I've had enough Labour MPs say to me that they didn't come into politics to see child poverty go up to think that they're going to win this fight.
Reposted from
Jo Michell
Succinct summary.
Comments
All that I have seen and heard from him would support this view
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2025/03/20/torsten-bell-displaying-his-true-neoliberal-colours/
They also aren’t clear on the benefits it would have for the overall economy so could be cheaper than thought
The public will always be contradictory and fickle. It’s up to MPs and Govt to govern in their interests even if it’s contrary to current opinion polling.
The two child cap is popular … u til it isn’t when the costs become known - like Brexit.
Though it does ultimately feed into broader concerns about the sustainability of voluntary FPTP elections.
Labour will not be lauded for maintaining a popular relic of Tory Britain, they’ll be pilloried for their dishonesty - like at the locals.
The outrage over it is very much contrived by the media.
Those who aren't the wealthy, generally speaking, receive some kind of bursary or have an EHCP in place, and thys are protected.
So, Labour are.
Even by the “standards” of Number 10 this does seem to be a particularly fraught lot
Emphasise suffering children and people want to help. Emphasise "irresponsible" parents and they don't want to bail them out.
https://bsky.app/profile/chelseachemist1.bsky.social/post/3lpvoleqk6c2m
People are open to different arguments!
It costs the government £3.5bn per year
And we don't have £3.5bn per year
Why would you want to represent people you believe are so (on average) convinced children should starve it's literally impossible to convince them otherwise.
It's a thought I suppose.
People are individuals, they have many views & many concerns & are not usually entrenched in any particular solution to them... partly because they recognise there is no simple, one-stop solution to them all.
Also it's the politicians' job to find solutions, not voters.
These people do exist and they’re very visible
Those who aren’t have better things to do than hang around on the street.
This isn’t a conspiracy.
I think the benefit trap is well understood and yet no one addresses both sides of the equation.
And yet the attitude is a knee jerk ‘no’.
It’s not unreasonable to resent antisocial families who make no effort to support themselves.
Surely we can conceive a way to persuade them to work without hurting the children?
That generates a huge amount of resentment, and I am always surprised the discourse just pretends they don’t exist.
The demonisation of poor children has a long history
Communication must talk about who is emphasising and why. Turn the light on the disinformers
The McSweeney Triangle - a strange occurrence where political principles and sensible arguments disappear without a trace.
Are there not enough MPs?
Enough, but lacking in determination?
Enough, but the govmnt machine always wins?
Let the lumpen proletariat know. It's a real cliffhanger
Rgds.
The manifesto makes no mention of it, I presume each and every one has a plan to raise the money for it without breaking manifesto pledges?
Constrained by Westminster's financial controls,
We have the Scottish Child Payment, described as 'a game changer' by anti-poverty charities,
Scotland's Government will cancel Labour's two-child cap next year.
Imagine how much more we could do with #ScottishIndependence
Starmer played the poor hand he was left by Tories very adroitly. After nearly 1 yr he has the stability to push further progressive policies
John Ruskin
Hunt reduces NI. Starmer keeps it that way but then everyone is furious about lack of investment.
Anti-trans campaigners win in Supreme Court case. Trans people take to ECHR. Farage can then use that to attack human rights law.
Insane. Delusional.
"We should do
"No no! I must be the workplace alpha!"
He's an "election campaign wunderkind" in the same way "Classic" Dom Cummings was the superforecasting puppetmaster of Westminster.