The Politics Thread

[webpunter]

It was a colour that rhymes with "down" and then the word "tide".  That kind of thing Rod Liddle posted on Millwall forums back in the day.

Oh dear #23890 contains the same, oops
Q/ are there any more offences to be taken into consideration
A/ yes
@ilo please can you edit accordingly
& apologies, again

As for Millwall thankfully the Premier League were spared from their presence this season
Phew TFFT
The most violent scumbag thick fuck racist fans a stain on football
& oppo fans insane for even thinking of attending a match there 

[sparkus]

Oh dear #23890 contains the same, oops
Q/ are there any more offences to be taken into consideration
A/ yes
@ilo please can you edit accordingly
& apologies, again

As for Millwall thankfully the Premier League were spared from their presence this season
Phew TFFT
The most violent scumbag thick fuck racist fans a stain on football
& oppo fans insane for even thinking of attending a match there

There's definitely a few Den on here.

[Squire Haggard]

The RN would have to use Destroyers which displace 8400 tonnes, the bow wave alone would swamp a dinghy, killing some of the occupants. No Navy Officer would do it unless they fancy several years behind bars for murder/manslaughter. Saying "I was obeying orders" is not a defence.

They dont have to do anything dastardly with a destroyer. The border patrol boats seen here would do fine.

You can see the new arrivals at Dover on this channel most days.

She usually gets a better view than today.

External Link/Members Only

[Vice Admiral]

There’s a very powerful article in today’s Times by the always reliable Jenni Russell that should be required reading, particularly for anyone under the age of 25.  Here’s some of it:
__________________

I’m relieved we have a new, decisive prime minister.  One who can grasp complex issues, understand trade-offs and announce a clear path ahead. It’s what we need in this climate crisis.  [Jenni is being sarcastic!]

It is a silent nature apocalypse, replicated across England. An unthinkable number of creatures have been incinerated in the fires: adders, slow-worms, hares, young birds. Fish are being left flapping and asphyxiating as rivers dry up; volunteers are helping to rescue a few and transferring them to watercourses still flowing. There are pitiful pictures of desperate bewildered ducks standing at the muddy bottom of vanished ponds, starving in their lost habitat.

And how did our resolute prime minister decide to deal with this national catastrophe of tinderbox land, declining food supply, dying wildlife and an ecosystem collapsing under unprecedented conditions? I was expecting him to cover immediate, individual and systemic responses.

I hoped he might start by saying: “In this disastrous drought, nature is paying the highest price and humans must do more. Rivers are being depleted to meet careless consumer demand. So cut your personal water use substantially. Instead, in this emergency, leave out bowls for insects and wildlife, feed where you can, and water the trees, bushes and pollinating plants nature needs most.”

We got none of this. Instead Burnham said, diffidently, that he was considering, possibly, in the long term, a ban on disposable barbecues, since they might have been the cause of some of the fires. It was an astoundingly feeble response. Two days later it was upgraded to an actual ban. That’s welcome but avoids the substantial issues: how our country has become so vulnerable and how we remedy it, fast.

The blindness of British politicians on this issue is petrifying. They declare a climate and nature crisis, but act only on the climate part. This year the UK’s intelligence chiefs warned that Britain’s food resilience and nature decline were a matter of national security.
__________________

Ah well.  It's a shame we’ve just elected – sorry, not elected – the most mediocre Prime Minister of my lifetime.

(Liz Truss wasn’t mediocre.  Just bonkers.)

[DastardlyDick]

Did they? Good for them. It makes perfect sense, don't you think?

Housing them in places that voted Green? No, but why do you think it does?
I  think that using redundant MoD sites is a good idea - they're usually already equipped with Security measures like high fences, one way in/out and, of course, many of them require minimal cost to get them ready to use, irrespective of where they're located.

[Charliehutton]

Housing them in places that voted Green? No, but why do you think it does?

Because a cornerstone of Green Party policy is to welcome all immigrants. It's what the electorate voted for. So they will welcome the asylum seekers, and feel rewarded by their presence, rather than see them as a burden and a problem, as people in some other areas do. Many Green voters will no doubt welcome them into their homes, thereby making the need to keep them in old military barracks redundant. It's regional democracy at it's finest.

