POLITICS CORNER

[Stanley]

Irony or not, the statement is true. As I pointed out the real irony is that if the government was to negotiate instead of quoting the pay review committees which were operating on historic evidence and so were out of date as soon as they gave their verdict, all the strikers would settle for less.
According to THIS report the attitude is....
"We will be resolute to this, because it would be irresponsible to allow public sector pay and inflation to get out of control and we owe a wider duty to the public to make sure we keep our public finances under control."
Challenged about the government's reluctance to engage on pay, the cabinet minister in charge of contingency planning for strikes, said the government was "always willing talk". "We're trying to be reasonable, we're trying to be proportionate and we're trying to be fair," he said. He added that the government was trying to "take the politics out" of the issue of pay by accepting the NHS review body's recommendations."
That's the conclusion the government has come to and has been set in stone because they daren't contemplate anything else. Acting normally would be seen as a U-turn and damaging Hunt's austerity policy.
Instead of questioning Mick Lynch's motives, why not accept what he says in his statements defending his members at face value? He talks more common sense than the politicians and is constantly calling for meaningful meetings and negotiation instead of blank walls of denial.
The ultimate irony is that in the end wages will have to go up and the workers will have to be taken seriously instead of being treated as greedy left wing traitors to society which is how Sunak portrays them. This attitude is doing just as much damage as the actual refusal to talk.

[Big Kev]

Unfortunately the irony smilie is not part of the default pack installed in phpBB. I could try finding it and adding from another pack, unless you already know where it lives Kev.

I do it manually. Just type upside_down with a colon at either end.

[Big Kev]

I looked for the emoji but failed to find it.

See my reply to Ian above

[plaques]

Watch out for another batch of buzz words...
accelerate development
regulatory freedom
Edinburgh Reforms
exciting growth announcements

Which all sounds like a re-run of Harold Wilson's 'white heat of technology'.

Promises or aspirations make your own mind up but depends largely on outside investment creating the next 'Silicon Valley' in the UK. Of course there may be be some competition for these investment funds especially since the Common Market area is better placed for trading with the outside world.

Since the UK is only at the stage of putting plans together the long term outcome is always going to be in doubt.

Don't hold your breath.

[PanBiker]

Unfortunately the irony smilie is not part of the default pack installed in phpBB. I could try finding it and adding from another pack, unless you already know where it lives Kev.

I do it manually. Just type upside_down with a colon at either end.

To be part of the post editor the ACP wont let you set up text strings for the smilies, they have to have the supporting emoji file as well.

As Kev says, manual entry works.

[Stanley]

There seems to be a flurry of parliamentary activity in the news this morning. First the news that the PPE contract linked with Michelle Mone is under attack, the company is being sued by the government for £122million.
See THIS BBC account of thinking about the use of armed forces in emergencies. There are some interesting items.....
"The government has said it wants to reduce its reliance on the armed forces to fill gaps in emergency situations. A planning document says the use of military staff should be a "last resort" and in future it wanted to make greater use of reservists."
"the document said that the military "cannot be the first port of call whenever an emergency hits". It added that in non-emergency situations, regularly using the military would be "an indication of policy failure, inadequate resilience planning or chronic underinvestment".
Finally, this surprised me, I had never heard about it before...
"It added that using the military during crises came at a cost to government departments, which are billed by the Ministry of Defence when troops are drafted in. Last week, the top civil servant at the department said it was charging other parts of government £4,000 per week per staff member to ensure they were being used as a "last resort" during industrial action."
In another part of the Westminster thicket I saw THIS Incident reported in which a Tory MP, Bob Stewart, seems to have abused a torture victim. He is accused of racist behaviour. It all sounds a bit unsavoury and unfortunate.

[plaques]

There seems to be a flurry of parliamentary activity in the news this morning. First the news that the PPE contract linked with Michelle Mone is under attack, the company is being sued by the government for £122million.

