General British politics discussion thread

Enzokk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122280180#Comment_122280180

The other problem is you have a multi-millionaire sounding like he knows more than you in a whiny tone at the best of times, trying to win your vote. And that all is not as bad as you are experiencing and you should be thanking him for all the good work he has done for the country.

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122280243#Comment_122280243

Yes. Quite apart from various mishaps, it's an almost insurmountable problem having a man who's richer than the king trying to convince people they should be satisfied with a government that has presided over high inflation and a cost of living crisis.

It's always going to look bad when the only thing he can think of in answer to a question about what he was deprived of as a child is "We didn't have Sky TV". There's no way that can be made to look good.

Podge_irl

I don't think this is an election that lends itself well to polling to be honest. I think there will clearly be a larger amount of tactical voting than is normal and it is just hard to account for that properly

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122280305#Comment_122280305

That's such a weird thing for him to come out with. There's a photo of the Sunak family pharmacy taken in the noughties which shows a satellite dish on the building:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/rishi-sunak-sky-tv-prime-minister-itv-google-street-view-b2562192.html

Obviously, it could have been installed after Rishi left the family home to pursue a career but… we're talking about a man who spends £13,000 a year heating an outdoor swimming pool. Heating said pool required an upgrade for the local electric grid:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/mar/12/rishi-sunak-has-electricity-grid-upgraded-to-heat-his-private-pool

I'm surprised that he didn't say that his family never went on foreign holiday. Much more sensible I would have thought.

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122280327#Comment_122280327

Anyway it's pretty obvious that even Sunak doesn't believe his party can win no matter what. He gave an unintentional demonstration of that on an LBC call-in this morning when someone called to ask him about his imminent resignation honours. Instead of rushing to say that he isn’t going to be giving away any resignation honours for a long time, he called it a "very interesting question", which suggests that he accepts its basic premise that he's going to be leaving office next month.

As with the Sky TV reply, it's the sort of unintentional truth telling that just can't be fixed by advisers.

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122279897#Comment_122279897

Right on cue - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/19/rishi-sunak-to-lose-seat-tory-wipeout-major-poll-predicts/

Exclusive survey for The Telegraph also shows party on track to slump to 53 seats, with around three-quarters of Cabinet voted out

breezy1985

Problem with tactical voting is the amount of people willing to do it.

I've been keeping an eye on Laura Trott's Sevenoaks where some friends live and polling says she will keep it for two reasons. Firstly there is still a core Tory vote in places like this and secondly because despite Labour being in second in the polls and the combined totals leading to a win the Lib Dems in areas like Kent are as much snobs as the Tories and won't tactically vote.

The Lib Dems will I think help vote themselves out of second place.

PommieBast

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122280633#Comment_122280633

There is only so much people will bite their tongue when it comes to tactical voting, and for me Kier Starmer ruling out rejoining the Customs Union is why I refuse to vote Labour. Thankfully I was able to get my vote transferred to a constituency where Labour are not the challengers.

Enzokk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122280706#Comment_122280706

Unless you want to re-open the Brexit debate again there should be no talk about rejoin or even getting back to the single market or customs union. Maybe I am projecting but Starmer not pushing anything close to the EU is better than hinting they will be doing something like that and giving Reform and the Tories talking points to win votes.

The problem with anything related to the EU, the UK is at the mercy of what the EU is willing to provide vs what they want to have. Hence the talk about the future relationship being guarded is correct, because if he says he will take the UK back in the single market and customs union is not dependent on him. It is what the EU is actually willing to offer.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122280305#Comment_122280305

Theoretically though, an insanely wealthy man isn't automatically incapable of empathy or connection with ordinary people: after all for all their flaws we've seen various billionaires like Buffet or Gates take keen interest in philanthropy to one extent or another; indeed having absolute no financial barriers to action or purpose could free a person up to fully concentrate on larger, macro-level problems plaguing people less fortunate.

