Autumn statement

[Ldr]

Billy this is your area more than anyone’s, what’s your thoughts?

[Glyn_Wigley]

It seems to be generally fairly sensible macroeconomics given the starting position. You can quibble round the edges about where extra revenue is raised and/or spending cuts made but the central thrust of it makes sense. How long it takes to make a difference can be argued about though. It's just a shame that a lot of Truss's lunacy made it necessary.

[Ldr]

Lunacy isn’t strong enough to describe it

[normal rules]

Electric cars to be taxed from 2025.that’s should help boost sales. Not.
Interestingly enough they reckon by 2030, it is expected that there will be 6.4 million battery electric cars on UK roads. This will account for just 19% of the UK's national car fleet.
Sticking with my cheap petrol runaround for now.

[Not Now Kato]

I can't see anything in it that will promote the growth that this country desperately needs, sadly.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Electric cars to be taxed from 2025.that’s should help boost sales. Not.
Interestingly enough they reckon by 2030, it is expected that there will be 6.4 million battery electric cars on UK roads. This will account for just 19% of the UK's national car fleet.
Sticking with my cheap petrol runaround for now.

If you're spending that much on a new car that bit is negligible.  The real daft thing is it's now cheaper in my plug in hybrid to run it on petrol than electric. Not so great for the environment though.  Until that changes I wouldn't now buy one.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Billy this is your area more than anyone’s, what’s your thoughts?

Been busy so haven't had a chance to look yet.

These reactions make me hopeful though.

https://mobile.twitter.com/DominicPenna/status/1593238413029040133

If those three hate it, can't be that bad.

[tommy toes]

Hunt blamed Covid, Putin, Global downturn and any other extraneous thing he could think of for the sh*tshow of the last 12 years of this lot. Not to mention Brexit.
Not our fault guv.

He even praised Osborne, Truss and Kwarteng. F**k me!

He's hammered working people again. Income Tax, Council Tax, Mortgage payments, Fuel bills, Inflation. How people are going to manage I don't know.
Guaranteed the triple lock though, can't upset the Tory party's main supporters

[ravenrover]

Tory MP  interviewed this morning put all the blame on BofE for increases in mortages and inflation not challenged at all as to whether correcting the consequences of the lunacy of Kami and Trussed was anything to do with it

[Glyn_Wigley]

Tory MP  interviewed this morning put all the blame on BofE for increases in mortages and inflation not challenged at all as to whether correcting the consequences of the lunacy of Kami and Trussed was anything to do with it

Yes, the BofE put interest rates up but that was to counter the trashing of Sterling that Truss was responsible for. And along with that, the BofE having to spend billions of pounds propping the pound up with no return, just to stand still. At least when Brown sold gold cheaply it brought money into the BofE.

[tyke1962]

My instinct when judging the merits of budgets or statements such as these is to take a good look at the opposition benches .

Labour were muted and there was a distinct lack of real anger .

Reeves with that in mind decided to attack the Tories for why this statement was necessary instead of actually attacking them on the content of the statement .

Clearly there weren't enough attack lines to go at and give or take Labour may well have rolled out exactly the same statement if they were in government .

Having thought since Truss and Kwarteng's  car crash spell the next GE was a shoe in for Labour I'm today not totally convinced .

If the Tories get on top of the migrant crisis on the South coast which will be a key part of who enters number 10 and with inflation coming down next year they may yet creep over the line with a massively reduced majority .

[wilts rover]

One point you might like to consider when judging if it was a good (or bad) budget that Hunt annouched (but didn't read out funnily enough) is that whilst he has raised taxes for the public and many business, he has CUT those for banks - the bank surcharge tax from 8% to 3% - which is projected to benefit banks & bankers to the tune of around £1billion.

https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1593235146194694144

https://twitter.com/owainpj/status/1593283001944768512

[BillyStubbsTears]

It feels like a very political Budget from a party that accepts it has zero chance in 2024 and is setting problems for Labour. And I don't say any of those lightly, because I really want to think that any Chancellor would pitch a Budget that was aimed at the long term good of the country first and foremost.

But I simply can't see how this one is.

Two points.

1) The OBR is predicting that inflation is going to plummetand be Negative from 2024 to 2026. If that is the case, we really should be doing all we can to support economic growth right here and now, to stop us tipping into deflation.  And if that includes more borrowing and spending now then so be it.