Shouldn't the police be bringing this claim? or is it not their job to collect evidence? (re Partygate). The governments action should be enough to trigger a full fraud investigation by the serious fraud department into all the suspect PPE fast track contracts. The overall appearance is to limit the action to a single event and to forget about the rest.

Concern is being raised that to fill the labour shortage poor workers are being flown into the UK under some kind of bondage agreement that looks very much like slave labour. The governments stand is ' if you can demonstrate examples along with proof we will look into it'. Since these workers would require visa entry it would be easy for Suella Braveman's department to check on the legitimacy and background without having to be provided with proof from outside organisations.

[Stanley]

I was thinking about the position of the striking health service workers this morning and my mind bwent back to the More Looms strikes of the 1930s in Barlick. A favourite ploy of the manufacturers was to lock the workers out and shut the mills down completely, they cost less to run that way. They refused to negotiate and waited for the workers to break which they often did. It struck me that by refusing to negotiate that is exactly what the government is doing, locking the workers out because as long as their morale holds they can't go back on the same wage.
Once again on BBC Today I heard the leader of the nurses and then the leader of the ambulance workers being asked how they felt about people suffering and dying 'because of the strike'. This is dishonest. 'Because of the neglect of the NHS by the ruling governments' should be the accusation.

[Stanley]

See THIS BBC report on the latest in the nurse's strike. Sunak is refusing to budge or allow his ministers to negotiate. It's as though he thinks he can repeat Thatcher's defeat of the miners but what he's forgetting is the miners were dispensable, the nurses are not. Sooner or later he is going to have to allow compromises to be made with all the strikers. We must assume that, being reasonably intelligent, he knows this so why is he presenting such a blank refusal to compromise to the unions?
"One former minister said the government would have to shift eventually and come up with more money, Another suggested ministers should consider offering a slightly increased offer, albeit still well below the 19% being called for, or a one-off payment to help with rising prices. A third senior Conservative added: "I'd be surprised if the pay offer as is on the table wins - unless they are prepared to carry this on for six months." However, even behind the scenes, government officials do not want to get into details about possible compromises. And some Tory MPs are urging the PM to maintain his stance, fearing any concessions would encourage future strikes. "Give in to one group then the whole lot will cascade around him," said one former minister."
That last comment is the answer I think.... What Sunak is after is the cheapest possible solution to the dreadful mess that ten years of wage freezing (In real terms cutting because of erosion by inflation, however low.) has left us with. It's Economics 101 that wages have to rise to keep abreast of living costs. Sunak knows this but is squeezing the situation until the pip's squeak so that when a low offer is made it will be somewhere near what will be settled at.
The calculation in his head is nothing to do with pay but how far he can push the NHS workers before a rising death toll is laid at his door and damages him. My guess is that some sort of gesture will be made in the guise of peace and good will at Xmas. When it happens be sure you see it as what it is, a cynical calculation to get an essential service as cheaply as possible so there is money available for HS2, Aircraft Carrier repairs and all the other essential things the government has to pay for. What we can be sure of is that the well-being of good honest working people is not at the top of his priorities.

[plaques]

Back in 1948 Nye Bevin proposed a contract between the government and the population that for an increase in taxes (our NI contribution) the government would provide 'cradle to grave' health care free at the point of access. This contract still stands. It was always obvious from the beginning that as the population aged and medical intervention became more expensive then taxes would have to rise. For some ideological reason our present government don't want to increase taxes although only a few months ago when Sunak was chancellor he did exactly that. Sunak wearing his King's new clothes thinks that by paying highly trained doctors and nurses wages approaching poverty levels that normal services can be resumed. The public is already shouting 'look at the King. Look at the King'. if Sunak wants to cancel the contract between the government and the people he should say so via a referendum or general election and give over hiding behind tiers of management and advisory recommendatory bodies.

[Stanley]

I'll bet you can hear me shouting Hear Hear in Colne!!!

