Liberal, Briton, FBPE. Co-mod of m/neoliberal
Rishi: we have a plan for tackling the cost of living crisis.
The plan:
I’m all for appropriately punishing people for the crimes they commit. But we usually don’t deprive solo-nationality citizens of their citizenship (leaving them stateless) for the crimes she is accused of - this is a punishment that is only being applied to UK (including UK-only) nationals who have recent foreign ancestors (i.e. so who could hypothetically - but often not in practice - be eligible for another country’s citizenship - in her case, Bangladesh). We also don’t usually apply extreme punishments like this to people for crimes committed as children, and we don’t usually punish children who were groomed and sex trafficked by terrorists as if they were the perpetrators.
The reality is that if Shamima Begum was a blonde-haired blue-eyed white girl whose parents and grandparents were all from Surrey, the media would have described her as a victim of sex trafficking; and the law that permits this punishment to be applied to her could not even have been used.
The legal system should not treat UK citizens differently according to whether or not the Tories think they look a bit foreign.
Ahh, that makes sense!
I’m unsurprised that a religious school is failing to teach science properly, but which bits of geography are they objecting to?
Michael Gove says a lot of things.
Cheap food imports? During a cost-of-living crisis? Blasphemy! Bring back the Corn Laws!
[Mogg] declared the death of “Davos man” - members of the global and political elite who descend on a Swiss ski resort every year for a global economic forum.
Ah, yes the famously left-wing extremists of … the World Economic Forum.
Maybe turn on the human being bit of your brain. The guy has cancer.
Imagine asking if it’s good or bad news that an old man has cancer.
No, the NHS under the Tories received real terms budget increases every year but one (in the second year of the Coalition, when NHS spending rose by very slightly less than inflation).
The problem is that, with large sections of the general public living more and more unhealthy lives, the demands on the NHS have been growing even faster than the real-terms budget. Obesity is correlated with a range of serious health problems - diabetes, cardiovascular disease, various cancers - that devour NHS resources, so the real-terms NHS budget would need to grow at a much faster rate than inflation to cope with the continuing deterioration of public health.
Ultimately, this isn’t a problem we should have been trying to spend our way out of anyway. The solution to an obesity epidemic shouldn’t have been to try and load the consequences onto the NHS; it should have been to take strong preventative measures to head it off well before the point when a quarter of the adult population of England were technically obese (and as many again were overweight).
When Covid hit, we went into lockdown to avoid overwhelming the NHS - where was the obesity equivalent of the Covid lockdowns?
Yes, my point was that above-inflation budget increases (so real-terms budget increases) ought to have led to improving services, other things being equal. But other things aren’t equal - partly because people are getting older, but also partly because people are living unhealthier lives.
So just to stand still, the NHS would have needed even larger above-inflation spending hikes than it got; or, heaven forbid, government policy would have had to start treating mass obesity as the public health emergency that it is, rather than fretting about the Tory press calling this a ‘nanny state’…
This is a really big factor. The public discourse around the NHS would lead you to think that NHS spending had been squeezed over the last 14 years - but it hasn’t. Cameron made a big political choice in 2010 that the NHS would be exempt from the budget cuts that affected the rest of the public sector; and the NHS budget has actually consistently grown faster than inflation under a decade and a half of Tory health secretaries.
So why does the NHS feel under so much more pressure today than under New Labour?
Broadly, two reasons. The first, outside the government’s control, is that the population has aged since 2010, and old people are more likely to need GP appointments and hospital beds. And the second, at least somewhat more in the government’s control, is that public health has continued its deteriorating trend of the last several decades - the share of people overweight or obese in particular, who also find themselves disproportionately taking up health services.
We can’t do anything about people getting older but we can act on the public health problem. We should be treating combating obesity with the same urgency we treated Covid.
And we’d like the refund, please.
He was the only candidate.
300-odd (and odd) Tory MPs.
‘We have experienced something truly horrific. The city centres have become wastelands. People go hungry and homeless. There’s a basic lack of provision of essential services … How do the British get by like this?’
Non-paywall link: https://archive.is/Kl4wC
It’s a first-past-the-post election - the Tories changed the electoral system because they knew they couldn’t win it in a fair vote. The Tories have also nominated Susan Hall as their candidate - a right-wing extremist, Trump-supporter, culture wars lunatic, swivel-eyed Islamphobic.
In an election like this, if you’re going to vote for a joke candidate then you might as well just vote for the Tory directly.
Politically, this is magnificent. The Lib Dems have target seats throughout Surrey where they’re typically the main challenger, they’ve been campaigning hard locally on water quality through most of this parliament (hasn’t always got national attention but they worked out a while ago it’s a very resonant issue in their target seats) and then just in time for the election Thames Water start warning people the water isn’t drinkable…