2) Hunt has set a massive trap for Labour. He's pushed the big spending cuts out beyond 2024. And by apparently allowing us to fall into recession and deflation for 2 years, he is going to make the effect of those cuts even more stinging.

The trap for Labour is this: if they DO sign up to those cuts, they are going to be a very unpopular Govt from 24-29. The cuts envisaged by Hunt are eye-watering. Far deeper than Cameron/Osborne Austerity. But if Labour doesn't sign up to the cuts, there's a danger of the bond markets taking fright and interest rates running away under Labour.

The way to avoid that would be to do everything in our power to prevent the dive into recession and deflation that the OBR says is coming. Get the economy growing and the cuts wouldn't need to be anywhere near as big. But that's exactly what Hunt has chosen not to do. It feels like a choice of a scorched earth policy to undermine the incoming Labour Govt and set the Tories up for a ressurection in 2029.

[ncRover]

It feels like a very political Budget from a party that accepts it has zero chance in 2024 and is setting problems for Labour. And I don't say any of those lightly, because I really want to think that any Chancellor would pitch a Budget that was aimed at the long term good of the country first and foremost.

But I simply can't see how this one is.

Two points.

1) The OBR is predicting that inflation is going to plummetand be Negative from 2024 to 2026. If that is the case, we really should be doing all we can to support economic growth right here and now, to stop us tipping into deflation.  And if that includes more borrowing and spending now then so be it.

2) Hunt has set a massive trap for Labour. He's pushed the big spending cuts out beyond 2024. And by apparently allowing us to fall into recession and deflation for 2 years, he is going to make the effect of those cuts even more stinging.

The trap for Labour is this: if they DO sign up to those cuts, they are going to be a very unpopular Govt from 24-29. The cuts envisaged by Hunt are eye-watering. Far deeper than Cameron/Osborne Austerity. But if Labour doesn't sign up to the cuts, there's a danger of the bond markets taking fright and interest rates running away under Labour.

The way to avoid that would be to do everything in our power to prevent the dive into recession and deflation that the OBR says is coming. Get the economy growing and the cuts wouldn't need to be anywhere near as big. But that's exactly what Hunt has chosen not to do. It feels like a choice of a scorched earth policy to undermine the incoming Labour Govt and set the Tories up for a ressurection in 2029.

I would hope that Hunt has the economic prosperity of this country at the front of his mind instead of political scheming…

What would the Labour solution to “get the economy growing” be?

[tommy toes]

It feels like a very political Budget from a party that accepts it has zero chance in 2024 and is setting problems for Labour. And I don't say any of those lightly, because I really want to think that any Chancellor would pitch a Budget that was aimed at the long term good of the country first and foremost.

But I simply can't see how this one is.

Two points.

1) The OBR is predicting that inflation is going to plummetand be Negative from 2024 to 2026. If that is the case, we really should be doing all we can to support economic growth right here and now, to stop us tipping into deflation.  And if that includes more borrowing and spending now then so be it.

2) Hunt has set a massive trap for Labour. He's pushed the big spending cuts out beyond 2024. And by apparently allowing us to fall into recession and deflation for 2 years, he is going to make the effect of those cuts even more stinging.

The trap for Labour is this: if they DO sign up to those cuts, they are going to be a very unpopular Govt from 24-29. The cuts envisaged by Hunt are eye-watering. Far deeper than Cameron/Osborne Austerity. But if Labour doesn't sign up to the cuts, there's a danger of the bond markets taking fright and interest rates running away under Labour.

The way to avoid that would be to do everything in our power to prevent the dive into recession and deflation that the OBR says is coming. Get the economy growing and the cuts wouldn't need to be anywhere near as big. But that's exactly what Hunt has chosen not to do. It feels like a choice of a scorched earth policy to undermine the incoming Labour Govt and set the Tories up for a ressurection in 2029.

I would hope that Hunt has the economic prosperity of this country at the front of his mind instead of political scheming…

What would the Labour solution to “get the economy growing” be?

BST
I think if Hunt and Sunak were planning to lose the next election, they'd have ditched the triple lock to make sure of it

ncrover.
Labours plans for the economy are widely available on news and politics sites if you can be bothered to look for them.