[Jerboa]

The RN would have to use Destroyers which displace 8400 tonnes, the bow wave alone would swamp a dinghy, killing some of the occupants. No Navy Officer would do it unless they fancy several years behind bars for murder/manslaughter. Saying "I was obeying orders" is not a defence.

What destroyers? Most are in dock getting serviced. Not sure why you believe the RN only had a type 45 destroyer to use.

[Vice Admiral]

Because a cornerstone of Green Party policy is to welcome all immigrants. It's what the electorate voted for. So they will welcome the asylum seekers, and feel rewarded by their presence, rather than see them as a burden and a problem, as people in some other areas do. Many Green voters will no doubt welcome them into their homes, thereby making the need to keep them in old military barracks redundant. It's regional democracy at it's finest.

The “Greenest” constituency at the 2024 General Election was Bristol Central, where the Greens got 56.6% of the vote.

The electorate numbered 62,735.  The turnout was 69.1%. 

Of those on the electoral roll, therefore – even in this Greenest place of all – 38,196 people did not vote Green.

By your proposal, it would be not only the guilty 24,539 who voted Green that will be “punished” by having asylum seekers foisted on them, but also the innocent 38,196 who did not.   

It’d be like an ultra-strict boys’ school a hundred years ago:  “If the boy who broke the window doesn’t own up,” says the Headmaster, “the whole school will get six of the best.” 

[Blackpool Rock]

Because a cornerstone of Green Party policy is to welcome all immigrants. It's what the electorate voted for. So they will welcome the asylum seekers, and feel rewarded by their presence, rather than see them as a burden and a problem, as people in some other areas do. Many Green voters will no doubt welcome them into their homes, thereby making the need to keep them in old military barracks redundant. It's regional democracy at it's finest.

Could be interesting putting 1000's of asylum seekers with certain hard line views on some sexual activities in Brighton which already has it's own very "Diverse" demographic   

[bigden40]

Because a cornerstone of Green Party policy is to welcome all immigrants. It's what the electorate voted for. So they will welcome the asylum seekers, and feel rewarded by their presence, rather than see them as a burden and a problem, as people in some other areas do. Many Green voters will no doubt welcome them into their homes, thereby making the need to keep them in old military barracks redundant. It's regional democracy at it's finest.

Disagree.  The Green Party has 10 guiding principles and immigration isn’t mentioned in any of them, it’s absolutely likely that many voting Green do so because they agree with the environmental and sustainability principles and are ignorant of their wider proposed policies and the implications. 

I often hear friends and colleagues floating the idea of Green as a protest vote against the mainstream parties that are ignorant to how ridiculously socialist that party has become, especially in the 2000s since they absorbed every activist going along with the left wing of the Labour Party.

[Followyourdick]

There’s a very powerful article in today’s Times by the always reliable Jenni Russell that should be required reading, particularly for anyone under the age of 25.  Here’s some of it:
__________________

I’m relieved we have a new, decisive prime minister.  One who can grasp complex issues, understand trade-offs and announce a clear path ahead. It’s what we need in this climate crisis.  [Jenni is being sarcastic!]

It is a silent nature apocalypse, replicated across England. An unthinkable number of creatures have been incinerated in the fires: adders, slow-worms, hares, young birds. Fish are being left flapping and asphyxiating as rivers dry up; volunteers are helping to rescue a few and transferring them to watercourses still flowing. There are pitiful pictures of desperate bewildered ducks standing at the muddy bottom of vanished ponds, starving in their lost habitat.

And how did our resolute prime minister decide to deal with this national catastrophe of tinderbox land, declining food supply, dying wildlife and an ecosystem collapsing under unprecedented conditions? I was expecting him to cover immediate, individual and systemic responses.

I hoped he might start by saying: “In this disastrous drought, nature is paying the highest price and humans must do more. Rivers are being depleted to meet careless consumer demand. So cut your personal water use substantially. Instead, in this emergency, leave out bowls for insects and wildlife, feed where you can, and water the trees, bushes and pollinating plants nature needs most.”

We got none of this. Instead Burnham said, diffidently, that he was considering, possibly, in the long term, a ban on disposable barbecues, since they might have been the cause of some of the fires. It was an astoundingly feeble response. Two days later it was upgraded to an actual ban. That’s welcome but avoids the substantial issues: how our country has become so vulnerable and how we remedy it, fast.

