I remain cautious about Streeting but not despairing.
He's said some stupid things (imv) and also some very sensible things that show he gets it.
If Labour are smart they will end the Junior Doctor's dispute and do so quickly - like next week, even. And it's easy. There is a lot of anger in the profession and people feel that they are entitled to pay restoration, I'll tell you why: Throughout 2010-16, Doctors saw significant pay erosion and said nothing because they are a well-off group and knew they could absorb it. But that erosion has continued. Hunt destroyed all trust in the 2016 dispute which was not about money. Then there was Covid. And over all of this time, there has been a continual worsening of working conditions. It is really tough and the pay is not sufficient. Another thing that the media conveniently leaves out is that doctors in post graduate training have many significant extra costs as well. The level of disposable income is actually surprisingly small.
So Doctors want pay-restoration. Streeting has said no to an immediate up-lift of all of what doctors are asking for. But that's fine, because there is a deal to be done.
The BMA will take something like 15-18% now with a commitment to good faith working towards restoration over the next few years. That would cost about £1Bn. Streeting can do that. It's basically what the Scottish government did to end the strikes.
On a broader level he has said that the overall funding envelope cannot expand much and the NHS needs to be more efficient with the resources it has. That sent shockwaves through NHS workers who heard it as we all know there is no more fat to trim. We are definitely at the stage where most 'efficiencies' we are forced to implement cut any reserve out of the system and make us less efficient. However, in detailed interviews he's clarified this and I came away much more hopeful. Here's a high level point, he made: Primary care is hugely under-resourced. That needs fixing. But if you do fix it, then your A&E presentations fall because a huge part of the pressure on A&E is people going there because they can't get help elsewhere. A GP appointment costs the NHS about £30; A&E presentation £180. So if you do it right, you end up saving money. Similarly, the other big pressure is not being able to get people out of hospital because of the collapse of social care. Fixing that will be expensive but social care is still cheaper than a hospital bed. If he is serious about this approach, then he will be able to make a big difference and our problem of not having enough resources to meet the demand will ease.
The other fix that's needed is that NHS capital spending was decimated by Osborne/Hunt 10 -14 years ago. Again this is spending that within 2-3 years makes for big savings elsewhere. So even within the limitations, there are still reasons for hope.
I have decided to judge him on what he actually does.
If ever a general election proves the need for electoral reform, it's this one. Labour have secured a massive parliamentary majority on 34% of the popular vote, little more than a third, and far less than the 40% they achieved under Corbyn in 2017. The Lib Dems, who have banged on about electoral reform all my life are now over represented with 70 seats on a 12% vote.
And there's Reform. I wouldn't want to see too many of them in parliament with their outrageous racist opinions. But in democratic terms, their 14% vote deserves more seats than 4 and more than the Lib Dems. This parliament is so skewed that I question it's moral authority, although the biggest parties have little interest in changing it. As polling guru Sir John Curtice said, this is the election the Tories lost, rather than Labour won. They deserved to go and I'm not sorry to see it, but I question the legitimacy of such a distorted parliamentary result.
If ever a general election proves the need for electoral reform, it's this one. Labour have secured a massive parliamentary majority on 34% of the popular vote, little more than a third, and far less than the 40% they achieved under Corbyn in 2017. The Lib Dems, who have banged on about electoral reform all my life are now over represented with 70 seats on a 12% vote.
And there's Reform. I wouldn't want to see too many of them in parliament with their outrageous racist opinions. But in democratic terms, their 14% vote deserves more seats than 4 and more than the Lib Dems. This parliament is so skewed that I question it's moral authority, although the biggest parties have little interest in changing it. As polling guru Sir John Curtice said, this is the election the Tories lost, rather than Labour won. They deserved to go and I'm not sorry to see it, but I question the legitimacy of such a distorted parliamentary result.
Whilst I agree there is a HUGE caveat to this. Voter behaviour is different in different voting systems. It's very difficult to map the numbers accurately but voter turnout is affected in an irregular manner by FPTP and tactical voting plays a big role. Labour voters in safe seats don't turn out if they think Labour are going to win. Corbyn was able to bring many of these out in '17 but in general, it's the case in the last decade or so. At least some of these people would vote in a proportional system. Similarly, there is a lot of tactical voting which you cannot measure accurately.
So whilst there is clearly a massive distortion here, and I remain in favour of electoral reform, we should not over-call it. There is a very big risk of over-calling it here.