[ncRover]

It feels like a very political Budget from a party that accepts it has zero chance in 2024 and is setting problems for Labour. And I don't say any of those lightly, because I really want to think that any Chancellor would pitch a Budget that was aimed at the long term good of the country first and foremost.

But I simply can't see how this one is.

Two points.

1) The OBR is predicting that inflation is going to plummetand be Negative from 2024 to 2026. If that is the case, we really should be doing all we can to support economic growth right here and now, to stop us tipping into deflation.  And if that includes more borrowing and spending now then so be it.

2) Hunt has set a massive trap for Labour. He's pushed the big spending cuts out beyond 2024. And by apparently allowing us to fall into recession and deflation for 2 years, he is going to make the effect of those cuts even more stinging.

The trap for Labour is this: if they DO sign up to those cuts, they are going to be a very unpopular Govt from 24-29. The cuts envisaged by Hunt are eye-watering. Far deeper than Cameron/Osborne Austerity. But if Labour doesn't sign up to the cuts, there's a danger of the bond markets taking fright and interest rates running away under Labour.

The way to avoid that would be to do everything in our power to prevent the dive into recession and deflation that the OBR says is coming. Get the economy growing and the cuts wouldn't need to be anywhere near as big. But that's exactly what Hunt has chosen not to do. It feels like a choice of a scorched earth policy to undermine the incoming Labour Govt and set the Tories up for a ressurection in 2029.

I would hope that Hunt has the economic prosperity of this country at the front of his mind instead of political scheming…

What would the Labour solution to “get the economy growing” be?

BST
I think if Hunt and Sunak were planning to lose the next election, they'd have ditched the triple lock to make sure of it

ncrover.
Labours plans for the economy are widely available on news and politics sites if you can be bothered to look for them.

To give this country the fresh start it needs, we need a new approach. The next Labour government will: 

1.      Create good, green jobs and new high-tech green industries across the UK via our climate investment pledge.

2.      Scrap business rates and replace them with a system that will incentivise investment and level the playing field between high street businesses and global giants.

3.      Create a new Industrial Strategy Council to embed long-termism into our economic strategy and form a new partnership with business.

4.     Buy, make and sell more in Britain to strengthen the foundations of our economy and strengthen supply chains. Our plan will create jobs and growth in all parts of the country and help to secure Britain’s economy against future shocks.

5.     Introduce a new deal for working people boosting jobs security and securing fair pay.


All quite vague and doesn’t answer or ease any of my worries by being an exciting alternative, that’s all. No need for the attitude.

[tommy toes]

No bad attitude intended. I apologise if it seemed so.
It just appeared from your post that you weren't aware what Labours plans were.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Imagine paying to read this every day.

https://mobile.twitter.com/tweetcmw/status/1593379574687186947

[BillyStubbsTears]

It feels like a very political Budget from a party that accepts it has zero chance in 2024 and is setting problems for Labour. And I don't say any of those lightly, because I really want to think that any Chancellor would pitch a Budget that was aimed at the long term good of the country first and foremost.

But I simply can't see how this one is.

Two points.

1) The OBR is predicting that inflation is going to plummetand be Negative from 2024 to 2026. If that is the case, we really should be doing all we can to support economic growth right here and now, to stop us tipping into deflation.  And if that includes more borrowing and spending now then so be it.

2) Hunt has set a massive trap for Labour. He's pushed the big spending cuts out beyond 2024. And by apparently allowing us to fall into recession and deflation for 2 years, he is going to make the effect of those cuts even more stinging.

The trap for Labour is this: if they DO sign up to those cuts, they are going to be a very unpopular Govt from 24-29. The cuts envisaged by Hunt are eye-watering. Far deeper than Cameron/Osborne Austerity. But if Labour doesn't sign up to the cuts, there's a danger of the bond markets taking fright and interest rates running away under Labour.

The way to avoid that would be to do everything in our power to prevent the dive into recession and deflation that the OBR says is coming. Get the economy growing and the cuts wouldn't need to be anywhere near as big. But that's exactly what Hunt has chosen not to do. It feels like a choice of a scorched earth policy to undermine the incoming Labour Govt and set the Tories up for a ressurection in 2029.

I would hope that Hunt has the economic prosperity of this country at the front of his mind instead of political scheming…

What would the Labour solution to “get the economy growing” be?

