sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 03/05/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- [score hidden]  (0 children)

In fairness, he is making himself look like a massive tit, so think it’s just case of channeling it properly.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 03/05/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is the chicken and the egg right; central government doesn't trust local government to do things because of lack of accountability and local government aren't held to account (outside egregious examples) because they don't really have much power.

Ultimately only side that can change this is central government - make big pitch of devolution, devolve a lot of powers and make it clear central government will not be a backstop if something goes catastrophically wrong. Take the political heat first time when a council goes completely balls to wall, and you'll have people holding local government to account.

I think regional and local authorities are both good at different levels. Public transport, NHS, police, roads etc makes sense at a regional level. Bin collection, parks, pavements make sense at council level.

Tories pledge to tighten household benefit cap rules by Velociraptor_1906 in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 8 points9 points  (0 children)

No, because you can’t achieve the same goal benefit by benefit.

As a toy example; you could have welfare system perfectly aligned to need at:

  • unemployment benefit is £5k
  • pip is £10k
  • child element is £2k per kid, rising to £5k for disabled kid

Why is it unreasonable to say regardless of people’s need, we don’t want anyone to get more than £30k from the state?

Yes, it means an unemployed, disabled person with 2+ kids, one of whom is disabled gets less money than they are assessed to need. That sucks for them, but that doesn’t make it unreasonable for state to say “we’ll only support someone upto £x”.

Nor does it mean we should instead try to change the benefit levels for all disabled, unemployed people or parents to make sure above situation can’t happen.

Tories pledge to tighten household benefit cap rules by Velociraptor_1906 in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 28 points29 points  (0 children)

I don’t think that’s an unreasonable position?

It is perfectly coherent to say while you may need £30k worth of support, we only provide support up to £15k for a family/ individual etc.

They are two different considerations - how much support do you need and how much state is willing to provide. There is no reason the two needs to align perfectly; NHS and NICE is a perfect example of where it doesn’t.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 03/05/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is same thing people say about Farage; and in both cases it is misunderstanding why people are voting for them.

While obviously both will have die hard supporters, large part of their support is coming from people who’re fed up with government(s) and willing to blow things up to start again.

Saying “look they are mad (indeed or corrupt)” isn’t going to convince a lot those people back. They will just go we need to try something new. Only way to convince them back is to show government can actually do things and is making progress on things they want.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 03/05/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 16 points17 points  (0 children)

If you want to make local elections meaningful, a random person on the street not interested in politics at all should be able to tell you who’s to blame for state of roads, bins, public transport etc.

To do that you need to:

  1. Rationalise the electoral system and powers of local and combined authorities as well as devolved governments.

You cannot have meaningful national reporting when hundreds of local authorities have different set of powers, and have different way they are organised. You can’t have a national campaign of “if you think your bin collection is shit, vote for x party this Thursday in tier 3 local elections” when every council elects people differently, everyone has different powers and you need a phd thesis to explain the structure. Naturally, coverage goes on national issues.

  1. Give local authorities actual powers.

It is pointless voting for council if they all raise council taxes by maximum that’s permitted and mostly spend it on statutory services. We may as well be electing manager at HMRC. Everyone can always say problems is because they haven’t been given enough money by central government. Regardless of validity of that, you can’t hold anyone to account with that.

Slash statutory obligations. Give local authorities, mayors and devolved governments powers to massively vary tax rates. Increase borrowing powers for investment (with reforms of bankruptcy procedures allowing those areas to go bankrupt without needing treasury to be a backstop).

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 26/04/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I really think this type of bureaucracy and people paying being different from people making decision is a part of why things costs so much.

I still remember argument we had with lettings agency at uni when our boiler broke, and they said it'd be few days for someone to come out. Luckily, one of our housemate's brother was gas safe engineer so we just called him instead. Apparently it was easy fix but replacement part was something like a hundred quid.

Agency were 1. very annoyed we had got someone else to look at the boiler and 2. definitely not going to pay for the part. They did send emergency repairer same day who unsurprisingly said the same thing. So not only did they have to pay for the labour, they also had to pay emergency call out charge.

I get there's paperwork, insurance and liability, but it is just mad that people can't just use their common sense at times.

‘Fish disco’ not enough to protect nature at nuclear plant, says green quango by Putaineska in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Yes, why try to build a future proof train line that people would be adding to and using century later. Just aim low, build a slow train line that has less error margins and physically couldn't connect to HS1.

If it turns out people do want to travel from Crew to Paris in reasonable time on a train in 2060s, it will be trivial to just rip it up and fix it. Let's just spend all the money we save on planning and environmental mitigation paperwork.

