Chancellor Rachel Reeves: Her Time Is Up!

[PR1Berske]

Plus clearly visible security detail

Oh I'm not here to suggest he's the real man of the people or owt, though I can see why the contrast has been pushed the other day. At first glance, and let's be honest that's how many people look at the news, you've got Kier in a private box with all his backers, and Rishi in the seats looking relatively normal.

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

An organisation apparently called Changed Labour responds to a man protesting about arms sales to Israel:

​

Rachel Reeves defends £7,500 clothes funding with Labour under pressure over donations

The Labour Party doesn't represent working people, does it fuck! It represents its rich donors and the Israeli propaganda line.

 

[PR1Berske]

'Disgusting and disgraceful': Labour conference heckler protests UK arms sales to Israel

Pro-Palestinian protesters were tackled and hauled out of the conference hall after interrupting Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ speech

www.middleeasteye.net

 

[GarveyLives]

Donations for new clothes welcome!​

 

[maomao]

Easily as big a cunt as Osborne. If not worse because he was born to it, she had to work hard to be the cunt she is.

 

[Dystopiary]

"New law will let investigators access suspects' bank details" - I'm concerned this will lead to claimants' accounts being scrutinised, just as the Tories had threatened.
"Suspects" could be anyone they choose.

 

[The39thStep]

Labour’s donors crisis takes a turn for the worse

 

[Pickman's model]

Labour’s donors crisis takes a turn for the worse

I like the way ar is ignoring her

 

[Larry O'Hara]

I like the way ar is ignoring her

He wants her job…

 

[Pickman's model]

He wants her job…

Ar Angela rayner

 

[PTK]

Ar Angela rayner

"Arrrr! Angela Rayner!" said the pirate.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Ar Angela rayner

thinking Jonathan Reynolds! But you're right: Rayner. Good question as to which one of Rayner or Reeves Starmer throws out of the balloon first.

 

[LakieLady]

"New law will let investigators access suspects' bank details" - I'm concerned this will lead to claimants' accounts being scrutinised, just as the Tories had threatened.
"Suspects" could be anyone they choose.

I'm not sure that will make a lot of difference, tbh. There is already information sharing between HMRC and DWP, and the DWP seem to pick up on claimants with significant sums in savings, presumably via the info banks give HMRC regarding interest payments. They then ask claimants to produce statements for all their accounts and warn them that their benefits may be stopped if they don't comply.

I don't know if they actually do it, because I always advise clients to fess up anyway.

It's high time they raised the savings limits for benefits anyway. It's been £6k and £16k since 2006, if the limits were increased in line with inflation they'd probably be more like £9k and £24k.

 

[brogdale]

My eldest and his wife have a joint current account so, as she's in receipt of PIP, my lad's bank account will be open to state scrutiny even though he receives no benefit?

 

[Larry O'Hara]

While Mariana Mazzucato is no anti-capitalist, it seems even she doesn’t buy Rachel Thieve’s hokum on investment. Oh dear! Here

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I'm not sure that will make a lot of difference, tbh. There is already information sharing between HMRC and DWP, and the DWP seem to pick up on claimants with significant sums in savings, presumably via the info banks give HMRC regarding interest payments. They then ask claimants to produce statements for all their accounts and warn them that their benefits may be stopped if they don't comply.

I don't know if they actually do it, because I always advise clients to fess up anyway.

It's high time they raised the savings limits for benefits anyway. It's been £6k and £16k since 2006, if the limits were increased in line with inflation they'd probably be more like £9k and £24k.

I'm sure it will make very little difference in terms of people being caught, but it is one more arbitrary power to the state, one more stick for poor people to be beaten with.

This new government has an authoritarian reflex, and it is clearly signalling that it will aim for the poor when it kicks out. If you have the temerity to ask for help from the state, you give up any right to privacy or dignity.

 

[Dystopiary]

I'm not sure that will make a lot of difference, tbh. There is already information sharing between HMRC and DWP, and the DWP seem to pick up on claimants with significant sums in savings, presumably via the info banks give HMRC regarding interest payments. They then ask claimants to produce statements for all their accounts and warn them that their benefits may be stopped if they don't comply.

I don't know if they actually do it, because I always advise clients to fess up anyway.

It's high time they raised the savings limits for benefits anyway. It's been £6k and £16k since 2006, if the limits were increased in line with inflation they'd probably be more like £9k and £24k.

Yeah, the banks do share that kind of info, but I'm concerned this could go a lot further with legitimised scrutisation of spends.

Re savings, yes and it's the same amount for couples as it is single people.

 

[Dystopiary]

My eldest and his wife have a joint current account so, as she's in receipt of PIP, my lad's bank account will be open to state scrutiny even though he receives no benefit?

PIP isn't means tested so treated differently to Universal Credit and so-called legacy benefits, so hopefully not, nor his wife's account.

 

[Pickman's model]

PIP isn't means tested so treated differently to Universal Credit and so-called legacy benefits, so hopefully not, nor his wife's account.

Isn't mt yet

 

[seeformiles]

Yeah, the banks do share that kind of info, but I'm concerned this could go a lot further with legitimised scrutisation of spends.

Re savings, yes and it's the same amount for couples as it is single people.

When we both lost our jobs during the pandemic, we were just over the savings limit for UC - cue us withdrawing a grand in cash and stashing it in the attic in order to get our £323 per month

 

[Smokeandsteam]

This new government has an authoritarian reflex, and it is clearly signalling that it will aim for the poor when it kicks out. If you have the temerity to ask for help from the state, you give up any right to privacy or dignity.

This is a really important observation. They are much much worse than even Blair in this respect.