They deserved to go and I'm not sorry to see it, but I question the legitimacy of such a distorted parliamentary result.
Everybody went into the race with the agreed-upon rules. For their own electoral self-interest, Labour might want to take into account that they're not as popular as their seat count would suggest, but at the end of the day, they have the moral license to implement the policies they could reasonably have been expected to implement.
And question...
Is electoral-reform in the UK mostly supported by the left? If so, I'd predict a bit of a cooling in enthusiasm, since they'll have the scenario of Farage with 91 seats to ponder.
To improve things requires more medical practioners and it takes years to train people.
People say this like they’ve never heard of immigration. One problem with NHS staffing is that we are struggling to retain overseas staff we’ve already hired because we treat them like shit in the “hostile environment”. One of our staff nurses has left because he can bring his family to Australia, but he can’t bring them here.
Recruiting ready trained folks from abroad is not a long term solution - but it would help in the short to medium term.
It does not help the qualified staff availability in the countries they come from.
Our current stance on refugees and asylum seekers does no favours to other countries either, many of our policies disadvantage other countries. I am just disputing there is no rapid solution - it is rather a question of what we are willing to do or not and why.
Ashamed I didn't get that, since I live in Canada, a Westminister country. Though I haven't seen the acronym used that often. (And it did not seem at all represented on Google).
Labour might want to take into account that they're not as popular as their seat count would suggest, but at the end of the day, they have the moral license to implement the policies they could reasonably have been expected to implement.
I'd rephrase it slightly and say that they certainly have a majority to implement their policies, but their actual mandate is fairly thin and because of the various pressures they are under party management might prove to be a problem in the mid term.
There’s an interesting side issue in this election of Labour haemorrhaging votes in areas with significant Muslim populations to independent pro-Gaza candidates, four of whom are now MPs. Even Starmer saw his majority eroded by such an independent.
I can’t see it being anything other than a one-off thing that will have gone away by 2029, but it’s interesting nonetheless. And, for my money, it’s one of the benefits of FPTP as the clearly strongly-held views that got them elected wouldn’t have had a chance of being represented in parliament under PR.
@Doublethink Yes - but why the surprise? At heart I think he's a fairly decent man, and that came out last night at his count, in his very early concession to KS, and in his words this morning.
What I find very concerning is turnout: 60% is pretty poor. And vote share against number of seats is even more skewed than usual. The "ringing endorsement" that Labour have gained when looked at against the number of the electorate shows that only 21% of voters have given them Parliament, and overall the Labour share of the vote is only up by 2%. If I were KS I'd be praying there are no by-elections in the near future.
@Doublethink Yes - but why the surprise? At heart I think he's a fairly decent man, and that came out last night at his count, in his very early concession to KS, and in his words this morning.
Essentially, because I don’t think his actions before or after entering parliament do show him to be a decent man. What - apart from this speech - is your evidence for that assertion ?
What I find very concerning is turnout: 60% is pretty poor. And vote share against number of seats is even more skewed than usual.
I agree. I would also like to know why Jacob Rees-Mogg’s public statement that the introduction of photo ID was intended to privilege the Tory vote didn’t lead to prosecution. Voter suppression efforts over the last 14 years have been a national disgrace.
@Doublethink Yes - but why the surprise? At heart I think he's a fairly decent man, and that came out last night at his count, in his very early concession to KS, and in his words this morning.
Essentially, because I don’t think his actions before or after entering parliament do show him to be a decent man. What - apart from this speech - is your evidence for that assertion ?
During the campaign there were reports that several other tories wanted him to attack Starmer more, but complained that he was too nice and honest to do it. For what that’s worth.
It disn't stop him continuing to put out the lies about tax under Labour and attempting to mislead the voters in other ways. I think he seemed decent because he kept out of the limelight which was easy when Mr Johnson was there to take it all. But when he did put his head over the parapet as prime minister he revealed the Tory side of him.
I think perhaps Sunak has seen what happened with Trump, looked at Reform (seen the racist garbage coming out of their candidates) and thought he should not push a destabilising narrative at this point in time.
There seems to be a similar set of inconsistencies in Inverness, with again everyone sent home for sleep in the (not unreasonable) recognition that these things aren't sorted out when everyone is asleep. Though, I'm not seeing any provisional count data from Inverness, which I assume should be kept secret until a final result can be announced (though all candidates and agents at the count would presumably know it, instructions not to tell anyone don't seem to be adhered to in Thurrock).
