Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Abernathy wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 12:01 pm MPs’ legitimate expenses - for setting up constituency offices, paying staff, office equipment and consumables, and so on - are rightly very comfortably adequate, yet Joe Public in his ignorance - ignorance encouraged by right wing news media - regards those legit expenses as simply being trousered by MPs directly. C.F. : “They’re all the same”, “They’re only in it for themselves”, repeat ad nauseum.

The expenses scandal certainly put the whole system into disrepute.

It doesn't help when so many MPs employ idle relatives on nearly £40k to stick a few stamps on envelopes.
Nadine Dorries springs to mind.

Some interesting stuff in here about non-doms. Of course, people always predict exodus over the slightest thing, but the Labour tax changes are certainly meaningful and seem overdue, but you never know exactly how it'll go. The changes seem to be more extensive than expected.

The "just tax the rich" lot don't seem to have said much about these new taxes on the rich.

https://www.ft.com/content/1fa38b0e-533 ... 1e9c23b755

Rachel Reeves was heckled during her speech by a young-ish looking guy who was right in the middle of the conference floor, Couldn’t hear what he was shouting about and he was bundled out the room in short order (not a good look - one of the security bods had his neck in a wrestling hold last seen used by Mick McManus), but for fuck’s sake, how do these idiots even get delegate or visitor accreditation? Security fail.

He was on about stopping arms sales to Israel, and I think he had a mate with a sign.
Probably got a pass from a Corbynite.

Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 7:32 pm He was on about stopping arms sales to Israel, and I think he had a mate with a sign.
Probably got a pass from a Corbynite.

Do that lot ever think about anything but Palestine?

No she means performative dickheads like you and the heckler cost Labour it's biggest defeat since 1935

Reeves could change fiscal rules to allow more capital spending, say sources
Chancellor tells conference she will ‘look at the value and benefits of investment and not just the costs’

This would be sensible.

Reeves to announce new measures to crack down on tax dodgers
Chancellor Rachel Reeves will say a further 200 recruits will be added to her planned army of HMRC officers tackling tax avoidance.

Having been assured BTL on the Guardian that they never crack down on tax avoidance, only benefit claimants, I was somewhat surprised to hear this. Just like I was surprised to read in the FT of tax rises on the very rich, which apparently they never do either.

Certainly the rhetoric is fairly conservative, but the policies much less so. It's like they're relying on people to see that. They may be mistaken in doing so.

I made the mistake of watching BBC News earlier. Talking about how the WFA cuts have been justified by "the financial situation Labour claim they've inherited" (my italics).

I didn't hear that from them for the last 14 years.

I gave up on them years ago.

Not even a kernel of truth is driving today's Starmer outrage.

Didnt the Daily Mail come out hard against "24 hour drinking" back in the day?

They did indeed. as they come out against any sort of change, until it happens and they get used to it, and they were then behind it all along. What they really want is for everything to be as they want, thank you very much.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 2:21 pm Didnt the Daily Mail come out hard against "24 hour drinking" back in the day?

Never! That would fuck up Littlejohn’s “stories” of getting pissed with the Sweeny!

Starmer's excellent speech seems to have gone down well so far. I wonder how the Right (and their comrades) will spin it? I can't wait to see if they try to run with Starmer's misspeak (he referred to Jewish hostages as "sausages" before quickly correcting himself) as antisemitism and PROOF of Labour's anti-Israeli bias.

Against it for other people. Nothing wrong with a cheerful lock-in at the local hostelry in the company of our trusty bobbies.

Oboogie wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 4:53 pm Starmer's excellent speech seems to have gone down well so far. I wonder how the Right (and their comrades) will spin it? I can't wait to see if they try to run with Starmer's misspeak (he referred to Jewish hostages as "sausages" before quickly correcting himself) as antisemitism and PROOF of Labour's anti-Israeli bias.

I was watching him delivering the speech live, and I never even fecking noticed.

Shabana Mahmood, the justice secretary, has announced that the government wants to cut the number of women going to jail

Most people who go there have either done something bad or something quite bad several times (including on bail or suspended sentences). So this won't be easy, but the rewards in terms of saving expensive prison places are huge. It's probably better in terms of public perception to try this first with women prisoners, see if it can be rolled out further. And of course there are special arguments against jailing women with children.

Worth recalling that Shabana Mahmood wouldn't be in any position to do this if she hadn't faced down the shit that she and Rushanara Ali got.

Sharon Graham, apparently unaware that a conference speech isn't the budget, or indeed a spending review (which the last government passed on to drop Labour in it).

Today was a historic moment: A Labour prime minister addressed the Labour party conference for the first time in 15 years.

These is no doubt that Britain is a better off under a Labour government and the speech showed serious intent.

However, the fact is that the cut to the winter fuel allowance was not reversed and investment for jobs in the future not clear. We still have some way to go for a plan for Britain.

One projection I've seen is that spending will rise 1% above inflation. That's not enough to keep up with the ageing population (though more so if we stop paying WFA to everyone) but it's not quite what we're being told is happening by some, not least Sharon Graham herself.

Beth Rigby (political editor at Sky News) reacted by ignoring the speech entirely and trying for gotchas on donations with Rachel Reeves and Bridget Phillipson...

(And I got suspended for Twitter for suggesting that they got Kay Burley to give her a slap).