BST
I think if Hunt and Sunak were planning to lose the next election, they'd have ditched the triple lock to make sure of it

ncrover.
Labours plans for the economy are widely available on news and politics sites if you can be bothered to look for them.

I'm not saying they deliberately want to lose the next election. I'm saying they have given up on winning it.

But if they want to win in 2029, they cannot afford to alienate pensioners. It's the only demographic that will predominantly vote Tory at the moment. Lose them now and they have little chance in 29.

The loyalty of pensioners to the Tories is quite something.

In the latest YouGov poll, these are the percentages of each age group supporting the Tories.

18-24 - 14
25-49 - 13
50-65 - 26
65+ - 47!

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

26 month to the election. It's a long long way away.  Sunak and hunt are clearly a more responsible pairing and they are right that a big driver of the economy is outside UK control in the wider world.

This statement could have been much worse for us all.

[BillyStubbsTears]

BFYP

How long can you keep making excuses for the Tories?

Yes there are external problems. But why are they hitting us harder than any other G7 nation?

By 2024, we'll have disposable incomes no higher than they were when the Tories came to power. A lost decade and a half.

At some point, even a supporter of their policies, like you have been for most of this period, surely has to ask themselves if the Tories have been wrong all along?

[Glyn_Wigley]

Yes, a lot of the pressures have been external but their reactions to those pressures have been their own.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

BFYP

How long can you keep making excuses for the Tories?

Yes there are external problems. But why are they hitting us harder than any other G7 nation?

By 2024, we'll have disposable incomes no higher than they were when the Tories came to power. A lost decade and a half.

At some point, even a supporter of their policies, like you have been for most of this period, surely has to ask themselves if the Tories have been wrong all along?

It's obvious that not everything done is the right course of action, eg I believe the policies on immigration are wrongly targeted and too tight - have you tried recruiting a mid level role recently?  It's very difficult, I want to add 3 roles to my team currently and really struggling to get good candidates.  We appear to have lost a lot of the 50-65 generation from the jobs market aswell, I've had no applicants above 45, there used to be loads.  Those in that bracket that I know have taken much lesser jobs post Covid as they don't need the money ironically (appreciate my area is very different to others).

Worth noting a lot of the current position isn't unique to us, Germany expects a bigger recession for example.  But we need a high quality economy, we will never compete with the far east on manufacturing for example unless we enacted some laws to force payment at the same rates to employees out in the supply chain and that will never happen (though I believe it should morally).

[Filo]

Truss and Kwarteng of the Conservative Party crash the economy and get their redundancy pay, the public have to pay for it, wouldn’t be bad if the public actually voted for them!

[Colemans Left Hook]

It feels like a very political Budget from a party that accepts it has zero chance in 2024 and is setting problems for Labour. And I don't say any of those lightly, because I really want to think that any Chancellor would pitch a Budget that was aimed at the long term good of the country first and foremost.

But I simply can't see how this one is.

Two points.

1) The OBR is predicting that inflation is going to plummetand be Negative from 2024 to 2026. If that is the case, we really should be doing all we can to support economic growth right here and now, to stop us tipping into deflation.  And if that includes more borrowing and spending now then so be it.

2) Hunt has set a massive trap for Labour. He's pushed the big spending cuts out beyond 2024. And by apparently allowing us to fall into recession and deflation for 2 years, he is going to make the effect of those cuts even more stinging.

The trap for Labour is this: if they DO sign up to those cuts, they are going to be a very unpopular Govt from 24-29. The cuts envisaged by Hunt are eye-watering. Far deeper than Cameron/Osborne Austerity. But if Labour doesn't sign up to the cuts, there's a danger of the bond markets taking fright and interest rates running away under Labour.

The way to avoid that would be to do everything in our power to prevent the dive into recession and deflation that the OBR says is coming. Get the economy growing and the cuts wouldn't need to be anywhere near as big. But that's exactly what Hunt has chosen not to do. It feels like a choice of a scorched earth policy to undermine the incoming Labour Govt and set the Tories up for a ressurection in 2029.

I would hope that Hunt has the economic prosperity of this country at the front of his mind instead of political scheming…

What would the Labour solution to “get the economy growing” be?