To improve things requires more medical practioners and it takes years to train people.
People say this like they’ve never heard of immigration. One problem with NHS staffing is that we are struggling to retain overseas staff we’ve already hired because we treat them like shit in the “hostile environment”. One of our staff nurses has left because he can bring his family to Australia, but he can’t bring them here.
Recruiting ready trained folks from abroad is not a long term solution - but it would help in the short to medium term.
It does not help the qualified staff availability in the countries they come from.
That depends on where you are. The Philippines apparently treat training nurses as an industry, a assuming most of them will leave as they will probably speak Spanish & English, so can work anywhere in about 50% of the world. I doubt it's the only place.
BTW, although Arkland, and all the lands near by, are now Red, Labour didn't do quite so well in Kent as was once predicted, though I haven't yet managed to work out the full picture.
The county town, and the Town Of My Youth, remain blue, although the Disgusteds of Tunbridge Wells have turned that place orange.
Happily, the formerly tory Elphicke domain - Dover & Deal - has fallen to Labour, this being the constituency most immediately affected by the arrival of refugees in small boats. Make of that what you will...
To improve things requires more medical practioners and it takes years to train people.
People say this like they’ve never heard of immigration. One problem with NHS staffing is that we are struggling to retain overseas staff we’ve already hired because we treat them like shit in the “hostile environment”. One of our staff nurses has left because he can bring his family to Australia, but he can’t bring them here.
Recruiting ready trained folks from abroad is not a long term solution - but it would help in the short to medium term.
It does not help the qualified staff availability in the countries they come from.
That depends on where you are. The Philippines apparently treat training nurses as an industry, a assuming most of them will leave as they will probably speak Spanish & English, so can work anywhere in about 50% of the world. I doubt it's the only place.
With respect very few Filipinos speak Spanish these days; Tagalog and English, yes. They were thoroughly Americanised after the American colonisation post 1905.
To improve things requires more medical practioners and it takes years to train people.
People say this like they’ve never heard of immigration. One problem with NHS staffing is that we are struggling to retain overseas staff we’ve already hired because we treat them like shit in the “hostile environment”. One of our staff nurses has left because he can bring his family to Australia, but he can’t bring them here.
Recruiting ready trained folks from abroad is not a long term solution - but it would help in the short to medium term.
It does not help the qualified staff availability in the countries they come from.
That depends on where you are. The Philippines apparently treat training nurses as an industry, a assuming most of them will leave as they will probably speak Spanish & English, so can work anywhere in about 50% of the world. I doubt it's the only place.
With respect very few Filipinos speak Spanish these days; Tagalog and English, yes. They were thoroughly Americanised after the American colonisation post 1905.
Can support this. For a variety of reasons I’m friends on Facebook with a number of UK domiciled Filipinos. When they get talking to each other my newsfeed gets filled with Tagalog.
An interesting (and rather cheeky) thought has occurred to me. Back in 2016 I responded to those who said we needed to stay in the EU to keep up a left wing restraint on the Tories by asking what if the UK moved left and the rest of the EU moved right. And that’s exactly what seems to be happening right now
Could we end up as the “sane person” of Europe, keeping to the centre while the rest of them go down the populist right rabbit hole? And if so, could it actually be to our advantage that we’re no longer tethered to EU politics?
Unpleasant thought: Reform probably gain votes from people who look on Sunak as a
Posh Paki
but imagine Farage to be 'One of Us'.
And now the man says he wants to build Reform into a mass movement and 'really challenge for the 2029 election'. He seems to fancy himself as a pocket Mussolini.
Sorry, I will try to be more careful in future. Should posted in Hell, perhaps, and purchase a supply of mental floss. I confess: I don't know how to do Hidden Text. Would **** do instead?
Hidden text, you put a square bracket [ then type the word spoiler then close the square bracket ] write your text. Then after it, you do the same again with /spoiler instead of spoiler between the square brackets.
If ever a general election proves the need for electoral reform, it's this one. Labour have secured a massive parliamentary majority on 34% of the popular vote, little more than a third, and far less than the 40% they achieved under Corbyn in 2017. The Lib Dems, who have banged on about electoral reform all my life are now over represented with 70 seats on a 12% vote.
And there's Reform. I wouldn't want to see too many of them in parliament with their outrageous racist opinions. But in democratic terms, their 14% vote deserves more seats than 4 and more than the Lib Dems. This parliament is so skewed that I question it's moral authority, although the biggest parties have little interest in changing it. As polling guru Sir John Curtice said, this is the election the Tories lost, rather than Labour won. They deserved to go and I'm not sorry to see it, but I question the legitimacy of such a distorted parliamentary result.
