General News Thread

[st albans fox]

28 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Sometimes the general mood of their constituents isn't in line with party policy and they represent their constituents?

The only way of certainly knowing the mood of their constituents is to ……….. have an election ……… 

They represent their constituents as voted within our system - which is party politics.    There is occasionally a large local issue where govt policy might have a huge local effect - that can muddy the waters.  We’ve seen in the past where an MP who has opposed policy, stands in the next GE as an independent and is elected. 

 

24 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

….or they adopted a social conscience when the party decided to put the lives of disabled people in jeopardy, after doing the same to OAPs a few months earlier and put that ahead of anything else. 

they could resign the whip and force a re election under their ‘independent banner’ to clarify that they retain the confidence of their constituents 

 

However, there’s always been disagreement within parties on policy which can drive changes in policy. (Eg. a week ago and more notably for the state of our country, the tories and brexit). 

[Tommy G]

3 minutes ago, kenny said:

As I said yesterday, it has a 2006 feel out there at present. 

 

At least the current government talks confidently about a crashed economy by mentioning it at every PMQs. The way we are heading, they will be able to talk first hand about a crashed economy rather than just spouting about Truss's mess from 2022.

Fixing the foundations!!

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, kenny said:

As I said yesterday, it has a 2006 feel out there at present. 

 

At least the current government talks confidently about a crashed economy by mentioning it at every PMQs. The way we are heading, they will be able to talk first hand about a crashed economy rather than just spouting about Truss's mess from 2022.

We fell a long way from 2006/7 into the abyss of the financial crisis of 2008 and its ramifications.  We’ve been bouncing along the bottom with v weak growth for years now - so it won’t feel so different if we do fall into recession on the back of events.  

[leicsmac]

Also, with everything going on right now, I wonder if the words of Churchill on democracy ("the worst form of government, other than all the others that have been tried/are viable options") could also apply to political parties right now. 

 

Fun times. 

[Sampson]

15 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Also, with everything going on right now, I wonder if the words of Churchill on democracy ("the worst form of government, other than all the others that have been tried/are viable options") could also apply to political parties right now. 

 

Fun times. 

To me it’s not a case of least bad political party, it’s more that the things that are needed to be done to help the low growth, stagnant economy that have existed basically all round Europe, the west and the westernised Asian economies which are caused a great deal by population ageing have become politically impossible for any party to actually do, be they a democratic one or authoritarian one. America has economically fared better the rest of the West, Japan, S. Korea etc. following 2008 but that’s largely been because of mass immigration (both documented and undocumented) and that has become politically impossible now there too and they are obviously enacting a sharp and brutal political pushback on that now.

This is an interesting video on South Korea, a country I know you know Mac, btw. Which probably has the worst of these issues out of any because it’s fertility rate dropped so quickly and it’s always been much stricter on immigration than Europe, US, Australia etc. 
 

 

[Bellend Sebastian]

1 hour ago, kenny said:

Boris would happily lead the labour party. His political leanings are fluid enough.

If I get the chance I'm going to put this to my father in law later and see what he thinks. Might lie a bit and suggest that this is a credible rumour. 

 

I'll need to take care though, I don't want to give him ANOTHER aneurysm

[Bellend Sebastian]

Talking of senior moments, I think I might have posted this before but I'm always drawn to stuff that attempts to explain why people increasingly seem to believe any old shite:

 

https://bylinetimes.com/2025/07/10/the-cost-of-lies-why-we-identify-with-deadly-misinformation/

 

[st albans fox]

Voting age will drop to 16 by next GE 

 

Understand the debate but on balance, not a fan 

[Sampson]

16 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Voting age will drop to 16 by next GE 

 

Understand the debate but on balance, not a fan 

Where have you seen that? Cant find it online. 

[kenny]

Just now, Sampson said:

Where have you seen that? Cant find it online. 

Sks has done a lengthy speech this morning.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c93kkg37n3kt

[inckley fox]

22 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Voting age will drop to 16 by next GE 

 

Understand the debate but on balance, not a fan 

What are your reasons for not being a fan, out of curiosity?

[leicsmac]

2 hours ago, Sampson said:

To me it’s not a case of least bad political party, it’s more that the things that are needed to be done to help the low growth, stagnant economy that have existed basically all round Europe, the west and the westernised Asian economies which are caused a great deal by population ageing have become politically impossible for any party to actually do, be they a democratic one or authoritarian one. America has economically fared better the rest of the West, Japan, S. Korea etc. following 2008 but that’s largely been because of mass immigration (both documented and undocumented) and that has become politically impossible now there too and they are obviously enacting a sharp and brutal political pushback on that now.