BST
I think if Hunt and Sunak were planning to lose the next election, they'd have ditched the triple lock to make sure of it

ncrover.
Labours plans for the economy are widely available on news and politics sites if you can be bothered to look for them.

I'm not saying they deliberately want to lose the next election. I'm saying they have given up on winning it.

But if they want to win in 2029, they cannot afford to alienate pensioners. It's the only demographic that will predominantly vote Tory at the moment. Lose them now and they have little chance in 29.

The loyalty of pensioners to the Tories is quite something.

In the latest YouGov poll, these are the percentages of each age group supporting the Tories.

18-24 - 14
25-49 - 13
50-65 - 26
65+ - 47!

lest we forget

https://burialsandbeyond.com/2020/03/30/crisis-what-crisis-the-gravediggers-strike-of-1979/


Crisis, What Crisis? The Gravediggers’ Strike of 1979
March 30, 2020 ~ Kate Cherrell   

The winter of 1979 was the coldest for 16 years and broke records for both cold temperatures and snowfall. From January 12th-14th, a winter storm left the UK blanketed in an estimated 18.4 inches of snow.

It was also the Winter of Discontent, when industrial action (or inaction?) brought the UK to a standstill.

Over several months, there raged a devastating series of strikes that changed the face of British politics forever. After the labour government implemented pay caps in an ongoing dispute with the Trade Unions, professions as far removed as nurses to waste collectors all went on strike, withholding their services in lieu of a wage increase. Eventually, the year lost 29,474,000 working days to stoppages.

The strikes began at Ford motors, as workers demanded a 30% increase, following a very successful year that saw the managing director receiving a pay increase of 80% and millions of pounds worth of profits for shareholders. After Ford workers were offered a 5% increase, as opposed to their requested 30%, strike action was arranged and a mass walkout began.


This had a snowball effect, with trade unions across the country implementing strike action, threatening to return the UK to a 3 day week. Soon enough, blockades and new committees were implemented, controlling the lorries that entered certain towns and cities.

This posed a problem for industries such as pharmaceuticals and farmers, who required large amounts of animal feed. The latter saw farmers picketing union buildings, flanking the building with rows of animal carcasses. The strike action of waste collectors in the capital saw rubbish piled five feet high, the likes of which had never been seen before. Strikes over wages became pickets, pickets became blockades and the series of events brought the nation to a standstill.


James Callaghan, the serving prime minister at the time, was widely criticised for his handling of the situation, especially in the midst of the lorry drivers strike. After returning from a summit in Guadeloupe, he held a press conference at the airport, dismissing suggestions that the UK was in chaos and made jocular remarks about his experiences of swimming in the Caribbean. The labour governments treatment of the Winter’s problems (and decision not to hold a general election in 1978) would ultimately prove deadly for the party. Images from the strike action, especially that of mounting rubbish piles would prove to be integral in the conservative party’s election campaign, joined with their damning phrase ‘Labour isn’t Working’. The conservative government, led by Margaret Thatcher, took office at the next election.


When Liverpool’s gravediggers went on strike in January 1979, they became the tabloid’s sacrificial lamb for the country’s problems.

Having never been on strike before, 56 gravediggers and crematorium workers (members of the GMWU in Liverpool and in Tameside near Manchester) withheld their labour, stating that their profession was unappreciated, demanding pay rises and changes to their awful working conditions. It remains undoubted that the conditions in which these gravediggers were working were unsafe, unsanitary and sub-par for any manual worker.

A Liverpool gravedigger speaking at the time said:

‘When you dig a new grave, you are covered in mud and slime. I have lost count of the times when the earth around me has caved in while I’ve been digging. Just when you think you’ve finished, you find yourself up to your neck again in mud. Every day of your life, you run the risk of being trapped and smothered.’

(The Winter of Discontent: Myth, Memory, and History – Tara Martin López)


Running headlines such as ‘Now They Won’t Let Us Bury Our Dead!’, the gravediggers’ strike was demonised and received far greater backlash than any other industrial action.

Forty years later, many of those who lived through the strike are unwilling to talk about it. Union activist and GMB convenor at the time, Ian Lowes, still defends the gravediggers’ actions, but shudders at the memory of the time.