Sunak's wealth mightn't have been a problem had his (party's) policies not directly crippled those less fortunate, while benefiting similarly financially wealthy people in turn. In theory, Sunak could have been the benevolent dictator near-billionaire who gave back to the country. Instead, at every turn he and the Tories chose to simply make the wealth gap larger & deprivation more acute. But I'm not entirely convinced his wealth was the root barrier to him fulfilling any kind of empathic leadership (maybe how he came to that wealth & the personality type required to do so being a more pertinent one; Bill Gate just made "good" and successful software)

PommieBast

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122280787#Comment_122280787

Understandable, and it is something the LibDems have also been very quiet about. Think only the SNP have gone big on Europe. Matching the pledge not to touch Income/NI/Corpo/VAT taxes is something they had to do for much the same reason, though I think the latter they will have to break sooner or later.

Real point is a desire to see the back of the Conservatives is not at any price. Starmer had previously already pissed me off by ruling out proportional representation.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122280706#Comment_122280706

Well good luck because nobody is joining the customs union and anyone who says they are is as big a spoofer as Farage

Igotadose

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122280838#Comment_122280838

"Theoretically though, an insanely wealthy man isn't automatically incapable of empathy or connection with ordinary people:"

No, but Sunak repeatedly saying, "I'm sorry you feel that way" is a red flag that he really doesn't give a cr@p about anyone else. That's a very aggressive response to someone when cornered - he used it to not address issues and as a way to put the person asking him questions on the back foot.

It'll be great if Sunak loses his seat and fecks off to California. Good riddance; he'll fit right in with wealthy Americans.

wazzzledazzle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281423#Comment_122281423

You're right.

It's a generic HR couldn't give a fcuk kind of statement.

"I'm sorry you feel that way"

Loosely translates to " I really couldn't give a fiddlers how you feel but i'm ok"

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281423#Comment_122281423

Oh for sure: the core problem is Sunak and not the concept of wealth itself; indeed the more I think on it the more I believe there's a new class of wealthy out there whose success was built on predatory financial tactics and psychopathy as a choice, rendering them more incompatible with the social contract than the traditional method of simply being super successful at providing a service or product. I'm sure there's overlap and I doubt someone like Bill Gates is all smiles and sweaters, but you do see a different mentality and attitude towards other human beings between somehing like the former Microsoft CEO and a charlatan like Sunak.

A Dub in Glasgo

Labour say they will grow the UK economy without addressing the 'elephant in the room' of the hard Brexit that was pursued. How, exactly, are they to grow the economy?

wazzzledazzle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281471#Comment_122281471

Soften that Hard Brexit.

I expect over time that deals will be done gradually with the EU.

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281482#Comment_122281482

The EU deal is subject to frequent review. It will evolve - if the EU is interested in easing the relationship for its own benefit. GB will accept whatever is offered.

NI is in a different position.

wazzzledazzle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281491#Comment_122281491

Labour need to keep it on the back burner for the first 18 months of Government, then gradually sell to the Brits, the benefits of a,b & c. The danger with that is, it gives the opposition something to latch on to.

I also have a feeling we have not seen he last of the prodigal son. I expect him to roll back in to town at some stage in the next few years. Either that be with Reform or the Tories. All hail blondie lcoks

rock22

@Sam Russell "The EU deal is subject to frequent review"

Is it though.

As I understand it, there is a review into the working of the agreement. But there is no commitment to reopen negotiations on the deal.

I cannot see any reason why the EU would want to reopen that agreement again except in terms of another application from the UK to join the EU.

Shoog

You cannot sell a rational position (your poorer because of Brexit) to an irrational audience. Brexit was sold as a stance against immigrants and a way to regain national pride - those are not rational positions so there will always be an irrational resistance to rejoining the EU.

wazzzledazzle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281525#Comment_122281525

Brexit was primarily sold to get a hold/control of their borders wasn't it.

It's an easy argument to have with the clowns who voted to leave. Here are pre-brexit immigration numbers, here are post-brexit numbers.

Here is the cost of a sausage pre-brexit, here is the cost now.

You get the idea/

Unfortunately the press are so toxic over there, you are almost always fighting a losing battle

A Dub in Glasgo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281482#Comment_122281482

Labour do not even acknowledge it was hard Brexit and they have spectacularly failed to link that hard Brexit to the economic position Britain finds itself in

wazzzledazzle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281562#Comment_122281562

I'm flabbergasted people haven't been jailed for the bullshit told on that campaign.

Anyway, that ship has long since sailed although the wreckage is still buried beneath.

