Starmer Abandons Tuition Fees Pledge

Chris_Boro said:
I'm asking how you (or anyone who believes similarly to you really) believe Labour could keep to pledges to spend £100s of billions on policy promises, as that is the basis of the attacks on Starmer dropping them.

Printing money in such large scales for the sole purpose of policy purchase will causes rapid inflation, it will shock the markets and shatter confidence, unless there's sufficient growth to match and we currently have none. Labour cannot go into the next election on that gamble, they would be slaughtered.

Right now, Labour are going to find it hard to convince people they can afford to raise money to fund the NHS. Nevermind any sort of other pledge.

And don't be ridiculous, I was asking if you would support paying higher taxes to fund the pledge as a whole. Not on you personally.
Click to expand...
Then don’t make uncosted commitments. Or ‘pledges’ you have no intention of keeping. Not difficult.
 
Wheres 100s of billions come from? Your first question to me was re: railways and I pointed out at the start you simply wait for the franchises to end and then run them from there. Getting rid of tuition fees isn't 100s of billions either.

Yeah sure I'd be willing to pay more income tax in return for living in a better country. Why not?
 
coluka said:
No offence roofie1, but that is a massive leap and scaremongering imho. That rhetoric will turn people away and want to stick with the tories if they were undecided. We all have to live under rule, it is a fact of life and thank goodness we do. I accept there are balances in freedoms, but suggesting Starmer wants to remove freedoms and rule as some sort of a tin pot authoritarian dictator will have the tories rubbing their hands with glee.
Click to expand...
Nothing "scaremongering" about it. Its not rhetoric. Its an observation of the direction the ideology Starmer represents and where its at. His record when DPP, his record in expulsions and removal of democracy in the Labour Party, his lies and broken promises to those who elected him as leader, his use of language to appeal to base instincts and sanctioning of material which accuses a senior politician of supporting child sex abusers, is abhorrent. Its symptomatic of where his political loyalties lie. His progressive move rightwards in support of further limits on rights and freedoms cant be swept under the carpet. To deny the truth to get elected is criminal. If we have to cover up lies for a politician to get elected, its a dangerous road to go down.
 
SuperStu said:
Wheres 100s of billions come from? Your first question to me was re: railways and I pointed out at the start you simply wait for the franchises to end and then run them from there. Getting rid of tuition fees isn't 100s of billions either.

Yeah sure I'd be willing to pay more income tax in return for living in a better country. Why not?
Click to expand...
Not to mention, this Government has paid the private train operating companies for every day there has been a strike. They continue to subsidise private shareholders in France, Germany, Holland [etc] in order for those franchisers to operate and maintain their profits. Meanwhile we pay the highest fares in Europe for a creaking Victorian second class railway system. The money is there - its just leaving the country and has been since our railways were given away to private profiteers.
 
SuperStu said:
Wheres 100s of billions come from? Your first question to me was re: railways and I pointed out at the start you simply wait for the franchises to end and then run them from there. Getting rid of tuition fees isn't 100s of billions either.

Yeah sure I'd be willing to pay more income tax in return for living in a better country. Why not?
Click to expand...

I'm talking about the wider pledges not just rail, but used it as a general funding point, to emphasise my first post in this thread. I didn't mean it to be a pick on you personally, apologies if it's come across that way.

I would pay higher taxes too, but I don't believe the wider electorate would support an election on that basis, which is why, as time progresses, Starmers original pledges are being dropped.

The economy is getting worse and worse, options for policy funding are being limited more and more.

The vast majority of the electorate don't understand how the national finances work, so everything has to add up. If the voters are convinced that Labour is creating a magic money tree, they will lose. (Tories don't seem to suffer with that though).
 
The Ruthsayer said:
Then don’t make uncosted commitments. Or ‘pledges’ you have no intention of keeping. Not difficult.
Click to expand...

How to you know he had no intention on keeping them when he made them?

Things have changed quite a bit since he made the pledges, unless you think he should've been able to predict those changes aswell?
 
Chris_Boro said:
How to you know he had no intention on keeping them when he made them?

Things have changed quite a bit since he made the pledges, unless you think he should've been able to predict those changes aswell?
Click to expand...
ALL of them Chris? Really? And how about his recent ambiguous prevarications on the defo ruin of a woman?
 
r00fie1 said:
Nothing "scaremongering" about it. Its not rhetoric. Its an observation of the direction the ideology Starmer represents and where its at. His record when DPP, his record in expulsions and removal of democracy in the Labour Party, his lies and broken promises to those who elected him as leader, his use of language to appeal to base instincts and sanctioning of material which accuses a senior politician of supporting child sex abusers, is abhorrent. Its symptomatic of where his political loyalties lie. His progressive move rightwards in support of further limits on rights and freedoms cant be swept under the carpet. To deny the truth to get elected is criminal. If we have to cover up lies for a politician to get elected, its a dangerous road to go down.
Click to expand...
I agree the personal attacks were abhorrent and ill advised. I have no doubt you had no intention to scaremonger either. I just think if the ordinary jacks and Jills of the UK were to come across your post and comments like it, it would have that effect. Most voters in the country are not politically ideolistic, they care about their income source, a roof over their heads and food on the table, some of the lucky ones will care about affording a holiday or running a car too and they will more than likely be afraid of change. They have seen life get harder under the tories but Sunak is portrayed as a Mr nice guy who is an economic safe pair of hands trying to do his best on inflation, immigration and looking after the family silver. If they see Starmer being lied about by the tories and see a section of the traditional Labour party supporters attacking him too, what do you think will happen? Where will their vote go, if indeed they vote, abstention is an assist for the tories in truth as things stand.

