Forum Topics

UK on the wrong side

"UN approves new study on effects of nuclear war" (1/11/24)"Melissa Parke, Executive Director for ICAN welcomed the study: “This new study is an opportunity to bring our understanding of the impact of nuclear war out of the 1980s and into the 21st century.  As the world becomes increasingly more interconnected, we need to make sure that policy decisions are based on science- not dogma and scaremongering. This study is a chance to bring that science together and guide us towards the future we want.”The vote on the resolution was not unanimous. Some of the nuclear-armed states and their allies actively lobbied against this study, possibly out of concern that more knowledge on what these weapons of mass destruction do would further erode any citizens’ support for having nuclear weapons. Only France, the Russian Federation and the United Kingdom voted against the resolution. However, the vast majority of states (144) – ranging from those that lead on disarmament and have been impacted by nuclear weapons testing in previous decades to those whose policies support the use of nuclear weapons – chose to commission this critical study." "Only France, the Russian Federation and the United Kingdom voted against the resolution." There were 30 abstentions, including the US.https://www.icanw.org/un_approves_new_study_on_effects_of_nuclear_warhttps://reachingcriticalwill.org/images/documents/Disarmament-fora/1com/1com24/resolutions/L39.pdfI guess that we know enough already and are not bothered.

David Ainsworth ● 733d3 Comments ● 733d

The Speaker Rebukes Reeves

Sir Lindsay Hoyle has accused Chancellor Rachel Reeves of acting with “supreme discourtesy” towards MPs given her “premature disclosure” of Budget details.The Commons Speaker said it was “totally unacceptable to go around the world telling everybody” about “major” new policy announcements rather than giving the information first to MPs.Sir Lindsay also questioned whether MPs would need to bother attending the House to hear Ms Reeves deliver her first Budget on Wednesday, given “we’ll all have heard it” already.During a round of broadcast interviews while attending the International Monetary Fund meeting in Washington DC, Ms Reeves confirmed a technical change in the way she would measure progress against the target of managing debt.It is expected Ms Reeves will use the Budget to open the door for the Government to spend billions more on long-term infrastructure, such as replacing dilapidated buildings on the public sector estate.Sir Lindsay, making a statement, told the Commons: “In media interviews last week the Chancellor announced that she intended to introduce changes to the fiscal rules relating to the funding of day-to-day spending through tax receipts and to the measurement of the public debt.“These are major new policy announcements with significant and wide-ranging implications for the Government’s fiscal policy and for the public finances.“It is evident to me that this should therefore have been made in the first instance in this House and not to the world’s media.“This principle is clearly and unambiguously set out in paragraph 9.1 of the Ministerial Code. While this can hardly be described as a leak – the Chancellor herself gave interviews on the record and on camera – the premature disclosure of the contents of the Budget has always been regarded as a supreme discourtesy to the House.“Indeed, I still regard it as such.“I am very, very disappointed that the Chancellor expects the House to wait nearly a full week to hear her repeat these announcements in the Budget statement on Wednesday.”Sir Lindsay said he has “always defended” the right of MPs to be the first to hear major Government policy announcements, adding: “Ministers should expect to face proper, sustained scrutiny when these announcements are made from the elected Members of this House and not the American news channels.”He noted Treasury minister Darren Jones would be making a statement to the House on “fiscal rules” on Monday, adding: “Perhaps no coincidence.“Honourable members may be wondering how they’ll get a seat on Wednesday (for the Budget) – to be quite honest, the way it’s going you won’t need to, we’ll all have heard it. It’s not acceptable, I don’t want it to continue and I want to treat this House with the respect it deserves.”Sir Lindsay added: “It’s totally unacceptable to go around the world telling everybody rather than these Members. They were elected by the constituents of this country and they deserve to be treated better.”He went on to note Labour when in opposition complained about the previous Tory government behaving in a similar manner, adding: “Get your acts together, all sides, treat Members with respect.”

Sue Hammond ● 738d16 Comments ● 736d

Starmer's Confusion

I already know about Starmer's confusion and inability to explain what a woman is 🤷🏻‍♀️and now I am confused about HIS confusion over 'working people'🤷🏻‍♀️🤷🏻‍♀️This confusing rhetoric from the government must end pdq because much of Reeve's🙍🏻‍♀️budget is centred around this ambiguous group.  Starmer🤓and his stooges need to have an urgent pow-wow in No 10 to sort this out because time is running out for them. 'Former Bank of England governor Mervyn King described Labour's pledge on national insurance, VAT and income tax as 'very unwise'.He also said the debate around not putting up taxes on working people was a 'terrible illusion' and warned putting up employers' national insurance was likely to depress workers' salaries.Lord King told Sky News: 'All this debate about not putting up taxes on working people is a terrible illusion, really.'Taxes are paid by people, they're not paid by companies or institutions, ultimately, they fall on the amount that people can spend.'And you only can raise significant amounts of money by raising taxes on most people, however you care to define that, but it's most people will have to pay higher taxes.And if they, instead of unwinding the cuts in employees' national insurance contributions, put up employers' national insurance contributions, that will make it less likely that companies will exceed to wage demands, they will press down on that, they will probably be less enthusiastic about creating new jobs.'Ultimately, the impact of these higher taxes has to be on the consumption of most people, however you care to define that group.'Lord King also warned that Ms Reeves' expected Budget plans could have an impact on interest rates.The Chancellor is set to rewrite the Government's fiscal rules to allow her to increase borrowing for public investment by around £50billion.Asked if he thinks the expected plans may have an impact on interest rates, particularly mortgage rates now, Lord King said: 'It could do, it could do.'https://mol.im/a/14007537

Sue Hammond ● 739d13 Comments ● 737d