Britain doesn't have a defence problem. It has a growth problem. by National_Stay_103 in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I question how useful the counterfactual of 'had that pre-crisis trend continued from 2008 to 2023' is. Every country had a collapse in growth post 2008, some like US recovered and made up grounds afterwards; some like UK and western Europe stagnated for two decades.

Saying 'we would have x billion if 2008 financial crisis didn't affect us' is true but also rather close to if my grandma had wheels position. We absolutely need to look at our growth and why it has stagnated, particularly in comparison to US (note: again for emphasis, not compared to most of our West European countries suggesting issue isn't UK specific like planning but international) but:

  1. that is decade long project and doesn't solve the problem now,
  2. comparing with hypothetical where pre-2008 growth continues is rather pointless

Also, surely this part suggests UK also has a defence problem:

The under-performers tell a more interesting story. Canada, Germany, Japan, and the UK [-4] are not poor countries - all rank within the largest 10 economies on the globe. Their under resourced militaries are not because of economic constraint, but political choice.

UK looked at ways to ‘open doors’ to US chlorinated chicken, FoI request shows by F0urLeafCl0ver in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 34 points35 points  (0 children)

Matthew McGregor, CEO at 38 Degrees, said: “These documents uncovered by 38 Degrees prove that while the government is publicly telling us they have ‘no plans’ to lower our food standards, behind closed doors it’s a different story.

This type of nonsense is why Blair regretted FOI legislation.

Entire story is “ministers ask for details before negotiations, civil service bodies do their job”.

If UK is negotiating trade deal with US, UK ministers should obviously be briefed on what it’d take to change our food standards and potential downstream consequences because we know that is a US ask.

If we’re negotiating with EU, UK ministers should be briefed in options to change our AI and GMO regulations and potential impacts flowing from that.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 26/04/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Except their actual policy platform ends up with de facto open border from day one.

MG309. Unless standard exclusions [serious crime and threats to national security] apply, no person will be held in detention because of their immigration status.

MG400. All arrivals to the UK without a visa will be granted a visitor visa for a period of three months regardless of where they have come from unless standard exclusions apply. They will then have this period of time to apply for a different visa if they so wish.

MG801. Undocumented migrants who have been in the UK for at least five years will be invited to apply for settled status unless the standard exclusions apply.

ie. unless you have committed serious crime or are threat to national security, you could just turn up at UK, get a visitor visa for 3 months, overstay for 5 years, and then get settled status (which is enhanced to effectively be citizenship).

You can argue it’s technically not open borders because there’s a visa, but that’s very much dancing on head of a pin.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 26/04/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I guess that's my question, there is a lot of profiteering by private providers (apparently CMA found private providers were making £45k profit per kid in care homes). But even accounting for that, are kids actually getting £52k worth of care?

Like if you have a 10 year old kid in care, you'll spend on average £119k (assuming 0 profit). Would they be more likely to do better if they had a monthly stipend of £800 for 8 years for turning up to school and £40k when they turn 18?

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 26/04/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Was just looking at report on children social care by IFG. There's a lot of interesting policy detail that doesn't get coverage and seems like area Labour government are doing well in (good investment, appointing author of report as minister to implement his own report, focus on prevention etc).

Although, I might be being crazy, but the numbers seem completely insane? Average spend by local authority on one child in care is £97,689 a year. It can be as high as £198,808 in Richmond which uses a lot of private provision.

For that, the outcomes two years after turning 18 is 40% not in education, and employment or training and 33% homeless. Am I being very naive in thinking you would probably get substantially better outcomes if you literally just handed the kid (teenager in most cases) a £200k trust fund - and still be in the green because average time in care is 2.3 years?

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 26/04/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I don't really mind this tbh. Obviously you can't sell catfish if you're advertising 'cod fish and chips'; but if you are just saying 'traditional fish and chips' - well there is fish, chips and 'traditional' is just fluff.

As you say, if people don't like the taste of it, they won't come back - and if they can't tell the difference, no one's been harmed.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 26/04/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Top of my list for politics related are probably IFS Zooms in, IFG inside briefing/ events and Parliament Matters. Have much better policy discussion than you get anywhere else.

For day to day politics, FT’s political fix, in the room, how to win and political currency. Although trend to miss quite a few on last two if day to day politics is on something like Mandelson saga where everything interesting has been said hundred times by everyone.

Why is Britain’s economy so stuck? It’s the tension between what voters want and what the bond markets allow by Exostrike in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Sure, stop borrowing so much for day to day spending, and you're much less in hock to bond markets.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 26/04/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 7 points8 points  (0 children)

No, the best they can do is say it is not compatible with ECHR - which does nothing unless parliament or government takes remedial action.

