Quote from: Wellsy on September 27, 2022, 12:01:37 pmit works for the ToriesI don't think it does work for the Tories, thats my point. If Starmer was to make a barnstorming speech today saying he was going to rejoin the single market/customs union/EU or introduce radical electoral reform it would be front page of all the papers and knock the Tories fucking up the Budget off them. It would also be incredibly easy to counter with 'Labour want to reverse the referendum result' or 'Labour want to stitch up the system to benefit themselves' (I know the latter is unfair but thats how it would be presented.Currently it will suit Starmer just fine to have the front pages about Tory economic turmoil, and a boring but competent piece on his conference speech on page 4 or 5 of the papers. It will perfectly position him as the competent alternative to visible incompetence. I understand people want more (in an ideal world I do too) but the political logic is inarguable right now. Incidentally theres been some good left wing policies coming out of the conference so far on green energy, nationalising the railways and a UK sovereign wealth fund.
it works for the Tories
Congratulations to @GiorgiaMeloni on her party's success in the Italian elections.From supporting Ukraine to addressing global economic challenges, the UK and Italy are close allies.
Dio, patria, famiglia
Just to note (not a commendation or a condemnation of either 'wing'), that a sovereign wealth fund is part of the tory's mini-budget policies. So I'm not sure it can be called a left wing policy. Perhaps just a 'sensible' policy.
It would help if the Labour party stopped being so completely and utterly useless, moved into the 21st century, got rid of their ties to the unions and made it policy to at least reverse leaving the single market and customs union - if not rejoining the EU fully.
I’ll see if I can dig out a better link.
Back to conference motions, motions are passed at conference and voted on by the delegates sent by branches. The current leadership is very good at blocking motions they don't like so they don't even reach the floor. The leadership will ignore a lot of the motions being passed. Democracy in action
Quote from: BrutusTheBear on September 27, 2022, 02:48:06 pmBack to conference motions, motions are passed at conference and voted on by the delegates sent by branches. The current leadership is very good at blocking motions they don't like so they don't even reach the floor. The leadership will ignore a lot of the motions being passed. Democracy in action I understand the difference, but the PR one was a motion; the green energy, sovereign wealth fund and rail nationalisation are all from the front bench I believe?
Front bench motions are likely to be followed through. Didn't think PR was a front bencher's motion??.
It isn’t only fracking profits it’s all energy profits. The fracking line is a good hook media use to lure in Joe public looking for outrage. Seems it worked I’ll see if I can dig out a better link.edit: 5 mins later I've failed. Although seems the idea was publicly floated in conservative circles in June this year: https://conservativehome.com/2022/06/10/ed-mcguinness-the-security-case-for-a-sovereign-wealth-fund/
BTW anyone wanting to get a perspective from various angles (well, maybe not Truss’s) of the budget policies should pay a couple of quid for a telegraph subscription at the moment (cancel straight away). It usually has decent economic analysis which some may be surprised to learn isn’t necessary aligned with one right wing view, just as the centre and left media aren’t. When read alongside the guardian or FT I find it provides a good overview from most angles. Good piece in there today I thought, by Ambrose Evans. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/09/27/liz-truss-must-choose-fiscal-u-turn-housing-crash/
Quote from: BrutusTheBear on September 27, 2022, 03:09:27 pm Front bench motions are likely to be followed through. Didn't think PR was a front bencher's motion??. No it wasn't, we're on the same page I think; my point was that unlike the PR one, the frontbench ones will likely progress.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/27/kwasi-kwartengs-tax-cuts-likely-to-increase-inequality-imf-saysIMF now waded in
but maybe they should substitute the word 'likely' with 'will'.
Using my mum as a bell weather for Labour's fortunes, she announced "I think I'll vote for that Kier next time". She has never, as far as I'm aware, ever voted anything but blue. That may appall the Corbynites but the fact we might actually get a Labour Government is a cause for hope imho.
I’m at a loss as to why my paying £5 a month to the Labour Party should give me a bigger say over policy than an MP who will have received thousands of votes to be elected. Is this the principle that those paying into the political system should get some return on their spending?