There are three over-arching themes to the news this morning.
The first is the toxicity of the UK's media. I have already noted that.
The second is the toxicity of the Trump administration. I will get to that.
The third is the toxicity of the Labour government here in the UK. That is the subject of this post.
What is very clear is that Labour is using this week, and the focus on Trump, as cover for some quite horrendous news stories.
Yesterday, I noted its sacking of the chair of the Competition and Markets Authority that is tasked with protecting the public from abuse by monopolies, and their replacement by a person from Amazon, in a move that is intended to deliver growth, come whatever the cost might be to the ordinary people and the smaller businesses of this country.
Yesterday, it became clear that labour really will allow the expansion of three London airports. As the FT summarised it:
Worse, as the Guardian noted:
Our right to protest against the despoilation of our planet is to be curtailed. Growth comes first, even if it will kill us all.
Then there was the news that Rachel Reeves is siding with banks and other financial institutions in the legal action brought by people who were mis-sold car loans, where there is clear evidence that compensation is owed. As the FT noted:
And then there was this by Chris Giles in the FT:
The demand is that Rachel Reeves deliver austerity to keep bond markets happy.
I am sure she will be happy to oblige. As is now apparent, Labour is the most economically irresponsible government we have had in the last fifteen years, and I am including that headed by Liz Truss in that reckoning.
It is clear that they think the green agenda is over.
Consumers are now to be sacrificed to business, whatever the issue. In fact, the Financial Conduct Authority has asked for guidance on how far they can go when doing this:
Given that they have been told to promote economic growth above all else, that is quite a reasonable thing for them to do, but it clearly shows what Labour is thinking.
And those who will be harmed by more austerity are being lined up for their suffering to begin.
This is a government that does not care about anyone but the rich.
This is a government that is indifferent to the people of the UK.
This is a government without concern for our planet.
It is a government willing to use all its powers to deny the people of the UK their rights.
And I do think that makes it the worst government of the last fifteen years.
But then, when you see your job as paving the way for the far right, as Labour ministers clearly do, this is precisely what you would do. If that's their criteria for success - and I think it must be - then everything they are doing makes complete sense.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
There have been blogs referring to Labour’s role – bit part role – in what is increasingly looking like the long and rather well planned road to ‘unfreedom’.
Given that leading Neo-liberal ‘intellectuals’ were driven by irrational fear and hatred of government and also a spill over was the contempt and hatred of those who depended on government, maybe we are in the midst of some deliberate ploy or plan to deliver just that?
Labour’s connivance in this plot started in 1997 to be honest, and they did little to counter the argument that they were responsible for the 2008 crash and not the private banking sector.
But this Labour government is much worse it seems to me and takes the biscuit for useless administrations.
Except of course, weakness is not useless to those who want to exploit it.
Risk then is to shouldered onto society by government because apparently that is good for growth.
Disgraceful.
We are being led by “just stop net zero”. Apparently what was holding back growth all this time was Ed Milliband and climate policy. Austerity, what austerity? Austerity is just a conspiracy to hide the truth that climate goals are damaging our society. Growth good. Anything getting in the way of growth is ungood. Removing regulations plusgood. Doing actions to please big bank of E, double plus good.
Is it even economic to expand Heathrow when the cost of flying will inevitably grow curtailing demand? The days of cheap oil are over and whatever your views are on climate change, the cost of flying will go up and this will reduce demand. I really wonder if business will invest and whilst Rachel Reeves may remove the planning obstacles, she is never going to fund the work.
Labour’s approach has moved to blame everybody else for preventing “”growth”.
The sign of a government deliberately prepared not to do anything for the good of the UK population as a whole.
For example stripping away the existing very limited consumer protection from financial mis selling.
Utterly incompetent and cravenly kneeling to the mass media and City of London.
My hope is that enough of the Left Wing of the Labour pull away, weakening the party and also offering a counter to Reform.
There is no left wing anymore, over 150,000 have left. And those in the party who object or wish to alter policy have no way to do so – “Conference is sovereign only when it is in session”(D. Evans). The only means is is a fraction of Labour MPs break away – but some of the possible suspects were deselected, suspended or expelled.
The coup is complete.
Thank you, both.
I was wondering about that and also wondered if Richard is hearing more from his contacts in the Commons etc.