[PanBiker]

Well said Ken, even paying them what they are asking for is only a drop in the ocean. Sunak can't even see a gift horse in the mouth and refuses to claim the brownie points. Think how many folk he could pacify with a few altruistic waves of the hand. He is deranged if he thinks that screwing everyone down even further is a real vote winner.

[Stanley]

Reports that striking health workers have been accused by government spokesmen of being responsible for any harm that comes to patients during the industrial action have, quite understandably, enraged them. They say the run down of the NHS is down to the politicians, not the workers.
Quite right!

[Stanley]

See THIS BBC report of what Steve Barclay has said and the consequences.
Ministers and unions have clashed over who would be to blame for preventable deaths during ambulance strikes.
Unite boss Sharon Graham accused Health Secretary Steve Barclay of telling "a blatant lie" when he said ambulance unions had "taken a conscious choice to inflict harm on patients". Mr Barclay blamed unions for striking when the NHS was under significant pressure. But the unions said he was at fault for refusing to negotiate on pay.
In an article for the Daily Telegraph, Mr Barclay accused ambulance unions of choosing to harm patients and making contingency planning more difficult. He said unions had refused to work with the government at a national level on how they would cover emergency calls during strike action. Unison said it was "utterly shocked" by the comments, while the GMB union said they were "insulting". Mr Barclay later told BBC Breakfast ambulance unions had chosen to strike at a time "when the system is already facing very significant pressure" from increased flu and Covid admissions. Asked who would be responsible for any deaths during the industrial action, he said: "It is the trade unions who are taking this action at a point of maximum pressure for the NHS."
This not only grossly insulting to the workers and is untrue. It's a shameful position for the government to be in.

[Stanley]

See THIS report on the meeting between President Biden and President Volodymyr Zelensky. It looks like one reliable thing in an uncertain landscape. I hope it is.... The West's support of the Ukraine against the onslaught of Russia is about the only positive thing I can see in politics anywhere at the moment. I wish the coalition well!
(And in the 4th or 5th wealthiest country in the world all we can do is refuse to pay essential workers a living wage. Makes you proud to be British.... NOT!)

[plaques]

More doom and gloom.

GDP fell by 0.3% against the estimated 0.2% only 50% worse than estimated.

Manufacturing contracted 2.8%, worse than the 2.3% contraction previously announced,

Construction actually shrank 0.2%, less than the 0.6% growth that had been recorded in November.

Household incomes continued to fall,

Household spending fell for the first time since the final spring lockdown of 2021.

The amount of households' disposable income fell by 0.5% in the quarter, the fourth consecutive drop.

Don't worry Jeremy Hunt has a plan.

Meanwhile The NHS Pay Review Body is looking at pay for next year. The nurses are told if they hang on it could be in their favour, By then they will have lost 26% against the cost of living. The government must think they are stupid. Jam tomorrow? Please Sir may I have some more.

It looks like Sunak will have to sack Steve Barclay blame him for the impasse and do a U-turn and come out a hero.

[Stanley]

All essentially correct and I agree with Ken's conclusions. Barclay has been so intemperate in his comments about health workers that it's almost as though he was setting himself up for ejection from the Health Ministry.
The strikers are standing firm so far. What Sunak does depends on this, if they show any signs of cracking he will press on but if they maintain a united front he is going to have to back down and negotiate. My feeling is that the tide of public opinion (and even that of some of his backbenchers) is turning against him.
This is a straight fight between a failed government and the electorate, it is no longer just the strikers. It is the ultimate arrogance and stupidity to think that politicians can win this battle. The sooner Sunak accepts this and acts reasonably the better.
(I can't remember ever having seen a mess as bad as this. The cause is the starvation of public services of funds. Remember what we said about the ultimate effects of Austerity in 2010? Why couldn't the politicians see it?)

[PanBiker]

Meanwhile the media, predictably are trying to make the unions the bogey men. Don't they realise that the unions only organise what the majority of their members vote for? Not far off a General Strike there are so many folk driven to the only thing they have left which is to withdraw their labour. Its unprecedented that the sway includes emergency service workers who traditionally do not take strike action due to the essential nature of their work.

