Current Affairs The Labour Party

[Blue 1]

We had a referendum in 2011 on a form of PR, an 'alternate vote' system. It lost.

Referendum results

Choice	Votes	%
No	13,013,123	67.90
Yes	6,152,607	32.10
Valid votes	19,165,730	99.41
Invalid or blank votes	113,292	0.59
Total votes	19,279,022	100.00
Registered voters and turnout	45,684,501	42.20
Source: Electoral Commission

Didn't help that the chief proponent of it was Nick Clegg.

The LibDems completely LibDemmed that poll. It should've been full PR on the ballot, not AV, and they made such a hash of campaigning that the issue won't be looked at again for a generation. Tossers.

 

[DanEFC92]

 

[random]

The LibDems completely LibDemmed that poll. It should've been full PR on the ballot, not AV, and they made such a hash of campaigning that the issue won't be looked at again for a generation. Tossers.

At the time I voted to keep the existing method, the alternative vote malarky just didn't appeal to me.

You are 100% correct though, a straight PR should have been the choice, and as @BigMick pointed out, Clegg was also the main 'face' of the campaign and if memory serves me right the tuition fee betrayal was just before this referendum so that obviously garnered them a load of support.

It's one thing 'toning down' some of your principles to get votes (Labour ?), but actually going against them is a totally different ball game and the Lib Dems are probably still paying for that decision today (along with the students they shafted)

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

The LibDems completely LibDemmed that poll. It should've been full PR on the ballot, not AV, and they made such a hash of campaigning that the issue won't be looked at again for a generation. Tossers.

The machinations of Government was not allowed to throw its full weight behind that referendum, all part of the coalition government deal. Simply put they saw power licked and bowed.

 

[Blues Harp]

At the time I voted to keep the existing method, the alternative vote malarky just didn't appeal to me.

You are 100% correct though, a straight PR should have been the choice, and as @BigMick pointed out, Clegg was also the main 'face' of the campaign and if memory serves me right the tuition fee betrayal was just before this referendum so that obviously garnered them a load of support.

It's one thing 'toning down' some of your principles to get votes (Labour ?), but actually going against them is a totally different ball game and the Lib Dems are probably still paying for that decision today (along with the students they shafted)

Which principles or policies do you think that Labour should "tone down" to appear more electable? How does Starmer and crew achieve this without being perceived as similar to what we have now?

 

[roydo]

Which principles or policies do you think that Labour should "tone down" to appear more electable? How does Starmer and crew achieve this without being perceived as similar to what we have now?

I think that in the world as it currently is, there is zero appetite for proclamations of policies from any political party. Other than the political anoraks, no one would care a jot.

That said, its a game they play, and he is in a pretty zero sum game. What I mean, is everyone knows the Government have cocked up, but again, no one can look at any like minded societies and say someone else has done well. He certainly cant say his covid policy was better.

His best bet, and thats not sommet politicians like to rely on, is once this is over, folk start to punish those they feel let them down, cos lets face it, no one who has been a bell end in this will blame themselves.

 

[summerisle]

Over a 1,000 deaths a day and Labour are losing support. Get a grip Starmer or make way for somebody who has the balls to pick apart this mess of a government, it shouldn't be difficult.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

At the time I voted to keep the existing method, the alternative vote malarky just didn't appeal to me.

You are 100% correct though, a straight PR should have been the choice, and as @BigMick pointed out, Clegg was also the main 'face' of the campaign and if memory serves me right the tuition fee betrayal was just before this referendum so that obviously garnered them a load of support.

It's one thing 'toning down' some of your principles to get votes (Labour ?), but actually going against them is a totally different ball game and the Lib Dems are probably still paying for that decision today (along with the students they shafted)

Clegg’s rise and descent was rapid. Lib Dem’s thought they could win a majority at one point. Made one of the biggest political mistakes I’ve seen when he insisted on being such a prominent member of that coalition. Should have taken a back seat.
Think the vote on PR was given to him on condition that he voted with tories on things like tuition fees. Massively underestimated how that would look. PR was very low on the list of public conversation at that time. Effectively made the Lib Dem’s a non-entity.
I liked him up until then to be honest. Seemed a decent enough guy along with Vince Cable.

 

[Amw79]

Clegg’s rise and descent was rapid. Lib Dem’s thought they could win a majority at one point. Made one of the biggest political mistakes I’ve seen when he insisted on being such a prominent member of that coalition. Should have taken a back seat.
Think the vote on PR was given to him on condition that he voted with tories on things like tuition fees. Massively underestimated how that would look. PR was very low on the list of public conversation at that time. Effectively made the Lib Dem’s a non-entity.
I liked him up until then to be honest. Seemed a decent enough guy along with Vince Cable.