The blindness of British politicians on this issue is petrifying. They declare a climate and nature crisis, but act only on the climate part. This year the UK’s intelligence chiefs warned that Britain’s food resilience and nature decline were a matter of national security.
__________________

Ah well.  It's a shame we’ve just elected – sorry, not elected – the most mediocre Prime Minister of my lifetime.

(Liz Truss wasn’t mediocre.  Just bonkers.)

He’s been PM for 2 minutes give him chance FFS.

[Squire Haggard]

Disagree.  The Green Party has 10 guiding principles and immigration isn’t mentioned in any of them, it’s absolutely likely that many voting Green do so because they agree with the environmental and sustainability principles and are ignorant of their wider proposed policies and the implications. 

I often hear friends and colleagues floating the idea of Green as a protest vote against the mainstream parties that are ignorant to how ridiculously socialist that party has become, especially in the 2000s since they absorbed every activist going along with the left wing of the Labour Party.

I had a glance at the main points in the Scottish Greens manifesto and dont see anything about migrants. I assume from what they've said that they will welcome migrants forever until there's standing room only.
Its worth looking at the two leaders, neither of whom has ever had a real job. School, university, then straight into politics for them both,

Says that she's ''an accidental MSP'' because she couldn't find a job when she left university.
External Link/Members Only

School, university, politics.
External Link/Members Only

[Charliehutton]

The “Greenest” constituency at the 2024 General Election was Bristol Central, where the Greens got 56.6% of the vote.

The electorate numbered 62,735.  The turnout was 69.1%. 

Of those on the electoral roll, therefore – even in this Greenest place of all – 38,196 people did not vote Green.

By your proposal, it would be not only the guilty 24,539 who voted Green that will be “punished” by having asylum seekers foisted on them, but also the innocent 38,196 who did not.   

It’d be like an ultra-strict boys’ school a hundred years ago:  “If the boy who broke the window doesn’t own up,” says the Headmaster, “the whole school will get six of the best.”

  VA, you're very naughty to suggest that the presence of asylum seekers could be considered a punishment, rather than a cause for celebration...

[ulstersubbie]

Its worth looking at the two leaders, neither of whom has ever had a real job. School, university, then straight into politics for them both,

Like so many of our politicians mate, they'd shit themselves if they had to mop a floor or get their hands dirty doing manual labour (I've been there and done it). Politics will always provide a cushy route for these people.

[RedKettle]

I had a glance at the main points in the Scottish Greens manifesto and dont see anything about migrants. I assume from what they've said that they will welcome migrants forever until there's standing room only.
Its worth looking at the two leaders, neither of whom has ever had a real job. School, university, then straight into politics for them both,

Says that she's ''an accidental MSP'' because she couldn't find a job when she left university.
External Link/Members Only

School, university, politics.
External Link/Members Only

It is a general problem with politics in recent years, far fewer MPs have had proper jobs and many come up via think tanks and special adviser roles.  In the past you had a mixture of manual workers, like posties, and professionals.  Much of it down the way parties select MP candidates - anyone in a proper job will struggle to put the time in to do all the roles/donkey work that is needed.

[RedKettle]

Disagree.  The Green Party has 10 guiding principles and immigration isn’t mentioned in any of them,

I think Charlie like many others just swallows the Reform bullshit without any critical thinking.

[Charliehutton]

I think Charlie like many others just swallows the Reform bullshit without any critical thinking.

  Not quite all of it, RK. For example, suggestions such as using the Royal Navy to return all the small boats to France, or Jenrick's vow to get the workshy cleaning the streets, are pretty silly. But pound for pound, I don't detect any more bullshit coming from them than the Tories or Labour.

[RedKettle]

Not quite all of it, RK. For example, suggestions such as using the Royal Navy to return all the small boats to France, or Jenrick's vow to get the workshy cleaning the streets, are pretty silly. But pound for pound, I don't detect any more bullshit coming from them than the Tories or Labour.

I have never voted Tory in my life but even they do not produce as much bullshit as reform.  The welfare reforms claiming £50b pa savings are utter fantasy, they would never be done.  It is also an interesting political direction as many of their heartlands are areas with high benefit claims, so it could backfire.