Sunak is on a hiding to nothing and he will have to cave eventually. Still cant understand why he isn't taking the brownie points on offer. Brass they have saved cancelling all the promised projects up North should cover all the demands of everyone that is currently complaining.

I am no expert but like a lot of contributors to this thread I reckon we could make a pretty good coalition come the revolution.

[Pluggy]

I am no expert but like a lot of contributors to this thread I reckon we could make a pretty good coalition come the revolution.

Since I lost religion about 7 years back, I've moved from classic religious conservatism to being very progressive thinking. Having a lot of free time now (I'm wheelchair bound due to a degenerative disease if you haven't been keeping up) allows me to do a lot of studying. I have never dared express myself politically in the past, long very messy story I won't trouble you with.

But what the hell, my opinion is worth exactly as much as the next persons. (practically nothing as an individual if were being honest). So for what its worth, heres Stephen's take in 2022.

Our present "first past the post" democracy is regarded as a simple primitive system. The countries that are doing better than us generally have some form of proportional representation. Probably a vain hope, evolution gave us a very conservative thinking brain, it appreciates simple black and white answers because its quick and easy to process. Way back when we were carving out our niche in the African rift valley, it served us very well, if we didn;t understand something, we'ed make up stories and share them with our contemporaries around a camp fire to explain them. Truth came a very poor second to having a good story (think about modern day life we go to see a movie because its good, not because its a "true" story and even if it is a "true" story its usually embellished out of all recognition). This is where our mythology came from, mix it with our social nature and our love of ritual and you get religion. Fast forward a few millenium, inject a load of learning,enlightenment and discovery etc, remove the deities and religion evolves into politics. Because human evolution moves so slowly, our social evolution is way, way ahead and getting further ahead. We're stuck at conservative, historically while we've had democracy the conservatives have spent more time in power than anyone else because our brains default to conservative. Now we're threatening our own existence on the only tiny place in a huge universe known to have life, we need to move on from conservative. Theres no way on earth will a Tory government ever kill the goose that lays the golden eggs and change to a proportional representation system, We need to move on from conservatism and its faithful bedfellows, religion and capitalism. Unfortunately I don't offer a solution.....

Controversial enough for yah ?

[Tripps]

Thanks for that interesting piece Plugs.

My problem with PR is the type of people who benefit from it. A wide range fom Nigel Farage (UKIP) to Nick Griffin (BNP). Neither has proved electable (probably wisely) under the FPTP sytem, but both have been elected to the European Parliament under PR.

I like FPTP, so long as those who lose go willingly and immediately. That seems to be the case here at the moment. At least we get a clear winner, and we can get rid of them in time if necessary.

Other opinions are also widely available.

[plaques]

There's no way on earth will a Tory government ever kill the goose that lays the golden eggs and change to a proportional representation system, We need to move on from conservatism and its faithful bedfellows, religion and capitalism. Unfortunately I don't offer a solution.....

I'm with you all the way. Many people see conservatism (small C) as cows munching away in green fields with the odd unicorn browsing on the hill tops. A pastoral scene that never really happened. The opposite being a behemoth Communist state where everything is run from the centre. An impossible dream of untold complexity. Proportional representation should result in balanced views that should prevent extremism taking over.

[Pluggy]

What I didn't mention is why I favour proportional representation. I;m well aware of all the pros and cons and no I wouldn't really like p*ll*cks like Farage having a voice. But by its very nature it forces people to have to work together to make decisions. We have sides to our house of parliament and meetings are almost invariably a tribalistic slanging match, Would anybody care to make a case for "Prime Ministers question time" actually achieving anything ? If its half a dozen parties with wildly different ideas at the very least they have to talk to each other in some kind of rational way.

I would expect the complete d*ckheads to be a small minority in a PR system.