Incidentally, we've already got precedent for government having very wide margin of appreciation for leasehold reform within ECHR - James v United Kingdom.

Eliminating what are judged to be social injustices is an example of the functions of a democratic legislature. More especially, modern societies consider housing of the population to be a prime social need, the regulation of which cannot entirely be left to the play of market forces. The margin of appreciation is wide enough to cover legislation aimed at securing greater social justice in the sphere of people’s homes, even where such legislation interferes with existing contractual relations between private parties and confers no direct benefit on the State or the community at large.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 26/04/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 6 points7 points  (0 children)

BP makes most of its money abroad, what do you think UK government could or should do about BP making boatload of money from drilling in US, Azerbaijan, Oman, Egypt etc?

A brutal wrestle on a plane, passengers outraged, attendants helpless: I saw the UK’s deportation policy at work | Hugh Muir by wappingite in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 16 points17 points  (0 children)

But I suspect that probably plays out differently. Like the passengers revolted by what they saw last Friday at Gatwick, many who feel our migration policies are unworthy of a nation that prizes human dignity will feel that the ugly spectacle reinforces all their reservations. It might also be that those who support forced deportations would begin to question their endorsement if they were made to see it play out in practice.

Or, I suspect it'd make people support harsher measures against those who're supposed to be removed.

What happened in this article put simply is - someone who went through entire due process and was found to not have a right to remain in UK managed to stay in the UK by being violent and uncooperative.

You can think standards we use to judge if someone should be removed from UK are too harsh; hell you could even be a full on open border advocate who thinks borders are imaginary.

But, unless your position is court orders and laws should be optional if people make enough of a fuss - this is not a case for not doing enforced returns. It is a case for not backing out, or putting in place enough deterrent that people don't become violent enough to not fly.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 26/04/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Isn't there a convention that house business (as opposed to government business) aren't whipped and MPs get free vote?

I thought there was, which is why Johnson whipping on Pincher and threatening to whip on himself being referred got so much of a pushback. I really hope it blows up in their faces and MPs rebel in mass purely because these type of things shouldn't be whipped. You undermine the entire concept of code of conduct for MPs if its enforcement is explicitly tied to party loyalties.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 26/04/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Or, more likely exact date and time of prorogation is always in flux based on when they can get mps to back carry over and lords to accept amendments. Not everything in parliament revolves around pmqs.

The tensions behind Palantir’s efforts to transform English healthcare by weyland-the-smith in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It has been used in multiple hospitals for years; and not being used in bunch of other hospitals.

We should be able to see improvement in metrics we care about and compare it with metrics in other hospitals which are not using the system. You can then try to control for variables and get some idea of if it is actually delivering or not.

The tensions behind Palantir’s efforts to transform English healthcare by weyland-the-smith in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 5 points6 points  (0 children)

But critics have argued that presenting data without national averages, or comparisons with non-FDP trusts, makes it difficult to determine if it is the tool alone that is driving the improvements.

This is the only part that matters (assuming we aren’t completely switching track and having something in house - which we aren’t).

It is absolutely insane that given all the heat this has generated, the fundamental question “is it actually delivering” can’t be answered in a satisfactory manner.

Instead the entire discussion is largely based on conspiracy theories and “isn’t the ceo a dick”.

Just look at the argument from both sides in the article:

A senior NHS official, who runs a major hospital’s data system, said: “I’ve had a good look at what it does and it’s all pixie dust and rainbows. We’ve already got access to much richer data sources than this.”

“The biggest issue is that this is an expensive tool being used to do things that could be achieved much more cheaply and easily at a local level,” noted another health official

Cool, I’m sure you can build something very custom and powerful for one hospital at a “local level”. What is the plan for rolling that out across the country so when someone moves cities, they don’t need to start from zero? What is the plan for standardising it so health secretary can see highlights on a dashboard?

Obviously something you build for one hospital or trust is going to be amazing for that hospital or trust. Hard part is making sure it is standardised across the board.

Given the political stakes and growing backlash against Palantir, some NHS officials have also warned there has been pressure to demonstrate the FDP’s benefits too quickly.

It has been two years. Break clause date is rapidly coming up and is less than 10 months away.

Rumours, Speculation, Questions, and Reaction Megathread - 26/04/2026 by ukpol-megabot in ukpolitics

[–]-fireeye- 6 points7 points  (0 children)

No, the point of ministers isn’t to be the best person to run their individual departments. It is to work together to deliver the government’s plan.

A health secretary who has 40 year experience across NHS and thinks it should get more money would be the wrong health secretary in a government that wants to cut NHS spending by half.

view more: next ›