If the political parties all put country first they would for a start agree that the triple lock needs to go - they all know that but stay quiet and will jump on any party that suggests it. 

Social care is another area that they should stop using as a political football.

To be honest I suspect I do agree with you in a general assessment that most politicians are low grade.  We just disgree on which ones are the worst.

[Blackpool Rock]

I have never voted Tory in my life but even they do not produce as much bullshit as reform.  The welfare reforms claiming £50b pa savings are utter fantasy, they would never be done.  It is also an interesting political direction as many of their heartlands are areas with high benefit claims, so it could backfire.

If the political parties all put country first they would for a start agree that the triple lock needs to go - they all know that but stay quiet and will jump on any party that suggests it. 

Social care is another area that they should stop using as a political football.

To be honest I suspect I do agree with you in a general assessment that most politicians are low grade.  We just disgree on which ones are the worst.

You're forgetting that most Reform voters are so thick they can only concentrate and remember one thing at a time and currently it that everything would be great if all the immigrants were stopped so then they'd all be Managing Directors of Multinational companies earning £Millions each every year

They can sometimes remember other basic details like whether it's chips for tea but if you ask them what time it is they forget their own fucking name 

[TallnHung]

You're forgetting that most Reform voters are so thick they can only concentrate and remember one thing at a time and currently it that everything would be great if all the immigrants were stopped so then they'd all be Managing Directors of Multinational companies earning £Millions each every year

They can sometimes remember other basic details like whether it's chips for tea but if you ask them what time it is they forget their own fucking name 

Fair summary

[Squire Haggard]

I have never voted Tory in my life but even they do not produce as much bullshit as reform.  The welfare reforms claiming £50b pa savings are utter fantasy, they would never be done.  It is also an interesting political direction as many of their heartlands are areas with high benefit claims, so it could backfire.

If the political parties all put country first they would for a start agree that the triple lock needs to go - they all know that but stay quiet and will jump on any party that suggests it. 

Perhaps a bigger problem is this. Its a long term problem too, which I dont think the current government will solve.

''There were an estimated 1,012,000 young people aged 16 to 24 years in the UK who were NEET in January to March 2026; this number increased by 89,000 when compared with January to March 2025 and was up by 55,000 on October to December 2025.''

External Link/Members Only

[Adoniron]

I have never voted Tory in my life but even they do not produce as much bullshit as reform.  The welfare reforms claiming £50b pa savings are utter fantasy, they would never be done.  It is also an interesting political direction as many of their heartlands are areas with high benefit claims, so it could backfire.

It will give Reform supporters something to think about when they are parking their mobility scooters outside Wetherspoons at 10.00am in the morning.

[Charliehutton]

It is also an interesting political direction as many of their heartlands are areas with high benefit claims, so it could backfire.

If the political parties all put country first they would for a start agree that the triple lock needs to go.

That's an interesting point. I can't imagine there are many constituencies with more benefits claimants than Clacton, yet they're resolutely Reform.

As for scrapping the triple lock, they can fuck off. As a vulnerable pensioner not wealthy enough to vote Labour, that pension matters to me...

[DastardlyDick]

What destroyers? Most are in dock getting serviced. Not sure why you believe the RN only had a type 45 destroyer to use.

What do you see being deployed most often on the news? Destroyers if another ship was available (we do have some frigates) wouldn't they send them if they were more suitable? A large ship is required because Naval Ships have very little spare space on the inside, (and we don't want them seeing the secret stuff) so you have to send one that has lot's of deck space.

[DastardlyDick]

Like so many of our politicians mate, they'd shit themselves if they had to mop a floor or get their hands dirty doing manual labour (I've been there and done it). Politics will always provide a cushy route for these people.

It's not just Politicians, large numbers of our young people will not do manual work either, which is why so many tradesmen from Central and Eastern Europe made a good living here. They usually left family at home because they could easily, cheaply, nip back at the weekend to see them. The dog whistle rhetoric from Reform, embraced by the Tories, drove them home. We now have to rely on Immigrants from much further away who bring their extended family with them because they can't visit easily.

[RedKettle]

That's an interesting point. I can't imagine there are many constituencies with more benefits claimants than Clacton, yet they're resolutely Reform.

As for scrapping the triple lock, they can fuck off. As a vulnerable pensioner not wealthy enough to vote Labour, that pension matters to me...

