| All you Labour voters, how's it feel so far. 22:58 - Mar 14 with 11455 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/mar/14/blockers-checkers-bats-and-chai
'Starmer’s language has been praised by the rightwing Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), a thinktank that was closely associated with Liz Truss.
Tom Clougherty, the executive director of the IEA, said: “Increasingly, the government is getting its rhetoric right. But its actions haven’t quite caught up. The British state is overloaded and that hurts both public services and the private sector. Changing structures might help, but ultimately government just needs to stop doing some things altogether.”
Starmer’s shift to using more robust language has increased in his eight months as prime minister. He said he would “build, baby, build” to meet his pledge on more housing, channelling Trump’s mantra of “drill, baby, drill”.'
|  |
| |  |
| All you Labour voters, how's it feel so far. on 21:30 - Mar 17 with 627 views | Swansea_Blue |
| All you Labour voters, how's it feel so far. on 18:15 - Mar 17 by DJR |
I can't say I've ever liked Streeting, and he's not even a mental health professional.
As it is, what he is saying does not even represent the consensus view in the country.
This from the Guardian.
According to polling by YouGov, almost four out of 10 people (37%) seem agree with Streeting that getting a diagnosis is too easy. But 32% say getting a diagnosis is too hard, and 14% say the balance is about right – meaning at last 46% don’t agree with Streeting.
(Streeting talked about there being “overdiagnosis” of mental health conditions, whereas YouGov asked about it being “too easy” to get a diagnosis; the terms have different connotations, although roughly they imply the same thing.)
The polling also found considerable differences between demographic groups on this issue.
Women are more likely to say getting a diagnosis is too hard, not too easy – while men are more likely to say the opposite.
The under-50s are more likely to say getting a diagnosis is too hard, not too easy – while the over-50s are more likely to say the opposite.
People from London and Scotland are more likely to say getting a diagnosis is too hard, not too easy – while people from the rest of Britain are more likely to say the opposite.
And Labour and Lib Dem supporters are more likely to say getting a diagnosis is too hard, not too easy – while Conservative and Reform UK supporters are more likely to say the opposite. [Post edited 17 Mar 18:16]
|
Far too much weight is given to the consensus view. People are by and large inexperienced and poorly informed on such issues, so polls like that are largely worthless imo. The professional view on what he said is far more relevant. It’s damning in this instance. Experts across the medical field seem to be pretty unanimous in their criticism. |  |
| |
| All you Labour voters, how's it feel so far. on 21:37 - Mar 17 with 602 views | DJR |
| All you Labour voters, how's it feel so far. on 21:28 - Mar 17 by GiveusanI |
Trying to cancel my LP membership due to their awful pandering to the Right, especially disability benefit cuts but their website seems to not allow me to login currently. That's odd.... |
You're best bet is to cancel the direct debit. |  | | |
| All you Labour voters, how's it feel so far. on 23:56 - Mar 17 with 559 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| All you Labour voters, how's it feel so far. on 21:28 - Mar 17 by GiveusanI |
Trying to cancel my LP membership due to their awful pandering to the Right, especially disability benefit cuts but their website seems to not allow me to login currently. That's odd.... |
It's the markets innit!
Feck'em. | |
| |
| All you Labour voters, how's it feel so far. on 07:07 - Mar 18 with 483 views | Swansea_Blue |
| All you Labour voters, how's it feel so far. on 10:30 - Mar 16 by Ryorry |
Talking of un-Labour-like, the biggest reason for alarm bells is this imho - it's so fundamental to everything else & is going under the radar even amongst normally politically aware people, with barely a mention in msm apart from the occasional Guardian article. That is the Labour Party policy of continuing support for Freeports & SEZs, especially in light of the potential for 'mission creep' towards 'Charter City' status.
This is an extremely complex subject, and as I'm not an economist, politician or journalist, let alone expert on it, there may be flaws or gaps in what I've written or linked below. If any of you have further information or corrections to make, they would be appreciated, so please let me know!