Second term Starmer should go full maverick and send the vote back to the people, this time without stupid red busses and the other idiot hanging on a highwire with a 1 pound UJ flag in his hand

Shoog

Labour has no radical manifesto, no big ideas - I can only see a massively missed opportunity with none of the broken fundamentals addressed. A once in a lifetime opportunity pissed away.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281491#Comment_122281491

There's a provision for periodic review of the implementation of the Trade and Co-Operation Agreement, but not of its terms. And there is no provision for any kind of review of either the terms or the implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement (except there is a mechanism for reviewing and refining the NI Protocol/Windsor Framework. But that expressly relates only to NI; a fundamental change in the broader UK/EU relationship can't be addressed there.)

This doesn't preclude the UK pursuing, and even acheiving, membership of the Single Market or of the Customs Union, or similar things that are radically different from what prevails under the WA/TCA, but none of these are going to emerge from a review of the implementation of the TCA. If a future UK government does decide to pursue such things, the TCA implemetation review will not be the framework they use to do it.

Sam talks about change being possible "if the EU is interested in easing the relationship for its own benefit". But the fact is that the EU is pretty happy with the WA and the TCA; we wouldn't have agreed to them if we weren't. We think they're broadly fine as they are. Plus, we've wasted enough time trying to negotiate with the UK. So are unlikely to be taking the initiative to make any sweeping changes to the current arrangements.

A UK government is going to have to take the initiative. And, when they do, they're going to have to do it outside the framework of the TCA review or anything similarly limited. And, they're going to have to make a pitch that looks attractive to the EU; that seems likely to produce a relationship which is materially more advantageous to the EU than the relationship based on the TCA and the WA. And, they're going to have to do with solid domestic political support.

Not to say that any of this is impossible, but it's clearly not imminent. A first-term Labour government can't do it, if only because they can't tick the "domestic political support" box. In this election they very conspicuously aren't seeking a mandate from voters to revisit the UK/EU relationship, and the EU understands as well as everyone else that if they are afraid to raise these matters domestically that's because they don't have, and don't expect to get, domestic support for any proposal for change they may make to the EU. We won't touch that with a barge-pole.

Long-term, though, the prospects are much better. The end of Tory rule and the advent of Labour rule will be a huge change in the fundamentals of UK politics, not because their policy offerings are radically different — they aren't — but because they are answerable to very different constituencies. More strongly than ever, voting preference in the UK is correlated with age, and the Tory vote is hugely dependent in strong support in the over-55 and over-65 age cohorts. Labour, by contrast, is dependent on the over-25, over-35 and over-45 cohorts. Not only are the Labour-supporting age cohorts disproportionately pro-EU, but they are also the cohorts that are most adversely affected by Brexit. Even though they may not now be demanding the reopening of the Brexit wars, if Labour wants to retain their supporty by addressing effectively the issues that affect them, it's going to have to confront Brexit at some point. If it doesn't, its voters will punish it. Those voters may think they don't want Brexit revisited, but they'll still be very dissatisfied with the limitations on what can be delivered by a government that won't revisit Brexit.

wazzzledazzle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281570#Comment_122281570

I'm not so sure. Manifestos can be dumped, amended whatever you like.

They are just playing this ultra-safe until GE is done with, although i don't expect anything radical for the first half of term

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281524#Comment_122281524

Well, if there are reviews, they can tighten or loosen the workings of the deal to the benefit of the EU, which may or may not benefit GB.

Such changes will whet the appetite of the UK Gov for further changes, eg Erasmus, Student visas, etc.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281585#Comment_122281585

Small compensation to the thousands of SMB who went to the wall because their primary market was yanked away. Only a return to the single market will make any material difference to the UK economy, all the rest is window dressing.

rock22

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122281585#Comment_122281585

I still cannot see how any 'review' of the workings or implementation of the trade agreement would significantly boost the post Brexit UK economy.

But more importantly, both Labour and the Tories , are committed to growing the economy without undoing Brexit and its effects. It is hard to see why, if they maintain that Brexit has not been the disaster it obviously is, that they would see such a review as in any way boosting the economy.

As has been clear from the very beginning, cutting yourself off from you major trading partners was always going to have negative economic consequences.

On another aspect to this election, a vox pop of Newstalk yesterday interviewed some canvasser from North of England. He was reluctant to call the result but, based on response from voters, he did predict a low or very low turn out. How would a low turnout affect the results? would it hurt Labour or Tories the most?