General British politics discussion thread

Panthro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122250233#Comment_122250233

I baggsie "Proud of our record"

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122250280#Comment_122250280

That's hardly the same thing. The very fact the photograph is rather prominently displayed on the Wikipedia page should make that clear. It is just one of millions upon millions of copyrighted photographs that people can't freely use.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122250499#Comment_122250499

I clearly said "reproduction is now illegal"

And backed it up with "The copyright holder withdrew permission for the image to be reproduced"

Which part of reproduction and reproduced are not the same thing ?

I never said you were facing the firing squad for owning a copy.

yagan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122250576#Comment_122250576

It hardly means much when it will circulate in other jurisdictions, unless brexit Britain introduce their own firewall.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122250576#Comment_122250576

"they were so concerned by that photo that reproduction of it is now illegal in the UK." is quite clearly meant to imply something beyond a bog standard copyright issue from owners who have nothing to do with the Conservative party in the first place. That it is under copyright has nothing to do with anyone being concerned about the photo. It's just a bizarrely conspiratorial way to reference "the photo is under copyright". There are also myriad fair use exemptions to the copyright.

swampgas

The Guardian commissioned a painting of the photo to get around the restrictions. Copyright law leads to odd outcomes.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/10/bullingdon-club-portrait-cameron-johnson-sale-oil-painting-oxford

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122249929#Comment_122249929

I'd have agreed, but as Nigel Farage has suggested American style histrionics and populism has snuck into the narrative. While the 1980s was demonstration enough that the UK was happy to indulge in flagrant & vulgar expressions of wealth. I'd not be that surprised if Sunak turned around and owned his status, if many would follow.

Shoog

Heard the latest from the Tories that it would be terrible for the country to have a labour super majority because there would be nothing to restrain their excesses. The Irony.

A Dub in Glasgo

Sunak will absolutely (or he should) regret that interview with Paul Brand on ITV

PommieBast

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122250075#Comment_122250075

Technically they were very proactive in enforcing its copyright, but the effect is the same. Think it was the BBC who got around it by commissioning an artist to make a printing of it.

edit: Others beat me to it..

devnull

Beth Rigby is currently ripping Rishi Sunak to pieces in the interview, it's really not going well for him.

yagan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122251257#Comment_122251257

"Loads of money" like the 80s would lead to civil war with so much iniquity now.

Like our Bertie bubble the masses tolerated the 80s wide boy culture because there was a sense of national uplift. Sunuk going full money is loo roll would the tear the curtain of tory vulgarity.

Patser

In years to come Sunak's campaign will be studied and studied again as to how not run a campaign, and how badly things can be done. Launching it in the rain with an unprepared Party, mitching out of D-Day celebrations, getting held up on lying over Opposition tax rises and now.....

https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1800942484911964491

flutered

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122249560#Comment_122249560

like joan bruton and they have iphones

A Dub in Glasgo

Sky News went live to shoppers in Edinburgh earlier today, not exactly what they were expecting. I did like the description of Starmer as the hollow man

https://twitter.com/ConnorGillies/status/1800928961834463484

Enzokk

Seems like the last couple of days will not change much for Sunak or the Tories. A snap poll indicted Starmer was better last night with the debate and the launch seems to have gone better as well. Starmer took questions from all journalists and it did not look like a funeral whereas the Conservatives launch was a bit of a damp squib.

I am puzzled, how do those in charge of the election think what people want is more tax cuts when almost everything is crumbling. The NHS is crumbling, education is crumbling, they have human sewage in their rivers and seas, the justice system is about to collapse and what the country needs is less money to solve these problems and more money for the richest (where tax cuts benefits the most at the end)?

They have some weird priorities…the interesting thing is that everything is so warped against Labour that they cannot go after an ambitious program as it will be attacked as fantasy. They have to stay as boring and close to the other side in case they get accused of fantasy policies and a magic money tree. And then we are back to the Corbyn era, great policies and a ambitious manifesto, can't implement it if you are on the opposition benches though.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122254393#Comment_122254393

Easy. They've spent years pandering to the rich and the hard right. The problem is that they've failed abjectly on pretty much all counts. This has put Reform UK in a position where it can go harder than the Conservatives in certain areas much like Leave.EU did in relation to Vote Leave in 2015-6.

