• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

uglymonkey

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2018
Messages
480
I think part of the problem ( after Brexit) is that no one knows what any of them stand for anymore, they are all fighting for the same narrow wedge of the electorate pie - very confusing. In "post truth" trump world, I don't think anyone believes anything of them say any more , as they will change their mind tomorrow and say the opposite- which as well as the people not engaging with voting and elections at all and the feeling that the common "man" can't make any difference one way or another. They feel are totally disenfranchised. This is bad for democracy and you are seeing it all over the western world, whether its due to the influence of social media or what I do not know. Worrying
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Typhoon

Established Member
Joined
2 Nov 2017
Messages
3,520
Location
Kent
Absolutely.
Kensington sounds as if it ought to be a Conservative seat, but it actually has large areas of mainly Labour-voting relatively poor voters, it's very mixed, plus a lot of its richer residents aren't voters because they're foreign nationals.
Confirmation:
From the top floors of the 24-storey Grenfell Tower, residents could see out across Kensington and Chelsea, one of the wealthiest local authorities in the country. Yet the tower and its residents were situated in one of the most deprived areas in England.

The borough is among London’s most unequal, with extreme poverty and wealth living side by side. Data shows that the vicinity of the tower was among the top 10% most deprived areas in England in 2015, ranking alongside parts of Bradford and south Tyneside.

According to the English Indices of Deprivation, there were 11 so-called lower super output areas (LSOAs) in Kensington and Chelsea that ranked in the poorest decile in the country. On the other hand, 14 areas in the local authority were among the 30% least deprived.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...y-sit-side-by-side-in-grenfell-towers-borough
I don't suppose it has become any less unequal in the last six years!

A lot might depend on getting the vote out!
 

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
5,071
I think part of the problem ( after Brexit) is that no one knows what any of them stand for anymore, they are all fighting for the same narrow wedge of the electorate pie - very confusing. In "post truth" trump world, I don't think anyone believes anything of them say any more , as they will change their mind tomorrow and say the opposite- which as well as the people not engaging with voting and elections at all and the feeling that the common "man" can't make any difference one way or another. They feel are totally disenfranchised. This is bad for democracy and you are seeing it all over the western world, whether its due to the influence of social media or what I do not know. Worrying
I think the only positive way to look at it is that voting Labour/Lib Dem is probably a vote back towards normality.

Labour are unfortunately at such pains to not over-promise that they aren't saying anything positive at all, but there's honesty in a manifesto that says "we've been digging a hole for the last 15 years, and it's going to take at least 5 to turn around and start climbing out of it."

The Tory alternative is to shiftily refuse to deny they have shares in the digging company whilst vaguely claiming that the hole is heading for Australia. Reform are similar, bit they will send a pensioner army to stand at the top and shout at all the people with shovels about how lazy they are.
 

75A

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2021
Messages
1,423
Location
Ireland (ex Brighton 75A)
I think part of the problem ( after Brexit) is that no one knows what any of them stand for anymore, they are all fighting for the same narrow wedge of the electorate pie - very confusing. In "post truth" trump world, I don't think anyone believes anything of them say any more , as they will change their mind tomorrow and say the opposite- which as well as the people not engaging with voting and elections at all and the feeling that the common "man" can't make any difference one way or another. They feel are totally disenfranchised. This is bad for democracy and you are seeing it all over the western world, whether its due to the influence of social media or what I do not know. Worrying
Well said, couldn't agree more.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
7,098
I think part of the problem ( after Brexit) is that no one knows what any of them stand for anymore, they are all fighting for the same narrow wedge of the electorate pie - very confusing. In "post truth" trump world, I don't think anyone believes anything of them say any more , as they will change their mind tomorrow and say the opposite- which as well as the people not engaging with voting and elections at all and the feeling that the common "man" can't make any difference one way or another. They feel are totally disenfranchised. This is bad for democracy and you are seeing it all over the western world, whether its due to the influence of social media or what I do not know. Worrying

Not sure about this at all.