It's difficult to obtain a clear picture of the differences between 'Special Economic Zones' aka SEZs (the *comparatively* innocuous entry point; currently 48 of these are operational in England); 'Freeports' (more worrying; currently 12 of these in England, Scotland & Wales); and 'Charter Cities' (very worrying indeed; but none yet in the UK). They were not mentioned in Labour's Manifesto as far as I can see. Rachel Reeves refused permission for the Ntional Audit Office to investigate England's 48 SEZs and (then) 8 Freeports despite a damning report from the HOC Committee in April 2024, citing lack of transparency & questions over value for taxpayers' money.
The reason I oppose them is, in a nutshell, that they seem to me antithetical to so much that Labour has striven for over the years. Their aim is to allow deregulation (for example of workers' rights and environmental protections); tax breaks & reduced tariffs, in order to maximise profits for their privately owned businesses. These private companies in the zones also receive Government subsidies, so that's a double whammy for 'ordinary' taxpayers - we lose their taxes into the Treasury, but they get ours going the other way.
I appreciate they can have some positive benefits (eg. the potential for growth of the 'green economy') & that Labour is trying to rescue the economy via growth, but strongly feel that that end does not justify the means, even with the latest element now of uncertainty over Trade Tariffs. Keir Starmer has said he would introduce greater monitoring/safeguarding to prevent erosion of rights in the zones, but I have not found any statement detailing these.
I urge everyone to read as many of the following linked articles as possible.
1. 30/10/2024 - Budget. Rachel Reeves confirmed that the govt. will continue to support existing Freeports
2. Very lengthy & detailed Govt. 'explainer' link, full of positives, looks as though aimed at attracting businesses to the schemes.
3. Excellent article by Yorkshire bylines giving a more rounded picture
4. A PDF 'primer' on Freeports from BylinesCymru. Obviously focuses on Wales, but very good overall picture of the dangers - read esp from "Network of liberty" onwards.
5. 21/11/2024 SKS announces Labour's intention to partner up with @BlackRock & similar businesses ... BlackRock has been described (by a businessman of a strong right-wing hue!) as "one of the best examples of disaster capitalistic organisations in the world".
6. Guardian article on BlackRock
7. Article on Charter Cities by Richard Murphy, a well-respected academic, author & regular contributor to Google Scholar.
8. Potential negatives - and there are many extremely serious ones. Excellent, thorough research by a Twitter/X blogger who pulls no punches. I understand that those who don't have Twitter/X accounts can only read his first post, not his additional ones (which appear as 'replies') so have copied & pasted a few below - I'm sure he wouldn't mind, as he wants all this shared as widely as possible, one of his complaints is that the paucity of information on freeports/SEZs in MSM.
@EuropeanPowell
Labour partnering up with Blackrock means the UK will be privatised.
"BlackRock own, and extract income from, things – schools, bridges, wind farms, and homes – that are nothing less than foundational to our daily being’. This requires them to ‘relentlessly squeeze’ profits out of their holdings – whether that means hiking rents for vulnerable tenants, or charging for the use of common infrastructure" -
@graceblakeley
Read Grace Blakeley's book Vulture Capitalism, she describes how the erosion of the nation-state is engineered to a point where govts working hand in hand with corporations step in to 'rescue' democracy from its failures.
The framework for the corporate coup lies in 74 Special Economic Zones (SEZs)and 12 Freeports.
Free zones are designated areas with relaxed laws and by extension relaxed enforcement of laws separate from the host country.
Secondary legislation is embedded within the free zones contracts, meaning zero Parliamentary and public scrutiny.
All free zones give numerous tax breaks to corporations for 10 years, when the deadline for the tax breaks expires, companies are already lobbying the Govt to extend them. Free zone licenses are set at 25 years, Blackrock will asset strip councils and absorb all public services, corporate governance will replace social governance, collective sovereignty (people power) will be replaced with corporate sovereignty (asset classes power).
Now the figures.
Each SEZ receives £160 million in State aid which is public money, multiplied by 74 = £11 billion 840 million
Each Freeport receive £25 million multiplied by 12 = £300 million
Teesside Freeport and SEZ has already spent £560 million of taxpayers money, see @PrivateEyeNews
Teesside was Sunak's flagship Brexit Freeports, profit share is split 90/10 in favour of the private sector.