He also got through a very good LD policy to increase the tax Threshold to £10K over the course of the parliament. A great, simple policy targeted at the least well off in society, and made the tax system more progressive at a stroke. But the trade off for that and the AV vote was to go back on tuition fees, and support the Tory manifesto, and as you say, he miscalculated the public (and media) response.

Killed his party, but we saw from 2015 what the tories were like when unleashed.

 

[roydo]

He also got through a very good LD policy to increase the tax Threshold to £10K over the course of the parliament. A great, simple policy targeted at the least well off in society, and made the tax system more progressive at a stroke. But the trade off for that and the AV vote was to go back on tuition fees, and support the Tory manifesto, and as you say, he miscalculated the public (and media) response.

Killed his party, but we saw from 2015 what the tories were like when unleashed.

But the nil rate band for income tax is now £12500.

In your own words, "a great simple policy targeted at the least well off in society, and made the tax system more progressive at a stroke".

 

[Amw79]

But the nil rate band for income tax is now £12500.

In your own words, "a great simple policy targeted at the least well off in society, and made the tax system more progressive at a stroke".

Yeah, the tories made further increases to the nil rate. I was thinking about the other things they did when unleashed - immediately implementing the MP pay increases, which had been held off on, continued public sector cuts, Brexit referendum etc.

 

[roydo]

Yeah, the tories made further increases to the nil rate. I was thinking about the other things they did when unleashed - immediately implementing the MP pay increases, which had been held off on, continued public sector cuts, Brexit referendum etc.

Not defending them, brexit especially, just an observation that at times, they have done stuff you approve of.

 

[Amw79]

Not defending them, brexit especially, just an observation that at times, they have done stuff you approve of.

Sure. Increasing minimum tax threshold is a sound policy. LDs got it from about £6k to £10K. Tories have pushed it a bit more to £12500. A good policy is a good policy.

 

[random]

Which principles or policies do you think that Labour should "tone down" to appear more electable? How does Starmer and crew achieve this without being perceived as similar to what we have now?

for example: Compare the Labour and Conservative Manifestos of the last election for the environment, obviously a lot has changed but this is what I go by. I would also like to point out before I get negged or fingered, that I voted for neither of those parties in the last election lol

Conservative:
£640M for a Nature/Climate fund
Plant 75,000 acres of trees* a year by end of next parliament

Labour
£400 Billion for a National Transformation Fund
improve the energy efficiency of 27 million homes in the UK
build 7,000 offshore wind turbines**
build 2,000 onshore wind turbines**
22,000 football pitches worth of solar panels

(not sure if the turbines etc are part of the £400 Billion spend or not, it doesn't say)


Which one looks like over promise and under deliver to you ?


That's just one policy that I have chosen, obviously anyone can sit and cherry pick the good and bad from both manifesto's as I am sure you are aware, I am just using that particular section as an example



* Someone pointed out that it works out at a tree being planted every 4 seconds, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year - don't think they will hit that target tbh

** heard/read somewhere that turbines are not all they are cracked up to be, one such study on cost/return on investment is here https://briefingsforbritain.co.uk/the-costs-offshore-wind-power-blindness-and-insight/

 

[roydo]

for example: Compare the Labour and Conservative Manifestos of the last election for the environment, obviously a lot has changed but this is what I go by. I would also like to point out before I get negged or fingered, that I voted for neither of those parties in the last election lol

Conservative:
£640M for a Nature/Climate fund
Plant 75,000 acres of trees* a year by end of next parliament

Labour
£400 Billion for a National Transformation Fund
improve the energy efficiency of 27 million homes in the UK
build 7,000 offshore wind turbines**
build 2,000 onshore wind turbines**
22,000 football pitches worth of solar panels

(not sure if the turbines etc are part of the £400 Billion spend or not, it doesn't say)


Which one looks like over promise and under deliver to you ?


That's just one policy that I have chosen, obviously anyone can sit and cherry pick the good and bad from both manifesto's as I am sure you are aware, I am just using that particular section as an example



* Someone pointed out that it works out at a tree being planted every 4 seconds, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year - don't think they will hit that target tbh

** heard/read somewhere that turbines are not all they are cracked up to be, one such study on cost/return on investment is here https://briefingsforbritain.co.uk/the-costs-offshore-wind-power-blindness-and-insight/

Didnt they, well Corbyn, want to build a battery factory in Swindon, after nationalising batteries/leccy as well?

It just all sounded bonkers.