And no one should assume I am fully against him because I am critical of for example of broad brush announcements.

Sorry too many ofs!

Galaxy

It us just as easy to manipulate those who read the guardian and who vote Labour. Perhaps more so.

Whilst of course anyone can be manipulated, some are more likely to be than others and in greater numbers. But I accept this is just opinion mostly. But it’s a matter of fact the degree of distortion of facts in some parts of the media which know exactly which buttons to press.