The current Tories (as opposed to the Tories of Major, Cameron or even May) are clearly reactionary right-wing populist, witness the way they constantly go on and on about immigration, are obsessed with this Rwanda scheme. and come out against "woke" issues or anything associated with the left.

Labour could be seen as bland and inoffensive.

Personally, and I suspect I am not alone, I will be voting for bland and inoffensive rather than for reactionary right-wing populism.

I'd like to see more from Labour on certain matters, but accept that they have to be inoffensive to avoid turning off people.

Also Sunak, to me, comes across as a completely weak and ineffectual leader. Starmer may not be ideal either but he comes across a lot more serious than Sunak.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,929
Location
Nottingham
Not sure about this at all.

The current Tories (as opposed to the Tories of Major, Cameron or even May) are clearly reactionary right-wing populist, witness the way they constantly go on and on about immigration, are obsessed with this Rwanda scheme. and come out against "woke" issues or anything associated with the left.

Labour could be seen as bland and inoffensive.

Personally, and I suspect I am not alone, I will be voting for bland and inoffensive rather than for reactionary right-wing populism.

I'd like to see more from Labour on certain matters, but accept that they have to be inoffensive to avoid turning off people.

Also Sunak, to me, comes across as a completely weak and ineffectual leader. Starmer may not be ideal either but he comes across a lot more serious than Sunak.
In short, Labour is trying to act in the national interest, the Tories in self-interest.
I can only go in my local area, it's somewhere where a lot go to Uni (either kids from here or workers having been and now living here), and yet there's been a growing level of Lib Dem support over the last decade - to the point that 2 years ago the local council election was a near 50:50 vote split between first and second Tory Lib Dems.
At least in part, I'd guess a growing realisation that tuition fees was a Tory pollicy that the LibDems failed to stop. If Clegg had been a bit more honest at the time about the realities of coalition then he would have saved his party a lot of grief later on. Something like "Given the election result, this coalition is the only way of establishing the stable government we need to manage the recovery from the financial crisis. We've joined it in the national interest and had to agree to some things we'd rather not have, but we will look critically at anything that isn't in the agreement and seek to moderate any extreme Tory ideas."
 

SteveM70

Established Member
Joined
11 Jul 2018
Messages
3,879
The irony of what happened with Clegg in 2010 is that a politician used to telling people what they want to hear in order to get their support was suckered by a politician telling him what he wanted to hear in order to get his support
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
7,046
Location
Taunton or Kent
I mean he probably didn't stand a chance of winning anyway, but still not a good look for the Tories:


The Conservative candidate for Mayor of Greater Manchester has defected to Reform UK, accusing his former party of "giving up" on the north of England.
Dan Barker had been selected by the Conservatives in December to challenge current mayor, Labour's Andy Burnham.
He follows Lee Anderson, the former Conservative party deputy chair, who defected to Reform UK on 11 March.
Mr Barker said the Tories had abandoned northern areas to focus on other seats under threat from the Lib Dems.
The Conservatives have 15 days to select a new candidate for mayor. A party spokesman said a selection process for a new candidate will begin shortly.

Speaking to the BBC, Mr Barker said the national Conservative party had failed to provide any support and accused the Tory headquarters of taking candidates "for granted".
He said: "I think, in truth, they've given up on Greater Manchester and the north of England.
"You can see that from inside the party, what they are really doing is trying to protect the blue wall in the South East and the South West because they fear that the Liberal Democrats are going to annihilate them."
Reform UK Leader Richard Tice welcomed Mr Barker to the party in a social media post, claiming the scalp of "another senior Tory".
Mr Barker denied he made a "knee jerk decision" to leave the Conservatives. He told the BBC he had "lost sleep" and considered "stepping back from politics" over the way he was treated.
In a social media post, Mr Berker called Reform UK "the new home of conservatism," saying the party "represent the ordinary people of this country".
Reform UK, founded by Nigel Farage, has been regularly polling above 10% of national voting intention over the last month. Reform are at their highest level since the party changed its name from the Brexit Party after the last general election.
Until today, Mr Barker's social media account was filled with posts promoting the Conservatives and local Tory politicians.
Less than 24 hours before announcing his defection, Mr Barker spoke to the Manchester Evening News promising to "take personal control" of police if he became the Tory mayor of the city.
A Conservative Party source said: "The Conservatives received under 20% of the vote in Manchester in 2021. We have to be realistic about our prospects in this election."
 