Well, I've seen the light. I'm a born-again FPTP-er now. Hallelujah!
A thought I have seen on Xitter and which seems to have legs - what we don't get from these results is a clear idea of the real level of support for Labour and Lib Dem. It's as if there's been a lot of tactical voting. A bit of unscientific poking around at seats the Lib Dems have won from the Tories tends to show a pattern of Tory support leaching to Reform and Lib Dem (presumably based on which Tory tribe the voter in question identifies with) but also a noticeable drop in the Labour vote - exactly what we might expect if Labour voters in those seats have been voting tactically. That would also of course (it's exactly what's intended) tend to boost the Lib Dem's seat count disproportionately.
I've also seen the Lib Dems come fourth or fifth in a lot of Midlands/North seats, where Labour has won and Tories and Reform vied for second, followed by the Greens or Others in third - sort of the same thing in reverse.
If people were primarily voting according to their preference, I'd perhaps expect most seats to see Tory, Labour, Lib Dem (and nowadays unfortunately Reform) as the top four in virtually every seat.
So what I think we're seeing, as a broad generalisation, is a right wing vote split between Tory and Reform, exposing far more seats than usual to be susceptible to tactical voting. As there are far more marginals where Labour is in contention than the Lib Dems Labour has done very well out of this, but the Lib Dems haven't done badly either. It's worked against Reform; their main contribution has been making tactical voting feasible. Thanks lads!
TBH, and whilst also admitting that some (or quite a lot of) electoral reform is needed, I cheerfully join with @Gamma Gamaliel in praising whatever gods there be that FPTP came up with the goods this time round...
As I've said (not sure on which thread), I'm also glad that the LibDems and the Greens* have done so well, and that they will be able to at least put a bit of pressure on Labour, as and when required.
The tories may eventually merge with Reform, which would not be a Good Thing, but I suppose it's possible that the surviving moderate tories (old-school small-c conservatives) may morph into a less hard-line centre-right party, despite still being contaminated with the toxins of their time in power from 2010. The traces of Cameron, May, Johnson, and Truss, will take a lot of washing off...
I don't have a horse in the race for Scottish independence, but I have some sympathy for the SNP, who are facing a lot of hard work to rebuild themselves.
(*as well as quadrupling their number of MPs, they came second in 39 constituencies, which, coupled with their successes in recent local elections, gives them a good base for future wins).
To improve things requires more medical practioners and it takes years to train people.
People say this like they’ve never heard of immigration. One problem with NHS staffing is that we are struggling to retain overseas staff we’ve already hired because we treat them like shit in the “hostile environment”. One of our staff nurses has left because he can bring his family to Australia, but he can’t bring them here.
Recruiting ready trained folks from abroad is not a long term solution - but it would help in the short to medium term.
It does not help the qualified staff availability in the countries they come from.
That depends on where you are. The Philippines apparently treat training nurses as an industry, a assuming most of them will leave as they will probably speak Spanish & English, so can work anywhere in about 50% of the world. I doubt it's the only place.
With respect very few Filipinos speak Spanish these days; Tagalog and English, yes. They were thoroughly Americanised after the American colonisation post 1905.
Thanks for the correction. English still covers a fair chunk of the globe.
Now that the election is over, a bit of advance warning that we'll be winding up this thread in a couple of days time. Obviously you'll be free to start new threads on British politics.
Comments
He's said some stupid things (imv) and also some very sensible things that show he gets it.
If Labour are smart they will end the Junior Doctor's dispute and do so quickly - like next week, even. And it's easy. There is a lot of anger in the profession and people feel that they are entitled to pay restoration, I'll tell you why: Throughout 2010-16, Doctors saw significant pay erosion and said nothing because they are a well-off group and knew they could absorb it. But that erosion has continued. Hunt destroyed all trust in the 2016 dispute which was not about money. Then there was Covid. And over all of this time, there has been a continual worsening of working conditions. It is really tough and the pay is not sufficient. Another thing that the media conveniently leaves out is that doctors in post graduate training have many significant extra costs as well. The level of disposable income is actually surprisingly small.
So Doctors want pay-restoration. Streeting has said no to an immediate up-lift of all of what doctors are asking for. But that's fine, because there is a deal to be done.