Heads are down right now
I think the whips are on the rampage
The Morning Star (studiously ignored by Establishment media which even counts trash like the Sun and Express as “respectable”) has an interesting report today on attempts to divide and conquer the remaining seven strong (?) leftist group in Labour – those who were suspended in July. Their six month suspension will soon be up and apparently five have been offered reinstatement, but two will remain out in the cold: Aspana Begum and Zarah Sultana.
I heard only two had much chance of returning
Agreed.
Most economically incompetent.
Most politically incompetent.
Most authoritarian.
I have never feared my government before, in my half century of adulthood. But I fear this one. I watched Starmer rehearsing for Downing St. while purging the dissenters in his party.
This has been a long time in the planning, and it concerns more than just the UK. Keep your eye on the occupied West Bank territories as they are finally annexed.
@Robertj
Peter Oborne warned us about Starmer quite a while ago in two pieces.
First, on Starmer’s untrustworthiness at
https://www.doubledown.news/watch/2023/september/25/exposed-keir-starmer-liar-murdochs-man-candidate-mi5-peter-oborne
And second on his authoritarianism at https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/uk-labour-starmer-authoritarianism-alarm-bells-ringing.
And so it has proved to be. Alas, Starmer is an UTTER crock of shite (apologies for my coarsel anguage) , without shite’s saving grace of being capable of being processed into nutrifying manure – HE’S TOXIC ALL THE WAY THROUGH.
And an illegitimate PM – he lied his way into the Leadership, and started plotting to oust Corbyn 6 months before the 2019 GE (See https://novaramedia.com/2023/11/14/the-corruption-behind-starmers-rise-has-finally-been-exposed/)
Thank you, both.
Not long after Starmer became DPP, DPP staff became alarmed at his regular visits to the US and engagement with the US war machine, largely irrelevant to his day job. The expenses he ran up, not just on these visits, were another matter.
His trip and apology to the US after May refused to extradite the alleged hacker ought to have resulted in dismissal. May and the cabinet may have been aware of the company* Starmer kept (and still keeps) and how intimidating they are.
*Said company, British, including a former chief spook and top soldier, and American, peers of the Britons, were involved with the Brexit campaign**, undermined not just Corbyn, but May, too, and parachuted one of their own, a former UK Treasury and US bank official***, as a watchdog at No 10 when Johnson was PM.
**They kept / keep a low profile and allow(ed) the loudmouths to dominate the airwaves. The MSM and other focus on Tufton Street and Putin for their role in Brexit never shifts to this lot. Oddly, they are neo con, but not necessarily neo liberal. One explained to me how 2008 and other crises weakened the west and its legitimacy, so opposed deregulation of certain industries.
***Richard may know this official’s father in law, a prominent journalist. @Richard: I’m happy to explain privately.
Talking about Peter Oborne, I couldn’t find his column in the February printed edition of ByLine Times. He’s the main reason I get the print edition.
There was nothing in January saying he was leaving, or planning a break or another trip to the occupied West Bank. I’m a bit worried.
No idea
I have not even opened mine as yet
Unfortunately the main stream commentators are genuinely perplexed as to what to do next. Andrew Marr in the New Statesman podcast asks and I’m paraphrasing ‘But what is the alternative economic strategy that is better than the one Rachel Reeves is pursuing? We are heavily taxed, the rise in NI has been tough, the economy is in a parlours state and new tax rises would be very dangerous for Labour. They could change the fiscal rules, but given the mood of the bond markets how is that going to go down? So he doesn’t see a radical alternative right now, just hold the line and hope and pray AI and planning reform deliver.
Curiously another commentator on the podcast goes on and outlines the role of the Bank of England and the impact of quantitive tightening on the bond markets but the implications of this in finding a way out of the impasse are not explored. We are at the mercy of the bond markets and the government is powerless to act – no wonder we are in a mess when this is the level of analysis on offer.
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-new-statesman-uk-politics-and-culture/id630596898?i=1000684269121
I was always very concerned at Starmer’s role in the whole appalling incarceration of Julian Assaunge and his apparent close links to the CIA. His past membership of the Trilateral Commission was also a good indicator of who he really is and who his friends are. https://www.declassifieduk.org/keir-starmer-joined-secretive-cia-linked-group-while-serving-in-corbyns-shadow-cabinet
It’s grim.
Want another reason for the list? Well here is a another from Reeves (and Reynolds):
https://www.politics.co.uk/news/2025/01/22/weve-got-to-move-on-rachel-reeves-rejects-calls-to-move-uk-closer-to-the-eu/
I really don’t know what to say, but that it’s all very sad.