uglymonkey

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2018
Messages
480
Mr Anderson does seem to like "swapping" parties. I don't think he himself knows what he believes in other than Lee Anderson.
 

Thirteen

Member
Joined
3 Oct 2021
Messages
1,119
Location
London
George Galloway threatened to go to the Greater Manchester Mayoral Election in 2028, somehow I don't think he'll be successful.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
7,046
Location
Taunton or Kent
The shambles continues:


Last night Tory MPs were told that the whip next week was likely to be reduced so they wouldn’t have to return to the Commons pre Easter. But it seems that a deal between Tory and Labour whips to avoid votes on Monday’s Investigatory Powers Bill have collapsed. So Tory MPs being told three line whip stands on Monday.
 

DC1989

Member
Joined
25 Mar 2022
Messages
497
Location
London
So when will the government cave in and hand over 30+ billion to the WASPI boomers? Perhaps they should tax those 18-40 an extra grand to pay for it
 

Falcon1200

Established Member
Joined
14 Jun 2021
Messages
3,664
Location
Neilston, East Renfrewshire
How would it change your opinion, and vote, if he clarified and said he meant kick Tory politicians from representing Scotland?

It would not, in the slightest, because just as with Mr Yousaf's predecessor (who said she detested Tories) his disdain, if not contempt, for those who do not share his enlightened opinions is crystal clear. Whereas I am happy to accept that all parties (even the SNP!) have some policies with which I agree and some with which I do not, and my vote will often be cast on a 'least worst' basis. Although of course in Scotland the independence question has a major effect too.
 

SteveM70

Established Member
Joined
11 Jul 2018
Messages
3,879
Now Sunak and Lucy Frazer have waded into this confected row about the flag on the new England football shirts. Inevitable after Starmer commented on it I suppose (and he shouldn’t have said anything either). He’s the bloody prime minister for gods sake, he has no business getting involved in this other than cynically stoking his bogus culture war agenda

Maybe he should focus on running the country or calling an election
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
7,098
Now Sunak and Lucy Frazer have waded into this confected row about the flag on the new England football shirts. Inevitable after Starmer commented on it I suppose (and he shouldn’t have said anything either). He’s the bloody prime minister for gods sake, he has no business getting involved in this other than cynically stoking his bogus culture war agenda

Maybe he should focus on running the country or calling an election

It really is a storm in a teacup, this thing about football shirts. Aren't there more important things to worry about?

It is worrying that politicians, unfortunately including Starmer too, appear to be courting the votes of people who think this is a big deal. They need to realise that there are other voters besides reactionary flag-waving English nationalists.

That will probably be written on a Post-It note for the next Chancellor when they take office...

I don't know too much about the WASPI issue but have they been subjected to such genuine hardship that it would be morally correct to use billions of pounds of precious public funds on compensating them? Is the average WASPI born in the early 50s worse off than the average Gen-Xer or millennial 20 or 30 years younger than them who will have to fund this via either higher taxes or, more likely knowing 2020s political norms, swingeing cuts to public services?

Is it right that there should be a transfer of money to a generation that is already, on the whole, better-off than the following generations?

I see that this is the new thing that the Mail and Express are focusing on. They're even having a go at the government over it. I've actually seen quite a few anti-Government / even vaguely pro-Labour pieces in some of the more right-wing papers of late.