The BMA will take something like 15-18% now with a commitment to good faith working towards restoration over the next few years. That would cost about £1Bn. Streeting can do that. It's basically what the Scottish government did to end the strikes.
On a broader level he has said that the overall funding envelope cannot expand much and the NHS needs to be more efficient with the resources it has. That sent shockwaves through NHS workers who heard it as we all know there is no more fat to trim. We are definitely at the stage where most 'efficiencies' we are forced to implement cut any reserve out of the system and make us less efficient. However, in detailed interviews he's clarified this and I came away much more hopeful. Here's a high level point, he made: Primary care is hugely under-resourced. That needs fixing. But if you do fix it, then your A&E presentations fall because a huge part of the pressure on A&E is people going there because they can't get help elsewhere. A GP appointment costs the NHS about £30; A&E presentation £180. So if you do it right, you end up saving money. Similarly, the other big pressure is not being able to get people out of hospital because of the collapse of social care. Fixing that will be expensive but social care is still cheaper than a hospital bed. If he is serious about this approach, then he will be able to make a big difference and our problem of not having enough resources to meet the demand will ease.
The other fix that's needed is that NHS capital spending was decimated by Osborne/Hunt 10 -14 years ago. Again this is spending that within 2-3 years makes for big savings elsewhere. So even within the limitations, there are still reasons for hope.
I have decided to judge him on what he actually does.
AFZ
And there's Reform. I wouldn't want to see too many of them in parliament with their outrageous racist opinions. But in democratic terms, their 14% vote deserves more seats than 4 and more than the Lib Dems. This parliament is so skewed that I question it's moral authority, although the biggest parties have little interest in changing it. As polling guru Sir John Curtice said, this is the election the Tories lost, rather than Labour won. They deserved to go and I'm not sorry to see it, but I question the legitimacy of such a distorted parliamentary result.
What is "LOTO"?
Whilst I agree there is a HUGE caveat to this. Voter behaviour is different in different voting systems. It's very difficult to map the numbers accurately but voter turnout is affected in an irregular manner by FPTP and tactical voting plays a big role. Labour voters in safe seats don't turn out if they think Labour are going to win. Corbyn was able to bring many of these out in '17 but in general, it's the case in the last decade or so. At least some of these people would vote in a proportional system. Similarly, there is a lot of tactical voting which you cannot measure accurately.
So whilst there is clearly a massive distortion here, and I remain in favour of electoral reform, we should not over-call it. There is a very big risk of over-calling it here.
AFZ
Everybody went into the race with the agreed-upon rules. For their own electoral self-interest, Labour might want to take into account that they're not as popular as their seat count would suggest, but at the end of the day, they have the moral license to implement the policies they could reasonably have been expected to implement.
And question...
Is electoral-reform in the UK mostly supported by the left? If so, I'd predict a bit of a cooling in enthusiasm, since they'll have the scenario of Farage with 91 seats to ponder.
Our current stance on refugees and asylum seekers does no favours to other countries either, many of our policies disadvantage other countries. I am just disputing there is no rapid solution - it is rather a question of what we are willing to do or not and why.
Thanks. And @Bishops Finger.
Ashamed I didn't get that, since I live in Canada, a Westminister country. Though I haven't seen the acronym used that often. (And it did not seem at all represented on Google).
I'd rephrase it slightly and say that they certainly have a majority to implement their policies, but their actual mandate is fairly thin and because of the various pressures they are under party management might prove to be a problem in the mid term.
Yeah. Very much [citation needed] on that one.
I can’t see it being anything other than a one-off thing that will have gone away by 2029, but it’s interesting nonetheless. And, for my money, it’s one of the benefits of FPTP as the clearly strongly-held views that got them elected wouldn’t have had a chance of being represented in parliament under PR.
What I find very concerning is turnout: 60% is pretty poor. And vote share against number of seats is even more skewed than usual. The "ringing endorsement" that Labour have gained when looked at against the number of the electorate shows that only 21% of voters have given them Parliament, and overall the Labour share of the vote is only up by 2%. If I were KS I'd be praying there are no by-elections in the near future.
Essentially, because I don’t think his actions before or after entering parliament do show him to be a decent man. What - apart from this speech - is your evidence for that assertion ?
I agree. I would also like to know why Jacob Rees-Mogg’s public statement that the introduction of photo ID was intended to privilege the Tory vote didn’t lead to prosecution. Voter suppression efforts over the last 14 years have been a national disgrace.