This is an interesting video on South Korea, a country I know you know Mac, btw. Which probably has the worst of these issues out of any because it’s fertility rate dropped so quickly and it’s always been much stricter on immigration than Europe, US, Australia etc. 
 

 

There's something in that - various forms of governance finding themselves unable to deal with vast crises of natural consequence arising. 

 

Really is no magic bullet for such matters, either.

[Sampson]

21 minutes ago, kenny said:

Sks has done a lengthy speech this morning.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c93kkg37n3kt

Ok thanks 

[dmayne7]

Clever political move. Will get them the majority of new votes and likely build lifelong voters for those who aren't super engaged.

 

The argument for it makes sense of paper (they can work full time etc) but they are still very much children. You've got plenty of people decades older who still act like children.

[UniFox21]

45 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Voting age will drop to 16 by next GE 

 

Understand the debate but on balance, not a fan 

Agreed, really not a fan. Don't believe our education system gives 16/17 year olds the base to vote with understanding of what the choices mean. 

[Sampson]

3 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

Agreed, really not a fan. Don't believe our education system gives 16/17 year olds the base to vote with understanding of what the choices mean. 

I’m not particularly a fan either as I remember what I was like at 16.

 

That said I don’t think it’s about the education system before 16, I think that is true in general of the population of all ages.
 

Are civics/politics/society classes even mandatory in school in the UK? It’s a long time since I was in school but they never used to be. I think politics is an entirely optional class and unlike the US and many European countries where Civics is mandatory it doesn’t seem to really exist in the UK, and children are never really taught about the ascension of law, the houses of commons and Lords, the separation of powers, international institutions, the checks and balances of western democracies and the reasons behind them etc. I mostly just learnt that as an adult bit by bit over the years.

[st albans fox]

34 minutes ago, inckley fox said:

What are your reasons for not being a fan, out of curiosity?

Others have expressed views broadly in line with mine

 

Do we think this decision will engage more teenagers and make them feel less ostracised by the lawmakers ? 
if no, then it’s a political move.  Are we out of step globally with our min voting age? 

[Foxdiamond]

27 minutes ago, dmayne7 said:

Clever political move. Will get them the majority of new votes and likely build lifelong voters for those who aren't super engaged.

 

The argument for it makes sense of paper (they can work full time etc) but they are still very much children. You've got plenty of people decades older who still act like children.

Not a fan either. From what I understand the vast majority of 16-17 year olds are not in full time work anyway. I'm sure there are some engaged mature people in this age group but not not enough to warrant the vote

[Alf Bentley]

20 hours ago, Foxdiamond said:

Yes. For too long carers have been undervalued. My wife worked as a care assistant looking after the elderly for 27 years 

 

17 hours ago, Parafox said:

 

It's genuinely a tough job. Most of the carers I came across when I was working were dedicated and their role was vital to their clients. Despite the time pressures they were under, many went over and above for the people they cared for.

 

She deserves a good pension and a medal. 

 

I doubt she got either.

 

Absolutely agree with these posts.

 

I got a greater insight into the contribution of care workers about 10 years ago, when my Dad was in decline with Parkinson's and mild dementia for 18 months.

It wasn't just their willingness to do dirty and sometimes physically demanding work, there was also the specialist knowledge of techniques (I injured my shoulder trying to move my Dad at one point), their extreme patience - and, in several cases, their ability and willingness to see and relate to him as an individual.

 

For 18 months, he had increasing levels of care support - increasingly frequent visits, then latterly someone living in. My brother and I covered alternate weekends - and I think I'd struggle to do such work on a full-time basis, mainly due to the need for consistent patience, rather than the dirty or physical work. 

 

The carers were from Tanzania, Liberia, Greece and Ghana. For that matter, my Dad's GP was a Greek Cypriot, his physio was Australian and his hospital specialist was 2nd generation Polish! This was in London, so that's not entirely typical of the nation - more British carers in other areas, including my first cousin. But certainly we'll continue to have a shortage of carers if, as a society, we expect people to do important, demanding work for low pay - and try to halt the flow of immigrant labour (though I accept that integration and English language are genuine issues).

 

After my Dad died, my brother and I agreed to give a thank-you payment to the carers. But I'll still always feel that I'm in the debt of the Tanzanian woman and the Liberian man (the main carers) for the way they made my Dad's final decline so much better than it would otherwise have been.

 

[UniFox21]

35 minutes ago, Sampson said:

I’m not particularly a fan either as I remember what I was like at 16.

 

That said I don’t think it’s about the education system before 16, I think that is true in general of the population of all ages.
 