Thank you, Duncan.
Further to my comments on another post yesterday, the government listens to asset strippers and banksters* who prefer to loot here / exploit customers here rather than compete in a single market where rules make that more difficult. City opinion is, unfortunately, shifting from remain / rejoin.
Some, but not all, realise the game is up for the City. A minor example: A sort of Lloyd’s insurance market is developing in Mauritius. The country’s finance sector is moving up the value chain. The Rothschild and Peugeot families, amongst others, have shifted capital down there. British bankers who have worked in the region and, unlike me, have no connections to the island are moving in and say the City is in decline.
It appears this Labour government is the ultimate success of the Tufton Street (and other) think tanks that have spread their neoliberal propaganda very effectively for years. Rachel Reeves is obsessed with a number and seems prepared to sacrifice the physical, mental, financial and environmental health of citizens for a meaningless number. It’s really bizarre that numbers matter so much more than people or planet to Reeves and Starmer!
Your closing few lines of “This is a government” somehow reminded me of one of Kinnock’s famous speeches
If Margaret Thatcher is re-elected as prime minister on Thursday, I warn you.
I warn you that you will have pain–when healing and relief depend upon payment.
I warn you that you will have ignorance–when talents are untended and wits are wasted, when learning is a privilege and not a right.
I warn you that you will have poverty–when pensions slip and benefits are whittled away by a government that won’t pay in an economy that can’t pay.
I warn you that you will be cold–when fuel charges are used as a tax system that the rich don’t notice and the poor can’t afford.
I warn you that you must not expect work–when many cannot spend, more will not be able to earn. When they don’t earn, they don’t spend. When they don’t spend, work dies.
I warn you not to go into the streets alone after dark or into the streets in large crowds of protest in the light.
I warn you that you will be quiet–when the curfew of fear and the gibbet of unemployment make you obedient.
I warn you that you will have defence of a sort–with a risk and at a price that passes all understanding.
I warn you that you will be home-bound–when fares and transport bills kill leisure and lock you up.
I warn you that you will borrow less–when credit, loans, mortgages and easy payments are refused to people on your melting income.
If Margaret Thatcher wins on Thursday–
– I warn you not to be ordinary
– I warn you not to be young
– I warn you not to fall ill
– I warn you not to get old.
He was right really wasn’t he – 40+ years later, here we are…
He was right
But now we are threatened by a Labour government
And it is interesting to note that this Labour government is the consequence of the processes that Kinnock initiated during his own left-bashing days as party leader.
This is all in plain sight. And each day brings yet another appalling announcement bending the knee before their global corporate masters, squeezing the throats of their long suffering victims (‘difficult decisions’)
Taking powers to filch benefit claimants’ bank accounts and remove their driving licences, while rich tax dodgers completely untouched one of the latest.
It’s beginning to look more and more like a police state.
Yet so little resistance from the body politic. Obviously its partly because of corrupt media spinning or gaslighting whats going on.
But Labour are plummeting in the polls – so people are sort of aware .
The deliberate replacement of mass membership political parties by faction-ridden parties funded by oligarch ‘donors’ must be part of it. It means that the grass roots are turned off – feeling detached and powerless to influence politics.
So there is no lively open debate on ideas within parties or between parties or in the media – which is largely oligarch owned, and which relentlessly puts Reform as the only alternative.
I wouldnt want to ask whether Labour is the worst government, – certainly governments from 2010 Osborne/Cameron onwards which have run the economy and society into the ground would qualify, but given what Labour is supposed to be about, this certainly seems to be the worst Labour govt ever.
And I’m a mamber.
I presume you mean member?