During the campaign there were reports that several other tories wanted him to attack Starmer more, but complained that he was too nice and honest to do it. For what that’s worth.
It’s the 76th birthday of the NHS today, maybe the new government will succeed in stopping it falling apart.
[/tangent]
Basildon and East Thurrock - recount today.
Thanks, presumably that will be close for Reform.
Looks like there was a balls up with the count https://thurrock.nub.news/news/local-news/labour-take-thurrock-but-its-too-close-to-call-in-south-basildon-and-east-thurrock-and-a-recount-will-follow-234229
And the sun shone on the Starmers as they arrived in Downing Street...
An augury for a brighter future, maybe?
(Apparently, a water-damaged Savile Row suit is among the bargains to be had in the tory closing-down sale...)
That depends on where you are. The Philippines apparently treat training nurses as an industry, a assuming most of them will leave as they will probably speak Spanish & English, so can work anywhere in about 50% of the world. I doubt it's the only place.
The county town, and the Town Of My Youth, remain blue, although the Disgusteds of Tunbridge Wells have turned that place orange.
Happily, the formerly tory Elphicke domain - Dover & Deal - has fallen to Labour, this being the constituency most immediately affected by the arrival of refugees in small boats. Make of that what you will...
With respect very few Filipinos speak Spanish these days; Tagalog and English, yes. They were thoroughly Americanised after the American colonisation post 1905.
Can support this. For a variety of reasons I’m friends on Facebook with a number of UK domiciled Filipinos. When they get talking to each other my newsfeed gets filled with Tagalog.
Could we end up as the “sane person” of Europe, keeping to the centre while the rest of them go down the populist right rabbit hole? And if so, could it actually be to our advantage that we’re no longer tethered to EU politics?
Unpleasant thought: Reform probably gain votes from people who look on Sunak as a
And now the man says he wants to build Reform into a mass movement and 'really challenge for the 2029 election'. He seems to fancy himself as a pocket Mussolini.
[ETA Hidden texted identity slur & added content warning - Doublethink, Admin]
Doublethink, Admin
Hidden text, you put a square bracket [ then type the word spoiler then close the square bracket ] write your text. Then after it, you do the same again with /spoiler instead of spoiler between the square brackets.
You can try this out on coding practice thread if you need.
You would need to do one of these things whether you posted in Hell or Purg.
Cross-posted - I was referring to Marvin's earlier post re the EU.
Well, I've seen the light. I'm a born-again FPTP-er now. Hallelujah!
But seriously ... yes, it is skewed.
I've also seen the Lib Dems come fourth or fifth in a lot of Midlands/North seats, where Labour has won and Tories and Reform vied for second, followed by the Greens or Others in third - sort of the same thing in reverse.
If people were primarily voting according to their preference, I'd perhaps expect most seats to see Tory, Labour, Lib Dem (and nowadays unfortunately Reform) as the top four in virtually every seat.
So what I think we're seeing, as a broad generalisation, is a right wing vote split between Tory and Reform, exposing far more seats than usual to be susceptible to tactical voting. As there are far more marginals where Labour is in contention than the Lib Dems Labour has done very well out of this, but the Lib Dems haven't done badly either. It's worked against Reform; their main contribution has been making tactical voting feasible. Thanks lads!
As I've said (not sure on which thread), I'm also glad that the LibDems and the Greens* have done so well, and that they will be able to at least put a bit of pressure on Labour, as and when required.
The tories may eventually merge with Reform, which would not be a Good Thing, but I suppose it's possible that the surviving moderate tories (old-school small-c conservatives) may morph into a less hard-line centre-right party, despite still being contaminated with the toxins of their time in power from 2010. The traces of Cameron, May, Johnson, and Truss, will take a lot of washing off...
I don't have a horse in the race for Scottish independence, but I have some sympathy for the SNP, who are facing a lot of hard work to rebuild themselves.
(*as well as quadrupling their number of MPs, they came second in 39 constituencies, which, coupled with their successes in recent local elections, gives them a good base for future wins).
Thanks for the correction. English still covers a fair chunk of the globe.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/05/lib-dems-to-push-for-cross-party-talks-on-tackling-social-care
Early days yet, but more of this sort of thing, please - with appropriate action, of course.
Saw that. Bugger indeed.
Now that the election is over, a bit of advance warning that we'll be winding up this thread in a couple of days time. Obviously you'll be free to start new threads on British politics.
Hostly beret off
la vie en rouge, Purgatory host