It is unaffordable and unfair. It was needed at the time to restore the position of the older generation but it has done what it was intended to do. Now it is the younger generation that are at a massive financial disadvantage. Loads of analysis on this. Pensioners talk as if removing the triple lock will leave them destitute, it would make little difference for years, there is no cut to the pension. But the saving over decades is enormous.

[RedKettle]

Perhaps a bigger problem is this. Its a long term problem too, which I dont think the current government will solve.

''There were an estimated 1,012,000 young people aged 16 to 24 years in the UK who were NEET in January to March 2026; this number increased by 89,000 when compared with January to March 2025 and was up by 55,000 on October to December 2025.''

External Link/Members Only

Agreed. We have a massive issue building in that generation.

[Punting2022]

Agreed. We have a massive issue building in that generation.

All of uk problems are to do with population increase. Healthcare education all struggling due to population. More so immigration and certain ethnic groups. Nhs is struggling because certain groups go for a cough. Immigration dont help. Teachers have to change methods to accomodate immigrants.

Gen z are lazy to. Hence lack of work. Old cidgers working past retirement to live. Most cant live without jobs. Doesnt allow young blood in.

[Blackpool Rock]

It is unaffordable and unfair. It was needed at the time to restore the position of the older generation but it has done what it was intended to do. Now it is the younger generation that are at a massive financial disadvantage. Loads of analysis on this. Pensioners talk as if removing the triple lock will leave them destitute, it would make little difference for years, there is no cut to the pension. But the saving over decades is enormous.

Overall as a group pensioners have done very well in recent years, not that you'd know it from everything you hear on the news.

I previously suggested that no party alone will scrap or say they're going to scrap the triple lock yet they probably all want to, what's needed is some sort of cross party consensus for an independent body to decide on whether it should remain or what it should be replaced by.

[Charliehutton]

It is unaffordable and unfair. It was needed at the time to restore the position of the older generation but it has done what it was intended to do. Now it is the younger generation that are at a massive financial disadvantage. Loads of analysis on this. Pensioners talk as if removing the triple lock will leave them destitute, it would make little difference for years, there is no cut to the pension. But the saving over decades is enormous.

I tend to agree, although it's politically tricky, as Rachel from accounts found out; stopping the heating allowance was seen as robbing Granny to pay for illegal immigrants/workshy layabouts, and pretty much universally unpopular.

[WASA38]

That's an interesting point. I can't imagine there are many constituencies with more benefits claimants than Clacton, yet they're resolutely Reform.

As for scrapping the triple lock, they can fuck off. As a vulnerable pensioner not wealthy enough to vote Labour, that pension matters to me...

Arguably a vulnerable pensioner reliant on the triple lock shouldn't indulge in a costly hobby like punting so should 'fuck off' from here.

As an 88 year old I view the triple lock as an affront to young workers on poor wages.

[Vice Admiral]

Overall as a group pensioners have done very well in recent years, not that you'd know it from everything you hear on the news.

I previously suggested that no party alone will scrap or say they're going to scrap the triple lock yet they probably all want to, what's needed is some sort of cross party consensus for an independent body to decide on whether it should remain or what it should be replaced by.

No serious commentator thinks that the triple-lock will be anything but catastrophically unaffordable as the years pass.

"Cross-party consensus"?  Now that would be a grown-up way to do politics – for Labour and the Conservatives, and possibly the Liberal Democrats and Reform UK, to sit down to hammer out agreement on certain unpopular but essential policies (on, for example, pensions, benefits, the NHS and immigration), so that no one party gets the flak.

When all the parties spend half their time nervously eying the electorate, it will never be possible to sort out the economy and get the nation back on an even keel.

[Charliehutton]

Arguably a vulnerable pensioner reliant on the triple lock shouldn't indulge in a costly hobby like punting so should 'fuck off' from here.

Given the nature of our little hobby, I did make that point with my tongue firmly in my cheek...

[RedKettle]

I tend to agree, although it's politically tricky, as Rachel from accounts found out; stopping the heating allowance was seen as robbing Granny to pay for illegal immigrants/workshy layabouts, and pretty much universally unpopular.

That was the right policy but inept delivery.

[bigden40]

That was the right policy but inept delivery.