That alone is a sure sign that the government are in real deep trouble. One senses even their most loyal friends in the media are having doubts.
 
Last edited:

Purple Train

Established Member
Joined
16 Jul 2022
Messages
1,498
Location
Darkest Commuterland
It really is a storm in a teacup, this thing about football shirts. Aren't there more important things to worry about?

It is worrying that politicians, unfortunately including Starmer too, appear to be courting the votes of people who think this is a big deal. They need to realise that there are other voters besides reactionary flag-waving English nationalists.
Well, people do seem to care about flags a lot more than they used to (Americanisation, methinks), so it's not just the reactionary nationalists who will have an opinion on this. Personally, my issue is with how they described it - if it's merely an allusion to the St George's Cross, fine, but "a playful tweak", or whatever the kit designers called it, isn't the kind of thing I think one should casually be doing to something with the recognisability and permanence that the ideal flag should have. Or, to put it another way, if they'd had an artistic reason (I see that it's apparently an allusion to the 1966 training kit. I can't see it. I don't think I'm colour-blind), I'd be fine with it, but I don't hold with marketing-speak!

Do I think it's a big deal? No. Do I think that the kit designers should have put a bit more care into how they designed that aspect? Yes.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
7,098
Mr Anderson does seem to like "swapping" parties. I don't think he himself knows what he believes in other than Lee Anderson.

It's a steady direction of travel (rightwards) though.

More cynically it could also be that he feels he has more chance of holding the seat by standing as a Reform candidate, now the Tory brand has been well and truly soiled even amongst many right-wing voters.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
7,046
Location
Taunton or Kent
It really is a storm in a teacup, this thing about football shirts. Aren't there more important things to worry about?

It is worrying that politicians, unfortunately including Starmer too, appear to be courting the votes of people who think this is a big deal. They need to realise that there are other voters besides reactionary flag-waving English nationalists.
I wouldn't be surprised if this is the media once again setting the agenda and politicians feeling obliged to follow suit, when it should be the other way round.
 

SteveP29

Member
Joined
23 Apr 2011
Messages
1,009
Location
Chester le Street/ Edinburgh
Wow, the Tories aren’t even second. That’s quite something
And that's what happens when the continually treat the electorate like fools, when they lie with impunity, when they lie to excuse the original lie and then attempt to enact policies that a, never said they would and b have no place in a progressive, modern world
 

birchesgreen

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2020
Messages
5,159
Location
Birmingham
Its good politics by Starmer, for those who don't care... won't care, for those who do care it will reinforce that Starmer is PM material a tiny bit maybe or at least be a palatible option. It won't make difference either way, though it is an ugly design. For Sunak though its a mistake getting involved but he has the political sense of a piece of cheese.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,162
Location
SE London
It really is a storm in a teacup, this thing about football shirts. Aren't there more important things to worry about?

It is worrying that politicians, unfortunately including Starmer too, appear to be courting the votes of people who think this is a big deal. They need to realise that there are other voters besides reactionary flag-waving English nationalists.

Sure, there are many massively more important things to worry about. But what we're talking about is first Keir Starmer and then Rishi Sunak spending what appear to be a couple of minutes giving their opinions on a minor issue that's of interest to some people - sufficiently interesting that some of the media decided it was worth reporting. Personally I don't see any problem at all with a politician spending a few minutes giving an opinion on something trivial. We all do that from time to time! I certainly wouldn't see it as 'worrying'. And characterising those football fans who dislike the change to the football team shirts as 'reactionary flag-waving English nationalists' is really unfair and awful stereotyping.

I don't know too much about the WASPI issue but have they been subjected to such genuine hardship that it would be morally correct to use billions of pounds of precious public funds on compensating them? Is the average WASPI born in the early 50s worse off than the average Gen-Xer or millennial 20 or 30 years younger than them who will have to fund this via either higher taxes or, more likely knowing 2020s political norms, swingeing cuts to public services?