Starmer dressed it up yesterday - attacking the racists, claiming 'tough decisions' were a necessary precursor of growth and discussing attacks on the poorest and most vulnerable as balance sheet type 'trade offs' and corrections.

Part of me thinks that Starmer is going to find this harder going than expected given the rapidity with which this government has become deeply unpopular.

But I also do think that there is a growing and really disturbing appetite in Britain for punishment beating of the poor. We saw it in some of the language used in the summer where the white working class trapped in plundered areas were conflated with the racist mob. We see it in the language used about people who fail to take on shit jobs that trap them into poverty and soul destroying labour. We see it in the culture war. We see it in the subtext of the 'preventative' health planning which seems to imply negative value judgements on the lifestyles of the poor.

I have long argued that Starmer's legacy will be to be remembered as the PM who ushered in right wing populism. Leading a clueless, reactionary and clapped-out Labour Government that resorts to enacting some of the Farage agenda, fails to deliver and is replaced after one term by those promising to 'do the job properly'.

The rise of an authoritarian reflex and a 'no one like us and we don't care' attitude - on display already by this Government must be understood in that context. Once, the job of aspiring governments was to reflect the ideas, hopes and aspirations of the people it wanted to be elected to serve. Those days, very clearly, are gone.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

This is a really important observation. They are much much worse than even Blair in this respect.

Starmer dressed it up yesterday - attacking the racists, claiming 'tough decisions' were a necessary precursor of growth and discussing attacks on the poorest and most vulnerable as balance sheet type 'trade offs' and corrections.

Part of me thinks that Starmer is going to find this harder going than expected given the rapidity with which this government has become deeply unpopular.

But I also do think that there is a growing and really disturbing appetite in Britain for punishment beating of the poor. We saw it in some of the language used in the summer where the white working class trapped in plundered areas were conflated with the racist mob. We see it in the language used about people who fail to take on shit jobs that trap them into poverty and soul destroying labour. We see it in the culture war. We see it in the subtext of the 'preventative' health planning which seems to imply negative value judgements on the lifestyles of the poor.

I have long argued that Starmer's legacy will be to be remembered as the PM who ushered in right wing populism. Leading a clueless, reactionary and clapped-out Labour Government that resorts to enacting some of the Farage agenda, fails to deliver and is replaced after one term by those promising to 'do the job properly'.

The rise of an authoritarian reflex and a 'no one like us and we don't care' attitude - on display already by this Government must be understood in that context. Once, the job of aspiring governments was to reflect the ideas, hopes and aspirations of the people it wanted to be elected to serve. Those days, very clearly, are gone.

So apart from that you rate Starmer?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

This is a really important observation. They are much much worse than even Blair in this respect.

Starmer dressed it up yesterday - attacking the racists, claiming 'tough decisions' were a necessary precursor of growth and discussing attacks on the poorest and most vulnerable as balance sheet type 'trade offs' and corrections.

Part of me thinks that Starmer is going to find this harder going than expected given the rapidity with which this government has become deeply unpopular.

But I also do think that there is a growing and really disturbing appetite in Britain for punishment beating of the poor. We saw it in some of the language used in the summer where the white working class trapped in plundered areas were conflated with the racist mob. We see it in the language used about people who fail to take on shit jobs that trap them into poverty and soul destroying labour. We see it in the culture war. We see it in the subtext of the 'preventative' health planning which seems to imply negative value judgements on the lifestyles of the poor.

I have long argued that Starmer's legacy will be to be remembered as the PM who ushered in right wing populism. Leading a clueless, reactionary and clapped-out Labour Government that resorts to enacting some of the Farage agenda, fails to deliver and is replaced after one term by those promising to 'do the job properly'.

The rise of an authoritarian reflex and a 'no one like us and we don't care' attitude - on display already by this Government must be understood in that context. Once, the job of aspiring governments was to reflect the ideas, hopes and aspirations of the people it wanted to be elected to serve. Those days, very clearly, are gone.

And they are potentially worse than a Sunak government because they can blame their current actions on the state of the economy they were bequeathed. Reality is that the UK's macroeconomic indicators have all been on the up for the last year. A government that still wanted to be liked would not be forced to do any of this stuff. This is all being done by choice.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

And they are potentially worse than a Sunak government because they can blame their current actions on the state of the economy they were bequeathed. Reality is that the UK's macroeconomic indicators have all been on the up for the last year. A government that still wanted to be liked would not be forced to do any of this stuff. This is all being done by choice.

Yes, on both points.

Seeing Ministers whinge about their treatment by the media is amusing, a serious media would have demolished Reeve's risible narrative and highlighted the reasons for it.

 

[teqniq]

Well i never:

UK chancellor ready to water down planned tax raid on ‘non-doms’

 

[Pickman's model]

And they are potentially worse than a Sunak government because they can blame their current actions on the state of the economy they were bequeathed. Reality is that the UK's macroeconomic indicators have all been on the up for the last year. A government that still wanted to be liked would not be forced to do any of this stuff. This is all being done by choice.

To be fair to rs he could blame his predecessor for the state of the economy when he became pm, surely you've not forgotten Liz truss so easily

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Well i never:

UK chancellor ready to water down planned tax raid on ‘non-doms’

Never planned always a sham

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Yes, on both points.

Seeing Ministers whinge about their treatment by the media is amusing, a serious media would have demolished Reeve's risible narrative and highlighted the reasons for it.

That would require journalists with a brain: Mason Kuenssberg Spring and Peston only had one cell between them and its gone missing…

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

Donations for new clothes welcome!​

Benefits fraudsters? They're loathsome fraudsters.

 

[PR1Berske]