[Stanley]

As many of you know I have read far more history than is probably good for me but like Stephen sat in his wheelchair and studying it has steered me to certain conclusions. I'm not going to bore you with 'what I think we ought to do' but would just make one observation. Regardless of what system of voting we use to choose our leaders, we will not see any improvement in the quality of governance until we have found a way to either educate or neutralise the voters who do not (or cannot because we never educated them well enough) look at the facts, assess the alternatives and cast their vote for whoever appears to be the most rational and stands a chance of making sensible decisions based on principle. You all know of whom I speak, the Bufton-Tuftons and Rees Moggs of this world and the sort of people who thought that Oswald Mosley was a good thing in the inter war years. In this respect it looks simple, the Liberals or the Greens fit the bill but there isn't the edge that's necessary there.
My only answer to this has always been primary education. We should start from the beginning to help children understand society and the best ways to make it work. That has never been done. We have never injected the effort and capital required into early education. The vast bulk of the spending per head is reserved for further education in the universities.
Until we do that and educate the electorate we are on a hiding to nothing. The big problem of course is that 'there are no votes in it' and it is longer term than the span of one or even several Parliaments.
See THIS for political Xmas messages but there is only one message that matters. That's Sunak stating publicly that he is right to fight inflation by refusing to pay workers a decent wage. As long as he tries to hold that untenable position he will fail and drag the country down with him. This is blind obstinacy when what is needed is consultation, negotiation and a proper plan to avoid this situation where all public sector workers are underpaid happening again. His own back-benchers are telling him this so why isn't he listening?

[PanBiker]

Regarding voting procedures. I am all for education to encourage folk to vote and starting early. In addition I would have some form of PR, (there are many), compulsory voting with an abstention box on the ballot. This would of course also involve doing away with the Palace of Westminster which is designed for across the house gladiatorial politics only. New build, "in the round" somewhere more central maybe around Derby area, attached social housing for all the MP's, nice office facilities, Gigabit fibre broadband, small kitchen and living area and somewhere to sleep. Deduct from MP allowances and make any other arrangements illegal apart from contributing to the family home. Got to be better than what we have now.

Market the Hoses of Parliament as a tourist attraction and charge the tourists for taking pictures. This approach works well in other areas of the world. The Colosseum in Rome makes a lot a of brass and that is just a pile of stones.

[Tizer]

Controversial enough for yah ?

Yes, thanks for raising the issue and for giving us an insight into your changed beliefs, Pluggy. My thought has always been that in the early days of human evolution some clever male examples of the species found they could frighten people into giving them power by making up tales of gods, devils, hell, heaven etc. They came to be known as priests and set up their equivalent of a masonic lodge and sold something known as religion. There are still some who come to our door and want to recruit us!

Of course there were others who found they could better achieve their power through violence and they became the monarchs, tsars etc. For millennia there's been tension between the two sides and it still continues, especially in places like Iran. The most surprising thing is that democracy was able to emerge out of all that and we are still in the very early stage of its development. Unfortunately it has already fragmented and we see our form, Representative Democracy, now in competition with Populist Democracy (that's the type that resulted in Boaty MacBoatface almost being adopted for the new Antarctic research ship - our politicians should have learnt from that but they didn't and we ended up with Brexit).

As for PR, like the rest of you I think it's good but has dangers which would have to be mitigated. But, as they say, nothing ventured, nothing gained. But I agree the Tory Party would never let it happen.

A problem I see at the moment is that out political leaders are leaning too close to populism and accepting Boaty, rather than exerting their true role as our representatives, consulting experts on issues and making the best decisions for the good of the people. A current example is the gender identity issue which many might think is a minor thing and not worth making a fuss about. But its part of a much larger problem of people increasingly refusing to believe in the foundations of this modern scientific world. They don't believe in sexual identity but want to replace it with fictional gender identity. I now wouldn't vote for Labour because Starmer wants to bring in gender identity if he's elected. Likewise, if I lived in Scotland I wouldn't vote for Sturgeon for the same reason.

We need to get our politics sorted out quickly because if Trump (or a Trump clone) gets elected in the next US election the world is going to become even more turbulent.