The problem isn't the fact that the retirement age for women was raised to bring it in line with men: That was sensible and much-needed. Rather, the problem is that it seems the Government didn't tell most of the affected women that they were doing this, with the result that loads of women planned and arranged their pensions in good faith on the expectation of retirement at 60 only to discover way too late that they were actually expected to continue working until 66, and that the pension etc. arrangements they had made were therefore inappropriate, causing some to lose a lot of money. I suspect as a result of the bad/misleading communication, the Government morally has no choice but to compensate those affected, although as you imply it is going to look unfair to many younger people that the Government is compensating many people who are actually better off than they are.

I see that this is the new thing that the Mail and Express are focusing on. They're even having a go at the government over it. I've actually seen quite a few anti-Government / even vaguely pro-Labour pieces in some of the more right-wing papers of late.

One of the ironies here is that this is a case of the Conservatives getting all the flak for a mistake that it seems was actually first made under the previous Labour Government, but where the consequences are only now showing up. I guess it shows that the true loyalty of much of the supposed Tory media is in reality simply the chance to kick up a scandal that gets their readers angry whenever they have the opportunity.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,306
The problem isn't the fact that the retirement age for women was raised to bring it in line with men: That was sensible and much-needed.
It was more than that. It was discriminatory against men - who were working longer but with a shorter life expectancy than women.
 

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
5,071
Its good politics by Starmer, for those who don't care... won't care, for those who do care it will reinforce that Starmer is PM material a tiny bit maybe or at least be a palatible option. It won't make difference either way, though it is an ugly design. For Sunak though its a mistake getting involved but he has the political sense of a piece of cheese.
I tend to agree. It was essentially a chance for him to mention that he genuinely does care about football, and is sufficiently in touch with the real world to think that charging 115 quid or more for a shirt is a pretty significant expense for most people.

Whilst I don't personally care a great deal, I'm certainly not put off by the idea of a Prime Minister having an opinion on an idiotic failure by the designers to properly respect the emblems they are working with. He didn't promise action, or go off the deep end, he just showed a degree of empathy with people who do care.

It's also good in the sense that he just answered a question in an interview, which looks relatively natural. I don't know how Rishi dealt with it, but if it's anything like other recent announcements, he will have missed the opportunity in an interview because his scriptwriters didn't tell him in advance what he thought about the issue, and in a desperate attempt to catch up he will have trotted out an official podium and wasted everybody's time pretending that the whole thing is a national crisis.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,162
Location
SE London
On a separate note, I've just received my poll card for the London Mayoral/Assembly elections. Except it's no longer literally a poll card: What used to be the small cards stating your polling number and details of your polling station is now a complete A4 paper letter inside an envelope - one of those envelopes with transparent plastic to reveal the address, so I would assume much less eco-friendly than the previous cards.

Not sure of the exact reasons for the change, but I imagine a big factor is the new requirement for photo-ID - since almost the entire back of the letter is given over to a list of what things count as valid photo-ID, and that list would never have fitted on the old-style cards.

Amusingly, despite it not being a card at all, both the letter and the envelope still refer to it as a 'poll card'
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,632
Location
First Class
Sure, there are many massively more important things to worry about. But what we're talking about is first Keir Starmer and then Rishi Sunak spending what appear to be a couple of minutes giving their opinions on a minor issue that's of interest to some people - sufficiently interesting that some of the media decided it was worth reporting. Personally I don't see any problem at all with a politician spending a few minutes giving an opinion on something trivial. We all do that from time to time! I certainly wouldn't see it as 'worrying'. And characterising those football fans who dislike the change to the football team shirts as 'reactionary flag-waving English nationalists' is really unfair and awful stereotyping.

Somewhat predictably, I agree.

Starmer's comments are entirely consistent with "reclaiming" the Flag of England from the far-right and making it a symbol of unity, which is surely a good thing. No alterations required....
 

Top