Member yes – Freudian slip
“Yet so little resistance from the body politic.” There’s a problem with commenting on what the electorate are or are not doing, or what we might wish they were doing, or criticisms of what they are not doing (how can we know, there are 45 million of us). I’m part of the body politic, and I’m absolutely stumped with regards to quite what it is I’m supposed to be doing in reaction to a government that spends over a trillion a year, runs the legislature, the police and the military, and can interfere in anyone’s life they choose with impunity. I can contact my MP, but that, in my experience, leads only to a politician’s reply written by a staffer. Voting doesn’t seem to be working either. I don’t have the cash for bribery. I am at a loss for what to do (standing against a vast, armed bureaucracy is somewhat daunting), and I know of no one, whatever their ideas, who knows how to get them implemented. I’ve read plenty of “here’s the problem and here’s what we can do about it” from serious academics, researchers and so on, and they all leave out the part about getting govt to act, because they equally don’t know how. I’d say the body politic seems unresponsive because, like me, they’re excluded from decision-making (what a waste), and, despite many hundreds of thousands of people signing petitions, sending letters and emails, supporting and joining organisations like We Own It, they see the relentless march of privatisation continuing. They’re also likely doing what they can (such as cutting back, saving, helping friends and family, volunteering), which is neither noticed nor viewed as political reaction. There’s an old saying, “Lord, give me the strength to change what I can…” Maybe that’s what’s happening, people aren’t expending energy pointlessly on a foregone conclusion, against a government that’s willing to kill its own people actively and passively in large numbers (see Prem Sikka’s articles on Left Foot Forward for the body count). I sincerely ask, of anyone, what can the electorate do that will actually alter the decisions of govt; for instance, to nationalise water, which would benefit 30 million homes and millions of businesses, yet despite overwhelming support, the govt says nah. The govt stands against its own people, and we will all simply pay the additional costs for water when prices rise, despite the injustice. I’d say that, and I won’t exclude myself from this, when almost anyone criticises the electorate for failing to act in response to some vile govt policy, the critic will likely be as guilty of the perceived inaction as those criticised, and as bewildered as to what to do. They will also be guilty of overlooking the many things people are doing that are simply missed. This would include parents helping their children financially at university. We could criticise parents and grandparents, aunties, uncles, siblings and friends, students themselves, for not campaigning in their tens of millions when tuition fees were being introduced, but I imagine that there may well be contributors here who would be guilty of that inaction, as I know I am. And all that effort may still not have led to the desired outcome, the govt would likely have just shrugged and introduced tuition fees anyway.
As a rare person who has changed policy, on some issues worldwide, I still share your concerns.
I resigned as a member of the Labour party when Starmer took over. Richard speaks of the toxicity of the current Labour Government – so here is an analogy (with nothing personal against Andrew B), but possibly describing some in current Government. The mamba (sometimes mistakenly spelt mamber) is a snake with extremely potent and toxic venom and is one of the most feared of all. It is known to be particularly aggressive. It does not seek out humans, but when cornered or threatened it will rear up and strike repeatedly in order to protect itself. The mamba is also renowned for the speed with which it can kill. It is not considered to be amongst threatened species. This venomous snake is known to be unpredictable. Neurological symptoms such as slurred speech and muscle twitches can start to become evident within 10 minutes of the bite and so on and so on.
There are several types of mamba, including green and black. But the most dangerous is the Right Honourable and Learned Mamba for Holborn & St. Pancras.
Between 2005 and 2022, only Hungary had banks with more EU fines (901 fines) than the UK, second on the list with 196 fines, which amounred to 34% of tge total fines levied.
If we discard Hungary as being a corrupt autocracy, the UK leads all statistics when it comes to fines imposed on banks based in that nation. Even well ahead of Switzerland.
For a good read on this, google “enforcement actions against European banks in the years 2005-2022” the result is hosted on link.springer.com
Further reading regarding what it is we are losing by Starmer handing the keys of CMA to Amazon, in the words of the Cory Doctorow;
https://pluralistic.net/2025/01/22/autocrats-of-trade/#dingo-babysitter
We had the best tech monopoly regulator in the world, and we have just hamstrung it. Sums up Labour completely. My suspicion is that Starmer was waiting to see if Trump got in to see which way he should jump, and he has now jumped clearly to the Right.
I agree with your conclusion
This shows what a wreck the UK constitution is . It should be headline news that the monopoly regulator can be handed over to a corporate monopoly at the stroke of the PM’s pen.
Nearly all the UK’s ‘independent’ public institutions – including @BBC and @NHS @UKHSA are infiltrated by govt – their appointments procedure not transparent – qualification for top jobs not stated – so as with CMA – straight cronyism or financial corruption etc.
How will we ever get a commission to revise the constitution – and especially remove dark money from politics?
Thank you, Andrew.
Andrew: Nearly all the UK’s ‘independent’ public institutions – including @BBC and @NHS @UKHSA are infiltrated by govt – their appointments procedure not transparent – qualification for top jobs not stated – so as with CMA – straight cronyism or financial corruption etc.
Representatives from big business are often, and have been for decades, on the interview panels for civil service, executive agency etc. appointments. Since Blair, senior civil servants have been encouraged to get City experience (vide Jeremy Heywood) in order to progress. Civil service titles have become Americanised as, from Blair onwards, politicians have tried to bring in a cultural shift.