Are civics/politics/society classes even mandatory in school in the UK? It’s a long time since I was in school but they never used to be. I think politics is an entirely optional class and unlike the US and many European countries where Civics is mandatory it doesn’t seem to really exist in the UK, and children are never really taught about the ascension of law, the houses of commons and Lords, the separation of powers, international institutions, the checks and balances of western democracies and the reasons behind them etc. I mostly just learnt that as an adult bit by bit over the years.

I think you're right, likewise has been many years since I was at school, but it was always thrown in as those PSHE/citizenship lessons here and there and not done very well. Overall the knowledge on politics etc is picked up by those interested or as you go through life, which really shouldn't be the way it's done.

 

I just feel if we're giving 16/17yr olds the vote whilst in full time education, we may as well teach them what their choices mean.

[kenny]

53 minutes ago, dmayne7 said:

Clever political move. Will get them the majority of new votes and likely build lifelong voters for those who aren't super engaged.

 

The argument for it makes sense of paper (they can work full time etc) but they are still very much children. You've got plenty of people decades older who still act like children.

Farage and those that manipulate Tiktok & Instagram the most effectively will be delighted.

 

 

[Alf Bentley]

23 hours ago, Spudulike said:

Just listened to PMQ's. What a waste of time. We got the 14 years of Conservatives and £22b 'black hole' in the very first sentence. At what point do they start taking responsibility? Just the same old speech about breakfast clubs. Pathetic.

 

We have a PM that refuses to answer a question. Does he not know the answer or just incompetent? The Speaker should call him out on it. The public deserve better.

 

I think Labour saw how, for years, the Tories in Govt apparently got away with blaming Blair/Brown for any economic problems - claiming they were due to Labour over-spending in office and overlooking the small matter of the 2008 Global Financial Crisis.

 

But they need to wake up to the public mood. It might seem unfair in that they genuinely have inherited an economic mess (partly caused by the Tories via austerity economics, Brexit, Johnson & Truss; partly due to one-off factors like Ukraine/fuel prices and Covid knock-on impacts). But the fact is that the public is not interested in who's to blame, they just want things to improve.

 

To that extent, Starmer is probably right to keep going on about things like breakfast clubs, NHS waiting lists etc. I know it's irritating when we hear them time after time, but that's probably because we pay much greater attention than average to politics. Most people pay very little attention, so a claim may be made dozens of times, but they might hear it once. From a Labour perspective, their first year in power has seen far too much media coverage of stuff that's gone wrong, like the winter heating allowance & benefit cuts, and too little about positive changes (early stages, admittedly).

 

Ultimately, though, Starmer & co have another 4 years to somehow achieve significant improvements in people's lives - improvements they notice. Otherwise, there's every chance they'll be booted out in 2029. I'm sure anyone who's being remotely fair would agree that's going to be a massively tough task, given the state of the economy and public debt, low growth, an aging population, climate change and external factors like Trump, Putin, the Middle East etc. Even if they govern brilliantly for 4 years (and their record has been genuinely mixed - good and bad - so far, I think), they might fail....

[kenny]

35 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Others have expressed views broadly in line with mine

 

Do we think this decision will engage more teenagers and make them feel less ostracised by the lawmakers ? 
if no, then it’s a political move.  Are we out of step globally with our min voting age? 

I like the point that you shouldn't be able to vote if you aren't old enough to stand.

 

Perhaps we will see 16 year old MP's in the future?

[Torquay Gunner]

3 hours ago, Sampson said:

To me it’s not a case of least bad political party, it’s more that the things that are needed to be done to help the low growth, stagnant economy that have existed basically all round Europe, the west and the westernised Asian economies which are caused a great deal by population ageing have become politically impossible for any party to actually do, be they a democratic one or authoritarian one. America has economically fared better the rest of the West, Japan, S. Korea etc. following 2008 but that’s largely been because of mass immigration (both documented and undocumented) and that has become politically impossible now there too and they are obviously enacting a sharp and brutal political pushback on that now.

This is an interesting video on South Korea, a country I know you know Mac, btw. Which probably has the worst of these issues out of any because it’s fertility rate dropped so quickly and it’s always been much stricter on immigration than Europe, US, Australia etc. 
 

 

It was an interesting video and kind of matches what was in this BBC interview of four South Korean women.  Long hours, big inequality between men and women and very expensive to have children with little help from the government.  It begs the question as to why the South Korean government are not doing more to support people, who want children when national birth rate is so low. 
 

 

Edited 17 July 2025 by Torquay Gunner

[nnfox]

I have a 16 year old. He can barely understand the implications of his decision making more than about 3 seconds into the future, and bases most of his decisions on information he received in the previous 3 seconds.  There's no way I would give him the opportunity to vote in a GE.  I'd say the same about his mates and his football team and they are, in the most part, all good, decent kids.  But that's the thing, they are most definitely kids.