“It was ‘enough is enough’ by low-paid workers who were treated like dogs.” But he promises: “Never again.” (The Mirror, 2019)

Prior to the gravediggers’ strike, Ford workers had settled on a 17% pay rise and tanker drivers received a 20% increase. However, further picketing to increase the national minimum wage to a £60-a-week-minimum heightened the gravediggers’ discomfort as it was practically double their weekly earnings.

Today, if a strike is to be held, a union is obliged to run a secret ballot beforehand. Before this, unions implemented decisions on a majority show of hands. In Liverpool Council’s Parks and Gardens Department, gravediggers and crematorium workers of Allerton Cemetery and Springwood Crematorium were called out on a show of hands and simply walked out of their jobs.


In a retrospective Mirror article, they recall that, ‘Leaders of the Liberal-run city council begged the men to go back, the chief executive anticipating media malice with a plea, “Even in war they stop to bury the dead”.

Upon hearing the news of the strike, a GMB official visited Liverpool and demanded that the workers return to their posts. Predictably, he was not met with warmth.

With no one to bury or cremate the dead, bodies were piling up. To ease the strain on funeral homes, Liverpool City Council hired a factory in Speke to store corpses until they could be safely buried. On average, 25 bodies were added to the backlog, with the Department of Environment noting that on one day, there were upwards of 150 bodies stored at the Speke warehouse. Such arrangements led to inflammatory words in the Commons, with Tory MP Anthony Steen[1]calling the setup:

‘Repugnant, an outrage to human decency… This strike offends against the dignity of man and is a horrifying example of man’s indifference and inhumanity to the dead.’

Similarly, a vicar speaking in 1979 said in his sermon:

‘When gravediggers will allow corpses to mount up rather than carry out their duty, I detect the underm­ining of the whole structure of our society.’


It leads one to think; if gravediggers and crematorium workers are regarded to be unbelievably important; the gatekeepers of morality and the custodians of our nearest and dearest, then why on earth did we (and continue to) regard them so poorly?

For £35 a week, Liverpool’s gravediggers had worked in all weathers without protective clothing and were forbidden from entering the canteen on their break. Instead, tea was brought to them on a dump truck and they ate around an open hole.

Gravediggers have long been defined by their profession in the publics’ eye, tasked with assisting the grief-stricken, but dismissed in the process.

Former gravedigger Dan Flew, states that these national views have not yet resolved.

‘At the time I was a grave digger, it was a kind of 50/50. The richest of people looked down on us and could be extremely rude while the more working class treated us like humans.We were seen by the council as the people who would do the work that others wouldn’t, but also a job for idiots.’


The Civil Contingencies unit had to look for new options and the press were watching. On 1st February, a journalist persistently asked Dr Duncan Bolton, Liverpool’s Medical Officer for Health, what would be done should the strike continue indefinitely. In a fluster, Bolton stated that burial at sea could be an option (due to his days in the Navy) and it soon was plastered across front pages. While sea burials were never implemented, it was one of many avenues considered. Other options were deploying the army, private contractors and allowing the bereaved to dig their own family’s graves.

In the warehouse at Speke, bodies were sealed in bags that kept the deceased preserved for up to six weeks. As the strike did not last anywhere near as long, the issues arising around the storage of the dead were clearly matters of aesthetics and personal frustrations, rather than a national emergency or sanitary concern.

The retrospective Mirror article claims that some cremations (for those whose bodies could not be embalmed) were held after hours at Springwood Crematorium, conducted by unpaid volunteers.
Firemen-TUC-WofD
Image: (via Libcom.org)

Unfortunately, the striking gravediggers did not only have to contend with the press, but aggression from their own communities. There was verbal abuse, physical attacks and threatening letters all thrown the way of the working men. One individual was attacked in a pub and taken to A&E where he was deliberately ignored by staff, despite NHS workers also being in dispute at the time.

After ten days, the workers reconvened and decided to return to work. Of all the industrial action of 1979, their strikes were said to have not so much hit the government, but affected everyday people, which was never their intent.

The gravediggers eventually settled for a 14% pay rise, although the wider damage done lingered for some years afterwards. Images of locked cemeteries joined pictures of mountains of rubbish in the Tories political campaign and Thatcher swung into power on an anti-union wave.
Labour Isn't Working
Conservative Party Poster. Image (Chris Ware/Getty)

Many unions blamed the gravediggers’ action for the resulting Conservative laws that forbade their previous methods of striking, for which they may be correct. Death and treatment of the deceased will forever invoke strong views, yet why must cemetery workers be dismissed when they too are necessary in the running of a supposed civilised society.