It’s not just government infiltration. Ministers have brought in their pet think tanks and hacks and donors, including United Health.
Last time I checked, the UK had no constitution. It certainly has no democracy.
What UK Constitution? There is no coherent UK constitutional statement that is wholly encoded in Statute for all to read and understand. Why not? It’s much more convenient for those who wish to manipulate political matters to their own benefit to rely on precedents – the decisions of judges in individual cases, the age-old procedures of Westminster and the theorising and opinions of mainly 19th century political figures. But clearly defined in Statute? Forget it; in the processes of exercising political power it’s much more convenient to have no specific and definitive constitutional parameters and constraints, hence the current descent into chaos in the UK.
But it’s more complicated than that: in Scotland, Scots Law prevails and sovereignty is defined in 17th century Statute (i.e. before the Union of 1707) as lying with the people of Scotland, not with Royalty (neither “Royalty in Parliament” nor in Regal matters). Westminster however claims that it is sovereign on all matters, with the added confusion of the concept of the “King in Parliament” holding a make-believe role in constitutional matters. When viewed from a Scottish perspective, the presence of Scottish MPs in the Commons is more performative than effective. The sheer number of English MPs means that Scottish MPs rarely play any decisive role in Westminster decisions and, more importantly, Scotland almost never gets the Westminster Government that the majority of the Scots electorate voted for.
What we’re seeing from the current Labour Government looks daily more like the end of proper democracy in the UK. Never has there been a better time or reason for Scotland to escape from the increasing chaos in the UK and set up a state which cares for its people in a civilised way. Latest polls show that 59% of Scots would vote for independence if Scotland were to become a republic. What are we waiting for?
It is time for Scotland to get on with getting out.
Thank you, Tom.
This is also why Labour is no longer interested in a rapprochement with the EU and, to be fair, vice versa.
Labour under Starmer should be seen for what is a “Shill for the Few” party!
Yes, I read a while back that when it comes to the housing market, there is a strong push by the vested interests, the usual suspects, to get Labour to relax the market. In the interests of growth.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2025/jan/17/uk-mortgage-rules-growth-fca-home-ownership-ppi
Looks like Labour are buying it.
As always, the real issue, affordability, is ignored.
I remember how self-certification fraud was swept under the carpet after the last financial crisis. I don’t think anyone went to prison for it. I think that many should have.
I expect that there will be the usual “it’s different this time” calls. That there are now safeguards in place. Trouble is, money always finds a new way to abuse the safeguards.
No, it never works. Any relaxation in the housing market will lead to higher prices and rents, as it always does.
The obsession with growth by Labour, is a corner they have now pushed themselves into. The problem with it is that growth does not treat everyone equally. People get left behind. The gap between the haves and have-nots will get worse. Again, it always has done.
I cannot say they are the worst Government in the last fifteen years, because there are some good things that they are doing that simply don’t get reported by the right wing media. For example, I know that the vested interests of the housing market are concerned with the Renters Reform Bill that is going through Parliament, that should see the end of no fault evictions and give more rights to tenants. Of course, the devil is in the detail, but I expect the Tories will vote against it, and the vested interests will do whatever they can to get it watered down.
Of course, Labour is a disappointment, in that they are not addressing fundamental issues, and they are just continuing the mistakes of the past that could lead to a Tory/Reform return in four years time. On the other hand, current polling might suggest that we get a hung parliament next time, and if Labour want to stay in power they will need help. My price for that would be PR.
Labour needs to understand that they are the ones that need to be different.
Thank you and well said, Leah Gunn Barrett.
Leah: “Last time I checked, the UK had no constitution. It certainly has no democracy.”
Leah’s comment and periodic ones from this community, especially AC Bruce and John S Warren, allow me to highlight to readers and Richard something they may not be aware of.
I regularly watch and read the anglophone and francophone media from outside the west. Addresses, remarks etc. by leaders, including religious*, from the global south / zone B and BRICS and UN officials (including the UN rapporteur on Palestine, the wonderful Francesca Albanese) are often aired. It’s amazing to watch British journalists or stenographers employed by the British MSM try to trip up, score points off, embarrass etc. these leaders and refer to British / western democracy, values, freedom (including markets) when doing so. The BBC and Grauniad are probably the worst offenders. Sometimes, these hacks are joined by diplomats and NGO officials / proxies at Q&A or ambushing leaders on walk about. What’s good is that these leaders, including from Mauritius a couple of years, and officials no longer put up with that nonsense and dress down, if not mock, the stirrers. It can be painful to watch the retorts. Corbyn could learn something.
