this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2024
49 points (100.0% liked)

UK Politics

3008 readers
168 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
49
Starmer suspends seven rebel MPs including McDonnell over two-child benefit cap vote (www.independent.co.uk)
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
24 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago (2 children)

They haven't been suspended for voting for the policy, because it wasn't a vote on the policy.

They've been suspended because they voted for an opposition party's amendment to the King's Speech. If you're in the governing party but are voting against your own party's agenda, what else do they expect to happen?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I think this is key - it's early days and the new government are still figuring out the size of the mess they've been left with. What they've announced so far are the big policies that they've done their sums on in advance. Scrapping the cap will require them to find a bullion quid from somewhere and that might take time. I have to assume the SNP amendment was at least partially them messing with Labour as they knew it wouldn't get through.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The whole point of these amendments is to just shit on the government and try and make a political point. "Look, this new government voted against taking kids out of poverty!" and all that disingenuous shite.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Indeed - it's political trolling. I seem to recall them doing the same a while ago under the Tories.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

I guess that would explain why the Scots sent Labour to parliament instead this time

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

That's true, it is quite crude of the SNP to try to trip up the party that is clearly closer aligned to its interests.

[–] julietOscarEcho 2 points 1 month ago

They want Westminster to be disfunctional. That's the path towards independence. They're actively opposed to progressive wins. This goes both ways BTW, Labour won't ally with them either. Structurally adversarial politics is crap. Only electoral reform will make it possible for natural allies to actually work together (on the issues where they align).

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I believe the cost of removing the cap is estimated to be 3.5 billion quid

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

Ouch

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago

Very true. Also worth noting that they all won election on the policy of not repealing the limit. It's not like this came out of left field!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Liz Kendall said the government had to do ‘the sums’ before it could commit to abolishing the limit

Watch them do the sums and declare that we can't afford it. And thus it will become the first of many Tory fiscal policies that a Labour government decides to cling onto rather than throw it in the rubbish heap where it belongs.

I'll eat my words if I'm wrong.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago

It's telling how they never have to "do the sums" for bombs or missiles.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

They seemed to be softening somewhat on the cap, even Starmer himself had been making more open comments on it. I’ve seen some suggestions this was laying the groundwork for a “rabbit out of the hat” at the budget, either raising or removing the cap.

However, if the Starmer camp feels they still need to project strength and stability, the shift on the cap may now be jeopardised. They could now double back down on keeping it to not be seen as caving in to rebels or flip-flopping.

Time will tell. I hope I’m wrong but we still haven’t seen what the true colours of Starmer’s Labour will pan out to be.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Hopefully they stick to actually doing things they've planned for, rather than madcap populist impulse decisions.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The policy is what exactly? Totally confused by the story within a story about Labour rebellions and former Home Secretaries.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago

There was an SNP amendment to the King's Speech to commit the government to scrapping the two-child benefit cap. Seven Labour MPs rebeled and backed the motion and have now been suspended.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

The policy proposed to be removed is a cap on welfare for more than two children leaving a family with three children roughly £3,455 worse off, and the average family affected by the policy £4,300 worse off.

The budget impact is estimated to be about £3.4 billion a year to bring 500,000 children above the poverty line - or about 0.2 percent of government spending.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Rebels should have pushed for the policy change internally instead of colluding with an opposition party. Also the suspension is only 6 months so they'll be back soon enough.

[–] IcyToes 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Labour does have a process for policies. It is called the National Policy Forum. He ignores it. So your suggestion that you can push internally is false. Keir doesn't tolerate dissent because he's an autocrat.

Labour used to get most funding from unions, it's now less than 30%, so wealthy business folk got control of that.

It's a shame that Keir's labour doesn't have policies that aren't cruel on people.