The UK public are paying billions in subsidies to some of the wealthiest and most corrupt corporations on the planet. Your money is being invested in your regions demise and your families transformation into serfs.
UK free zones contravene EU laws and regulations on State aid where govts of member states are prohibited from using State aid to make profits, this disrupts the integrity of the Single Market by creating an unlevel playing field.
UK SEZs sabotage the UK's chances of rejoining the EU not just because of bypassing rules on State aid but also because of massive deregulatory 'freedoms' that allow companies to pollute the environment, 'self regulate', shred employment rights, tax evasion, turbocharge job displacement, and so on. None of this is acceptable to the EU.
Keir Starmer "There will be no rejoining the EU in my lifetime". Now you know why he says this.
Read the EU Commission website on State aid and SEZs
https://europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2020/646164/EPRS_BRI(2020)646164_
Lord Smith of Kelvin is managing Director of Otter Ports Ltd which is the parent company of 8 of the UK's 12 Freeports, Otter Ports Ltd is registered in the Cayman Islands, Smith did not declare this in the register of interests, Smith was a pallbearer at the Queen's funeral.
Compulsory Purchase Orders apply to business, agricultural, and residential properties, it is no coincidence that 192 councils have worse debts than Birmingham which was issued with an S114 notice which is technically bankruptcy. 6,000 people could have their homes torn down as part of a £2.2bn project in which 1,266 council houses and 567 properties could be repossessed in a mass compulsory purchase order for the area. Birmingham is host to 6 SEZs. https://theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/jul/22/economic-violence-ladywood-b
All 12 UK Freeports are housed inside a Special Economic Zone that ranges from 33 to 75km in diameter, why? SEZs are expansionist by nature, the growth Reeves obsesses with is about corporations, private equity making serious incursions into the public sector, that is privatisation not just of public services but of the entire country, SEZs perforate holes in the fabric of the nation, as zone fever takes hold, economies outside the zones will be forced to capitulate to the corporate political model.
6 days into office Rachel Reeves refused permission for the National Audit Office to investigate England's 48 SEZ's and 8 Freeports despite a damning report from the House of Commons Committee in April 2024, citing lack of transparency, questions over value for taxpayers money, and ignoring of the Nolan principles.
Join the dots.
This all happened because of Brexit, which was based on 'exit strategies' developed in the 1960's, what were once libertarian fringe fantasies have now become reality."
9. Lastly, In the interests of balance, a more measured article written 11 months ago when the Tories were still in power, urging people not to panic & to resist the kind of rhetoric in no. 8. above. It's written by Chris Grey, Emeritus Prof. of Organisation Studies at Royal Holloway & ex-Prof at Cambridge Uni. It's very long, so a small extract in summary: "But, even if the Government’s communication was perfect, it would not be able to disguise the genuine and serious criticisms of its SEZs which exist: their questionable economic value, their questionable value for money, their capacity to lead to corruption and criminality, their lack of transparency and accountability, and their capacity to dilute or over-ride local planning controls.".
Links:-
1. https://www.irwinmitchell.com/news-and-insights/expert-comment/post/102jn1n/budg
2. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/investment-zones-in-england
3. https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/news/home-affairs/special-economic-zones-in-the-u
4. https://bylines.cymru/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Gazette-Freeports.pdf
5.
6. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/nov/20/blackrock-climate-human-righ
7. https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2025/01/28/charter-cities-would-destroy-the-
8.
9. https://bylinetimes.com/2024/04/04/freeports-special-economic-zones-explained/ |
Fantastic summary there Ryorry. Sorry for not replying until now, but there was a lot to take in! I’m amazed this isn’t causing outrage. If these zones function as intended it’s pure financial rape and pillage. The worst of capitalisms excesses on steroids. Yes, there are ‘benefits’ in terms of jobs, but at what cost? | |
| |
| All you Labour voters, how's it feel so far. on 11:18 - Mar 18 with 364 views | Ryorry |
Great link to the Parliamentary committee evidence, very useful, thanks 👍 |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