Religion is probably more important in those places than in the west. It’s often a cultural expression. I consider myself a cultural Catholic. So do some of my friends of European origin in Europe and the Americas. When the above hacks etc. do that, they insult people.
Britain’s institutions are failing. Many of its officials and journalists are, too. They really need to calm down, learn and focus on Blighty.
British ones seem to be the worst, but there are some American, French and German ones.
Sticking our oar in is the British way. It’s taught in some schools, still. Competence is not required to hold the oar. Possession is enough. I have seen it time and again, especially in the NGO community, where I have long felt infiltration is commonplace and lack of knowledge on the issue being campaigned on is very highly prized.
Thank you, Richard.
You echo what Aurelien says, especially in places like the former Yugoslavia and Sudan.
I must read his latest.
I don’t think I can agree that this is the worst government for the last 15 years. I don’t think it is any better, indeed, so far, is much worse, than the last Labour government. So that’s 27 years. I am not sure it is better than Major’s government, so that takes it back further. In fact, why limit it in time. Is this the worst ever ‘Labour’ govrnment?
As to what to do? As a very small gesture I plan to tell the water company and the local authority that I cannot afford to pay any increase in my bill, but will continue to pay the current rate. This is based on the fact that my (mainly) state pension income is less than it was last year, losing £600 over the 2 years in winter fuel payment. I don’t know if that may lead to a CCJ, I think, probably not. But we’ll see.
Good luck with that
I hope you do not suffer grief
Have told them in advance? If so they have an obligation to offer assistance.
Thanks Richard
I will tell the council as soon as I get the new bill.
The water company has sent me, today, notice of an increase in my DD even though my usage is unchanged for the last 6 months. I will notify them tomorrow. I know that the water company cannot cut off the supply. and I doubt they will bother with legal action if I am still paying most of the bill.
I cannot do the same with gas and electricity as they CAN cut you off.
The poll tax protests that destroyed Thatcher started small. If everyone takes just one small step to (safely) non-comply, perhaps we can get somewhere.
Hmmm… Starmer & Reeves pushing deregulation and undermining consumer protections. I wonder why they appointed former EU trade commissioner, Peter Mandelson, as US Ambassador – you know – that Mandelson who negotiated the Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership – fortunately ditched by the EU because… it would undermine European consumer protections.
Actually Richard I don’t agree. The Tories have done far more damage in 14 years. And that’s without including Brexit. I also think new runways at Heathrow Gatwick would be a good idea.
No doubt you’ll react in your usual way but I think you’re a bit hysterical on this one.
I will react in my usual way.
I will tell you that you must be the sort of utterly selfish person with excess money who thinks a weekend in the Dordogne is fine without ever considering the fact I’d like my children to have a chance of surviving on this planet, about which ambition you are obviously utterly indifferent.
Hysterical? I have spent a life calling out idiots and I am not going to stop now.
Chris Barnes
Perhaps you could explain why you think new runways at Heathrow Gatwick are a good idea?
I have blocked him. After ten posts he turned out to be a troll. They take that long to reveal themselves now.
You really have too be exceedingly dumb to trust anything that Keir Starmer says any more:-
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jan/23/labour-mps-ordered-to-sink-landmark-climate-and-environment-bill
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/starmer-waspi-labour-fuel-tax-b2666452.html
At what stage would new runways at Heathrow and Gatwick count as “growth” which is expressed as a percentage figure? When the decision to build is finalised? When the first sod is turned over? Or when the work is completed and a plane actually takes off? Either way, it will be a few years yet. So I can’t imagine that Starmer/Reeves will be able to claim much credit for “growth” before the next election. Even if they could persuade private investors to cover much of the cost. So it will be another example of :–
*pretend to be Labour
*act like the Tories
* fail to derive any electoral benefit from doing so.
The construction counts as growth
Watching the Green party political broadcast on BBC1 last night it was striking how their their policies and language could have been that of the Labour party from 40-50 years ago, but of course nothing like the Labour party of today. I never thought I’d say this but I will seriously consider voting Green next time
Their economic policy remains dire, naive and totally destructive. I hate to say it, but pretending money is nit what it actually is would be ruinous.