Today, 18 workers tend the six cemeteries in Liverpool and there have been no strikes since. They can also finally enjoy their tea in the warmth of the canteen.

 “This was all about a group of low-paid people fighting to try to get a better deal. They had a right to withdraw their labour but, when they did, the consequences were terrible.” (Ian Lowes, 2019)

 

*

 

Where Next?

Want to read more about the Winter of Discontent?

Wikipedia –  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_Discontent

Print – ‘The Winter of Discontent: Myth, Memory, and History’ Tara Martin López (Studies in Labour History) Liverpool University Press, 31st July 2014.

 

References/Sources:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/gravediggers-strike-helped-put-final-13972135

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/dec/30/liverpool-gravedigger-strikes

YouTube – Secret History: Winter of Discontent Documentary 1998. Channel 4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYWsUXQrLYw&t=274s

 

[1]  The MP later found fame for claiming £87,250 expenses for his country home in Devon, where he moved after losing his Scouse seat. (source: Mirror)

 

[normal rules]

A bit more detail to the EV taxation that is coming:

The Autumn Statement doesn’t just ensure that electric car buyers will have to pay vehicle excise duty from 2025.
Owners of electric models costing more than £40,000 will also have to pay the “expensive car supplement” as well.
This is charged for five years, starting a year after the car is first registered. The current rate is £355.
Alongside the standard rate of VED (£165), that would leave owners paying £520 a year!!!!!!!
There’s 2 and a half grand on top of your ev price. Yes, you can buy many ev’s for under 40 k. But the basic Vw id3 comes in at around 35grand currently. Add extras and inflation by 2025 and I can’t see much change out of 40k for an average family car.

[tyke1962]

26 month to the election. It's a long long way away.  Sunak and hunt are clearly a more responsible pairing and they are right that a big driver of the economy is outside UK control in the wider world.

This statement could have been much worse for us all.

Totally agree with that bfyp .

[ncRover]

No bad attitude intended. I apologise if it seemed so.
It just appeared from your post that you weren't aware what Labours plans were.

No worries Tommy, sorry for being reactive. Hard times ahead. I did like the concept of Truss’ economic policy, but I guess it was at the wrong time. I’m now left feeling that we’ll just have to push through it and hope for more stable times ahead.

[BillyStubbsTears]

The problem with Truss's economic ideas wasn't that they were the right ideas at the wrong time.

They were absolute batshit at any time. The far right had an obsessive belief that if you cut the taxes of the wealthy, they work twice as hard and we all get richer. Trouble is there is precisely zero evidence that is true.

What Truss and Kwarteng did was to ash taxes for the wealthy and borrow an astronomical amount to do so. The markets said they didn't believe that the policy would grow the economy, which means tax intake would stagnate, which means Trussonomics meant permanently borrowing to subsidise the richest few percent in society.

The bond markets said "Fine if you want to borrow to do that, but we'll double your interest rate be ause we think you'll bankrupt the country and this is our risk premium."

It was the economics of the madhouse. The one positive thing to come out if it is that the IEA and Adam Smith Institute who pushed for it  should hopefully never get close to No10 again.

[tyke1962]

The problem with Truss's economic ideas wasn't that they were the right ideas at the wrong time.

They were absolute batshit at any time. The far right had an obsessive belief that if you cut the taxes of the wealthy, they work twice as hard and we all get richer. Trouble is there is precisely zero evidence that is true.

What Truss and Kwarteng did was to ash taxes for the wealthy and borrow an astronomical amount to do so. The markets said they didn't believe that the policy would grow the economy, which means tax intake would stagnate, which means Trussonomics meant permanently borrowing to subsidise the richest few percent in society.

The bond markets said "Fine if you want to borrow to do that, but we'll double your interest rate be ause we think you'll bankrupt the country and this is our risk premium."

It was the economics of the madhouse. The one positive thing to come out if it is that the IEA and Adam Smith Institute who pushed for it  should hopefully never get close to No10 again.

Here here Billy , thank god the opposition know who they can trust .

https://news.stv.tv/politics/labour-leader-sir-keir-starmer-has-kissed-a-tory-and-is-not-ashamed-to-admit-it