27 May
3:54pm, 27 May 2025
4,742 posts
|
Cheg
Yeah I do understand this is a bit prescriptive. I just want a move away from throwing a manifesto out there that doesn't get actioned. On the otherside, a good size majority and still being pushed this way and that by public opinion. The world changes, particularly big stuff like war or a market crash that would need a re-evaulation. It's a work in progress. |
27 May
3:57pm, 27 May 2025
47,840 posts
|
SPR
A legally binding manifesto doesn't make sense, they have to be able to make changes if the situation changes, how do you decide the change is legally enough to change plans. Also locking them into bad decisions means that the general public suffer. I agree with TRO that Labour don't really have a proper plan for what to do with power. I like Rayner's leaked plans but then I would. The mess was worse than thought but we have evidence of others knowing that there was a mess and asking Labour what they would do about it. We need the parties to be honest about the pros and cons of things and difficult decisions but while lying or being economical with the truth can gain you votes, I don't see them changing. |
27 May
5:05pm, 27 May 2025
6,103 posts
|
J2R
Cheg wrote: On the otherside, a good size majority and still being pushed this way and that by public opinion. The thing is, though, that they're not actually being pushed this way and that by genuine public opinion, but rather by what Morgan McSweeney thinks it should be, based on what happened in the 2019 election. There's a very marked anti-Brexit majority in real public opinion, for example, but you wouldn't guess at that from what Labour have been saying and doing. |
27 May
6:47pm, 27 May 2025
18,796 posts
|
jda
“Public opinion” cannot actually push them in any way whatsoever. They have a massive majority and can do what they want. More precisely, the Govt can do whatever the *backbenchers* will allow. The public doesn’t get a say in the matter until 2029. |
27 May
6:52pm, 27 May 2025
34,124 posts
|
richmac
Absolutely - Starmer isn't getting the free ride that Johnson or Sunak had from the press
|
27 May
6:57pm, 27 May 2025
587 posts
|
DaveG
The issue isn't that manifestos should be binding. The December 2019 manifesto should never have been forced to happen given that Covid was 3 months away, for instance. Any legal binding is meaningless anyway given Parliament can vote to repel things, so I doubt there is a mechanism which could work. The issue is more that governments aren't held to account. There should be an independent body who, when an election is called, releases a document which reviews all previous manifesto promises and how well the government delivered on them. Having a (fact-checked) debate between the PM and leader of opposition purely on that would be good so let us see how believable the government is. I've long thought we should have a Council of Elders, which sits above the Speaker. This could be, for instance, 2 Labour, 2 Conservatives and an independent, but amongst people who care about the national interest rather than party politics and have respect. Perhaps John Major and Michael Heseltine for Conservatives and David Blunkett and Harriet Harman for Labour, and someone like Jeremy Paxman as the chair. The role of the Council of Elders would be for deciding if the Ministerial Code has been broken, whether people had lied to Parliament (cough, Johnson), and to report annually on the government's progress of their manifesto. It feels like these are things were people who have wider respect and no longer have party political careers could act in the national interest and bring a little more accountability to the system. At the moment, if you've a big enough majority you can do what you want, as Johnson showed. |
|
27 May
7:21pm, 27 May 2025
4,743 posts
|
Cheg
jda wrote: u what has caused the rowback on winter fuel then?
“Public opinion” cannot actually push them in any way whatsoever. They have a massive majority and can do what they want. More precisely, the Govt can do whatever the *backbenchers* will allow. The public doesn’t get a say in the matter until 2029. |
|
27 May
9:23pm, 27 May 2025
18,797 posts
|
jda
Some change of mind between Starmer/Reeves/McSweeney presumably. Public opinion hasn’t changed that I’m aware of. The policy was unpopular when announced and has remained unpopular since. |
27 May
10:27pm, 27 May 2025
23,781 posts
|
rf_fozzy
This was interesting polling. bsky.app And sort of suggests the "strategy" (and yes I use the term in the broadest sense) they are following. If it comes to a Starmer vs Farage contest at the next election, they're betting it will go Starmer. The question for Badenoch and the Conservatives is what are they for. (And is perhaps the danger for labour if there is a total and complete collapse in the Tory vote) |
28 May
7:07am, 28 May 2025
24,743 posts
|
Ally-C
Yaxley Lennon out of prison and straight on to social media on the grift. You’ve got to admire these right wingers & their ability to rinse the gullible.
|
Useful Links
FE accepts no responsibility for external links. Or anything, really.Related Threads
-
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024
-
EU Referendum - In or Out? Vote here
Aug 2018
-
March to Parliament Against Brexit - Sat 2nd July
Jun 2016
-
EU Referendum
Feb 2016
-
Ads on Fetch - anyone else getting Leave and Remain?!
Feb 2017
-
The Environment Thread :-)
May 2025
-
Economics
Jan 2025
-
Dear Scottish Fetchies
Jan 2023
-
Any economists out there - question
Oct 2022
-
Power and exploitation - please check my sanity
Oct 2018
Report This Content
You can report any content you believe to be unsafe. Please let me know why you believe this content is unsafe by choosing a category below.
Thank you for your report. The content will be assessed as soon as possible.