Starmer Abandons Tuition Fees Pledge

I think it is probably currently unaffordable given the financial backdrop and there are more urgent issues needing addressing such as the economy, the cost of living crisis, the state of the NHS etc (for now). That said, I think the effects on Nursing and GP issues should be fully considered and training in these areas be free, or at least better subsidised.

However, it is about the right time to explain what he will do rather than what he wont do and to start focussing on how his plans will be funded. If he ducks and dives on policy and taxation I worry that it will play into the tories narratives and cause potential switchers to wobble and keep Sunak and his mates in power. He needs to start to give clarity to what he will achieve, how it will be paid for and sell why it is good for Britain and its people.
 
coluka said:
I think it is probably currently unaffordable given the financial backdrop and there are more urgent issues needing addressing such as the economy, the cost of living crisis, the state of the NHS etc (for now). That said, I think the effects on Nursing and GP issues should be fully considered and training in these areas be free, or at least better subsidised.

However, it is about the right time to explain what he will do rather than what he wont do and to start focussing on how his plans will be funded. If he ducks and dives on policy and taxation I worry that it will play into the tories narratives and cause potential switchers to wobble and keep Sunak and his mates in power. He needs to start to give clarity to what he will achieve, how it will be paid for and sell why it is good for Britain and its people.
Click to expand...

Some have survived the cut
Privatise rail
£28bn per year on green energy to drive jobs
300000 houses per year to help the housing crisis

But, as you say, the economy is in a mess and he can’t promise to do everything
 
If Labour win the next election, how would they justify paying for...

Increased funding to the NHS.
Increased funding to Education.
Scrapping tuition fees.
Nationalising Energy.
Nationalising Water.
Nationalising Rail.
Increased infrastructure spending.
Increased Police funding.
Build ~300k Houses.
Reduce Council Tax.
Increase Care spending/overhaul.
Fairer welfare system.
Cover the destroyed immigration system.

Basically increased funding on everything the Tories have broken, which is pretty much everything.

If the answer to that is to increase everyone's taxes massively to cover it or just "print money", then the Tories win the next election. It's that simple.
 
1finny said:
Privatise rail
Click to expand...

Freudian slip? Supposed to say nationalise? I think the problem is deep down even Starmer fans probably expect that policy to be dropped at some point. Reeves has already said it won't be happening publically.
 
coluka said:
I think it is probably currently unaffordable given the financial backdrop and there are more urgent issues needing addressing such as the economy, the cost of living crisis, the state of the NHS etc (for now). That said, I think the effects on Nursing and GP issues should be fully considered and training in these areas be free, or at least better subsidised.

However, it is about the right time to explain what he will do rather than what he wont do and to start focussing on how his plans will be funded. If he ducks and dives on policy and taxation I worry that it will play into the tories narratives and cause potential switchers to wobble and keep Sunak and his mates in power. He needs to start to give clarity to what he will achieve, how it will be paid for and sell why it is good for Britain and its people.
Click to expand...
focussing on how his plans will be funded.
I agree with what you say but how come nobody ever asks the Tories this.
 
SuperStu said:
Freudian slip? Supposed to say nationalise? I think the problem is deep down even Starmer fans probably expect that policy to be dropped at some point. Reeves has already said it won't be happening publically.
Click to expand...

How do you suppose they pay for it, if they do?

Or more importantly, what way do you support paying for Nationalisation?
 
Chris_Boro said:
How do you suppose they pay for it, if they do?

Or more importantly, what way do you support paying for Nationalisation?
Click to expand...

Well the argument people make with the railways is that there's not really anything to pay. You just wait for the franchised out services to reach the end of their contracts.

But lets pretend that's not the case and that nationalising the railways would involve paying some company a fee - I'd pay for it the same way the government pays for everything it does. By creating new money. 🤷‍♂️
 
It’s time to give the NHS a pay rise! No, I mean, erm, you know, tough decisions. I’m going to increase income tax for the top 5% of earners! No, I mean, look, it was a different time. We have to take some difficult decisions. It’s time to scrap tuition fees! And that’s a pledge. Will we? Yes, because it’s a pledge. Oh no, I mean, we will look at that. That’s what I meant. You CAN trust me, Labour, when I say we will defend freedom of movement as we leave the EU. I mean, no. I just said it for the sake of it. I promise I will renationalise Royal Mail! Trust me. I promise.

It looks like a lot of people are finally waking up this absolute fraud of a politician. An habitual liar who’ll say whatever he thinks the people in a room want to hear to get what he wants, and then do the opposite once he’s closed the door on his way out.

I’m sure this thread will turn into another slanging match but he’s done the dirty on more and more people as he’s gone along. I’m pleased more are waking up to his empty rhetoric and outright lies.
 
SuperStu said:
Freudian slip? Supposed to say nationalise? I think the problem is deep down even Starmer fans probably expect that policy to be dropped at some point. Reeves has already said it won't be happening publically.
Click to expand...

haha - yes indeed - Nationalise

In general... It's all a bit daft isn't it tho? It goes something like this

'Starmer breaks pledge so I won't trust him....... Starmer says he will do something but why trust him?'

In effect - 'I believe him and will slaughter him when he says something I don't like ..... but I won't believe him if he says something I might like.

I'm too long in the tooth to expect a good conversation about it all. A shame really
 
SuperStu said:
Well the argument people make with the railways is that there's not really anything to pay. You just wait for the franchised out services to reach the end of their contracts.

But lets pretend that's not the case and that nationalising the railways would involve paying some company a fee - I'd pay for it the same way the government pays for everything it does. By creating new money. 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...

I see, and what does printing new money do to the economy?
 
1finny said:
haha - yes indeed - Nationalise

In general... It's all a bit daft isn't it tho? It goes something like this

'Starmer breaks pledge so I won't trust him....... Starmer says he will do something but why trust him?'

In effect - 'I believe him and will slaughter him when he says something I don't like ..... but I won't believe him if he says something I might like.

I'm too long in the tooth to expect a good conversation about it all. A shame really
Click to expand...
His issue is that he’s saying fewer and fewer things that people in general like - not just Labour voters, left wingers, etc - judging by the recent polling. I know we shouldn’t be *too* bothered about polls but there’s a reason his lead has got smaller and smaller.

It’s become increasingly clear that little will actually change under his leadership, should he win the election. Again, we’ve had this discussion but this idea that he’ll become truly progressive AFTER he’s won an election just seems absolutely crackers to me. He’s literally telling us what he thinks right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top