No. The right policies would have been addressing the direct cause of the UK's excessively high energy costs alongside serious welfare reform.

[RedKettle]

No. The right policies would have been addressing the direct cause of the UK's excessively high energy costs alongside serious welfare reform.

Classic - just redirect to another issue.

It is ridiculous to be randomly directing help for heating to a group that includes millionaires and other wealthy people.  In addition the relative increase in state pensions (triple lock) as well as more people having private pensions simply means that hardship over heating bills in that group is nowhere what it used to be.  Plenty of data on that it you do your normal dive onto AI.

Most Tory politicians agreed with that and many were on the record, until there was a chance to have a go at Labour - country first anyone??

If you are asking two other questions, should we reform/reduce welfare and should be find cheaper energy then yes to both.  But nothing to do with why I believe the policy actually being discussed was right but as with so much Starmer did appallingly implemented and presented.

[timsussex]

In March 2023, Angela Rayner posted on X: “Being an MP isn’t a second job. It is the job.” The previous year, Rayner said that “the public deserves a government that respects them — not one that treats the job of an MP as just another income”.

However she received £84,000 in fees for six speaking engagements after she resigned over the stamp duty fiddle

[RedKettle]

In March 2023, Angela Rayner posted on X: “Being an MP isn’t a second job. It is the job.” The previous year, Rayner said that “the public deserves a government that respects them — not one that treats the job of an MP as just another income”.

However she received £84,000 in fees for six speaking engagements after she resigned over the stamp duty fiddle

Not sure I class 6 speaking engagements as having a second job, but get your point.  More surprising is who would £14k (average) to have speaking????

[TallnHung]

All of uk problems are to do with population increase. Healthcare education all struggling due to population. More so immigration and certain ethnic groups. Nhs is struggling because certain groups go for a cough. Immigration dont help. Teachers have to change methods to accomodate immigrants.

Gen z are lazy to. Hence lack of work. Old cidgers working past retirement to live. Most cant live without jobs. Doesnt allow young blood in.

NHS would be empty if it wasnt for immigrante, same for England Football that everyone was cheering on.
Lack of funding over 30 years on most of our services including NHS and Defence had fucked everything to the point that it'll take that long to fix it if anyone ever gets past Parliamentary Term thinking and works long game.

Try thinking and working on solutions rather than blame and maybe, just maybe, when you need a black or brown nurse to wipe your old arse maybe, just maybe,  they will still be there for you!

[bigden40]

Classic - just redirect to another issue.

It is ridiculous to be randomly directing help for heating to a group that includes millionaires and other wealthy people.  In addition the relative increase in state pensions (triple lock) as well as more people having private pensions simply means that hardship over heating bills in that group is nowhere what it used to be.  Plenty of data on that it you do your normal dive onto AI.

Most Tory politicians agreed with that and many were on the record, until there was a chance to have a go at Labour - country first anyone??

If you are asking two other questions, should we reform/reduce welfare and should be find cheaper energy then yes to both.  But nothing to do with why I believe the policy actually being discussed was right but as with so much Starmer did appallingly implemented and presented.

How is it a redirect?  Both things are very relevant to the winter fuel payment.

The winter fuel payment would be less necessary, and easier to scrap, if our energy bills were not so high - the root cause.  The winter fuel payment is also a benefit, but axing it was tinkering round the edges of a much bigger problem.

It’s true that Starmer and Reeves botched this very modest policy change so it’s probably best that they didn’t attempt to address the real problems. 

[bigden40]

NHS would be empty if it wasnt for immigrante, same for England Football that everyone was cheering on.
Lack of funding over 30 years on most of our services including NHS and Defence had fucked everything to the point that it'll take that long to fix it if anyone ever gets past Parliamentary Term thinking and works long game.

Try thinking and working on solutions rather than blame and maybe, just maybe, when you need a black or brown nurse to wipe your old arse maybe, just maybe,  they will still be there for you!

Disingenuous argument.

A reasonable immigration policy allows for importing workers to fill skill shortages, no one is arguing against that.  The fact that certain sectors needed those skills doesn’t take away the impacts caused by mass immigration elsewhere in our economy and/or society. 

Foreign-born NHS workers account for about 1.5% of long-term immigrants to the UK since 2000, 98% plus are not working in the NHS.