I admire to some degree people having ideological hopes and visions it is their absolute right, but the truth staring everyone in the face is 5 more years of Sunak or 5 years of Starmer, who can at least make a start on righting some wrongs of the last 12 yrs. I would urge all those that do not like Starmer to abide by the many messages folk said to me under Corbyns leadership, and consider the reality of another term of tory rule. I held my nose and did the right thing, I hope people will take their own advice to me in 2019 otherwise it would be somewhat hypocritical for them not to.
 
coluka said:
I agree the personal attacks were abhorrent and ill advised. I have no doubt you had no intention to scaremonger either. I just think if the ordinary jacks and Jills of the UK were to come across your post and comments like it, it would have that effect. Most voters in the country are not politically ideolistic, they care about their income source, a roof over their heads and food on the table, some of the lucky ones will care about affording a holiday or running a car too and they will more than likely be afraid of change. They have seen life get harder under the tories but Sunak is portrayed as a Mr nice guy who is an economic safe pair of hands trying to do his best on inflation, immigration and looking after the family silver. If they see Starmer being lied about by the tories and see a section of the traditional Labour party supporters attacking him too, what do you think will happen? Where will their vote go, if indeed they vote, abstention is an assist for the tories in truth as things stand.

I admire to some degree people having ideological hopes and visions it is their absolute right, but the truth staring everyone in the face is 5 more years of Sunak or 5 years of Starmer who can at least make a start on righting some wrongs of the last 12 yrs. I would urge all those that do not like Starmer to abide by the many messages folk said to me under Corbyns leadership, and consider the reality of another term of tory rule. I held my nose and did the right thing, I hope people will take their own advice to me in 2019 otherwise it would be somewhat hypocritical for them not to.
Click to expand...
I wasnt being "idealistic" or suggesting only white angels and virgins should be in politics. Its also important to recognise that "politics" isnt just about the narrow walls of Westminster. Politics starts and ends in the street. But thats another discussion.

UTB
 
Colin Warnek said:
Colour me shocked......

www.bbc.co.uk

Labour set to ditch pledge for free university tuition, Starmer says

Sir Keir Starmer said his party was "likely to move on" from its previous policy of scrapping fees.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...

I would have thought the Starmer haters who have jumped on this would have done so back in January when it was openly discussed:

www.theguardian.com

It’s multiple choice time for ruthless Starmer: will he retain or scrap tuition fees? | Gaby Hinsliff

As the state of education comes under scrutiny, Labour’s leader faces some hard choices over the promises he made in 2020, says Guardian columnist Gaby Hinsliff
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

But hey, that one didn’t get much coverage.

Let’s not forget what was actually reported though, which as usual, has been totally bypassed by the haters:

“He added that the current fees system, of £9,250 a year, was "unfair" and "doesn't work for students, and doesn't work for universities".”

So basically he’s arguing that the Tories have trashed the economy (true) and as such the economic landscape has shifted considerably. Does he carry on with a plan that is now unaffordable? Or does he try to make the system fairer within the current wrecked fiscal landscape?

Reading on here it seems that everyone wants him to whip out the magic money tree and SPEND SPEND SPEND! Seriously, have a word with yourselves - you will just end up with another 5 years of Tory at this rate 🙄
 
MolteniArcore said:
I would have thought the Starmer haters who have jumped on this would have done so back in January when it was openly discussed:

www.theguardian.com

It’s multiple choice time for ruthless Starmer: will he retain or scrap tuition fees? | Gaby Hinsliff

As the state of education comes under scrutiny, Labour’s leader faces some hard choices over the promises he made in 2020, says Guardian columnist Gaby Hinsliff
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

But hey, that one didn’t get much coverage.

Let’s not forget what was actually reported though, which as usual, has been totally bypassed by the haters:

“He added that the current fees system, of £9,250 a year, was "unfair" and "doesn't work for students, and doesn't work for universities".”

So basically he’s arguing that the Tories have trashed the economy (true) and as such the economic landscape has shifted considerably. Does he carry on with a plan that is now unaffordable? Or does he try to make the system fairer within the current wrecked fiscal landscape?

Reading on here it seems that everyone wants him to whip out the magic money tree and SPEND SPEND SPEND! Seriously, have a word with yourselves - you will just end up with another 5 years of Tory at this rate 🙄
Click to expand...
You'll end up with another 5 years of Tory if Starmer wins the next election.
 
Last edited:
coluka said:
No offence roofie1, but that is a massive leap and scaremongering imho. That rhetoric will turn people away and want to stick with the tories if they were undecided. We all have to live under rule, it is a fact of life and thank goodness we do. I accept there are balances in freedoms, but suggesting Starmer wants to remove freedoms and rule as some sort of a tin pot authoritarian dictator will have the tories rubbing their hands with glee.
Click to expand...

It wasn’t scaremongering, it was just b0ll0x 😄
 
“It's been nine years since the Lib Dems betrayed students over tuition fees, don't let them fool you again. Labour will be different. We have pledged to abolish tuition fees. We mean it, I will be honoured to deliver this pledge in government.”

Angela Rayner MP, 9th December 2019.

✊🏻
 
MolteniArcore said:
It wasn’t scaremongering, it was just b0ll0x 😄
Click to expand...
I`de give you some credence and respect your point of view if you allowed democratic debate and discourse - even if you dont agree with it.
From your personal comments, your values and Starmers politics fit well together.
 
viv_andersons_nana said:
“It's been nine years since the Lib Dems betrayed students over tuition fees, don't let them fool you again. Labour will be different. We have pledged to abolish tuition fees. We mean it, I will be honoured to deliver this pledge in government.”

Angela Rayner MP, 9th December 2019.

✊🏻
Click to expand...
Was she wearing her R2D2 shoes when she said that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top