There's a real "me first" culture here. I've spent virtually my entire adult life here so I can't comment if it's a thing elsewhere but most people couldn't care less about anyone else so long as they're fine. Rich people can buy their way around the NHS' problems and send their children to private school so they're more than happy to get a tax cut to make this easier. Old people don't care about free movement unless they own a Villa in Spain, France or Italy. Neither of these demographics are likely to end up in front of a judge or to even speak to a police officer so that's an alien concern as well.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122254431#Comment_122254431

The Thatcher legacy is not the state of the country - but the state of the British mind. The Tories colonized the outlook of the British to be if you aren't rich and acquisitive you ain't worth dirt.

I don't see an easy way out of this since it's fairly endemic.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122254591#Comment_122254591

Thatcher sold off the council houses at half price. That won her (and the Tories) a huge amount of Labour votes. The Tories stopped building council houses that sent up property prices on an unending rise - way beyond inflation. It made buying a house a one-way bet.

What Labour need to do to combat this is to build low cost rental houses (basically council houses) to cater for 30% of the homes needed by those needing council houses. This has to be done to remove the over-priced private rental homes from the market. How they do that, I have no idea.

NHS needs more funding which is not there. They need to invest heavily, but how to do that without tax increases.

The water company and river pollution scandals should be tackled by prosecuting the water companies with fines sufficient to bankrupt them, so they pass into state ownership. Hold the top management personally liable for the damage they have caused and give them free accommodation in chokey.

They need much more tax income and they have left themselves with few choices - property tax and wealth taxes the only options. Otherwise, invent a new tax heading - like large pension funds, or airport travel tax.

The country is a basket case.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122255701#Comment_122255701

Not going to happen.

There's nothing more innovative that Brits do than come up with the most desperate and flimsy excuses to shut down housebuilding and investment in infrastructure. They absolutely despise it as much as they say they love the NHS. You'd almost have an easier time getting Americans in red states to give up the second amendment.

The NHS doesn't need more money, it needs to be adapted to the changing needs of an ageing population. It needs to only fund evidence-based therapies instead of nonsense like homeopathy. The UK tax burden is at an all time high so there's not going to be any more money for it.

Same for the water and utility companies. They won't be held to account because the regulator is toothless. I hope Labour beef up the regulator's powers but I'm not hopeful.

We desperately need more houses and more infrastructure, particularly in the southeast. We also need to start taxing capital. A land value tax would be a great start, as would a mansion tax and the opportunity will never be greater than in July 2024.

rock22

I fully agree with your point on homeopathy but , according to the BBC, the amount spend is less than £5m or 0.004% of the budget on homeopathy. So in the context of addressing issues within the NHS, it is insignificant.

Health care has become more expensive and the population is aging. The total cost will not decrease so the choice is to raise taxes to pay for it or curtail the actual treatments available.

Randycove

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122255734#Comment_122255734

water needs to be nationalised. I can’t see any other way forward for it.

A Dub in Glasgo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122255992#Comment_122255992

Definitely does and it was crazy to privitise it in the first place. It is the height of stupidity for Labour to run away from that

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122256012#Comment_122256012

A nationalised water service needs plenty of money that was shipped out in bonuses and dividends. That money needs to be recouped. Would Starmer do that?

The NHS needs resetting to increase efficiency and service for patients. The NHS is devolved for Wales and Scotland which complicates matters. Difficult to solve without more funding that they do not have.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122255992#Comment_122255992

Sure, but knowing the Tories, that'll be a monumental mess to untangle.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122256080#Comment_122256080

Nationalising doesn't mean free water.

Currently what is being paid by customers is making water companies a profit so you just transfer that to state profits.

A Dub in Glasgo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122256130#Comment_122256130

Water in England & Wales was privitised by Thatcher in 1989, Labour were in power 1997 - 2000, I am sure they did some legwork on how to untangle the mess and can pass it to Starmer & co.

yagan

Third level needs to be affordable again rather than importing qualified labour all the time.

I think there's moves to turn more healthcare degrees to apprenticeships, which supposedly frees them from the university system and fees, but there's already questions being raised here and elsewhere in the EU about the compatibility and transference of such qualifications to the EU.

A Dub in Glasgo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122256080#Comment_122256080

Get the regulator to heavily fine those polluting water companies to the extent that they go bust then the state picks up the pieces as a nationalised utility

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122256186#Comment_122256186

The student loan system does seem to make third level affordable. I don't know anyone who was put off financially from third level and most of my friends still haven't paid a penny back and are half way through the thirty year cut off. And I am talking about people all from typical working class demographics.

It's not a system I would support but I don't think they have anyone not going to uni that would go if it was cheaper.