[timsussex]

Not sure I class 6 speaking engagements as having a second job, but get your point.  More surprising is who would £14k (average) to have speaking????

Might have taken more time than some Tory directorships 

but yes if any company I had shares in paid that I would be more than a touch annoyed

I assume none of the companies provided tax advice

[RedKettle]

How is it a redirect?  Both things are very relevant to the winter fuel payment.

The winter fuel payment would be less necessary, and easier to scrap, if our energy bills were not so high - the root cause.  The winter fuel payment is also a benefit, but axing it was tinkering round the edges of a much bigger problem.

It’s true that Starmer and Reeves botched this very modest policy change so it’s probably best that they didn’t attempt to address the real problems.

It was a poor policy before energy prices increased and would be if they fell, for the reason I said. It is an isolated benefit unrelated to others so no need to wait years for wider reform. Getting rid of it was right, as most parties agreed at different times.

[DastardlyDick]

I tend to agree, although it's politically tricky, as Rachel from accounts found out; stopping the heating allowance was seen as robbing Granny to pay for illegal immigrants/workshy layabouts, and pretty much universally unpopular.

Had it been properly targeted in the first place by means testing it would have been a lot cheaper. My Parents used it for other things because they had Civil Service pensions and didn't need it.

[Adoniron]

Had it been properly targeted in the first place by means testing it would have been a lot cheaper. My Parents used it for other things because they had Civil Service pensions and didn't need it.

Lots of people who didn't need it used it for other things. I saw one woman being interviewed who said she used it to buy Christmas presents. Others who only had the state pension to live on definitely needed it.

[Adoniron]

Disingenuous argument.

A reasonable immigration policy allows for importing workers to fill skill shortages, no one is arguing against that.  The fact that certain sectors needed those skills doesn’t take away the impacts caused by mass immigration elsewhere in our economy and/or society. 

Foreign-born NHS workers account for about 1.5% of long-term immigrants to the UK since 2000, 98% plus are not working in the NHS.

325,000 NHS employees aren't British citizens. That's 21% of the workforce.

External Link/Members Only

[Punting2022]

325,000 NHS employees aren't British citizens. That's 21% of the workforce.

External Link/Members Only

No one has an issue with people who work. Its the ones in hotels freeloading of benefits etc.

The home office have handed out handbooks to these illigall alien men advising how to not rape a woman. How to not be a peado.
So the Homeoffice knows these men from islamic countries as immigrants are rapist and peados. Yet still let them roam around the streets. Should be detention centres. 

[Blackpool Rock]

No one has an issue with people who work. Its the ones in hotels freeloading of benefits etc.

The home office have handed out handbooks to these illigall alien men advising how to not rape a woman. How to not be a peado.
So the Homeoffice knows these men from islamic countries as immigrants are rapist and peados. Yet still let them roam around the streets. Should be detention centres.

Apart from they do (and I suspect you do to)

It's the old chestnut that "They're all out of work and scrounging benefits" but then in the next sentence "They're all taking our jobs" 

Asylum seekers aren't allowed to work in the 1st 12 months and after March this year they are only allowed graduate level or certain professional roles. Seems crazy to me as IMO they should be allowed to work and start paying for their upkeep, in fact i'd even say they should be made to do some sort of work on a voluntary basis to help the local communities they are living in

[Punting2022]

Apart from they do (and I suspect you do to)

It's the old chestnut that "They're all out of work and scrounging benefits" but then in the next sentence "They're all taking our jobs" 

Asylum seekers aren't allowed to work in the 1st 12 months and after March this year they are only allowed graduate level or certain professional roles. Seems crazy to me as IMO they should be allowed to work and start paying for their upkeep, in fact i'd even say they should be made to do some sort of work on a voluntary basis to help the local communities they are living in

Voluntary work sems good. Earn their keep. Maybe clean the roads theier sort make a mess. So much litter around and its always their sort in their areas. Voluntary litter picking where a British born supervises and gets paid. Creates more jobs.

[Followyourdick]

Voluntary work sems good. Earn their keep. Maybe clean the roads theier sort make a mess. So much litter around and its always their sort in their areas. Voluntary litter picking where a British born supervises and gets paid. Creates more jobs.

Can you explain “their sort” and “their areas” please?