Jump to content

Recommended Posts

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


>

> Unfort for Labour this is the age-old problem with

> much of the left....they have 'good' and 'right'

> on their side, so they are never wrong, its the

> voters who are wrong...over and over again

> apparently.....

>

>

> To be fair thought the statement from the Labour

> party this morning did seem to acknowledge they

> need to change. I wont hold my breath though.


Labour?s in probably the worst trouble it?s ever known. I?d caution that Twitter is not real life, and all those ?haters? that Quids seems to think make up the entirety of left-wingers in this country are more likely just the ones that shout loudest from the safety of their keyboard. A lot of more sensible people, I suspect, can see it for what it is.


And that?s, as has been stated repeatedly up-thread, a colossal inability of the ?left? to realise that principles without power mean nothing in politics. They still don?t understand why Corbyn was reviled in the Red Wall, and until they get that - and the fact that screaming at each other like a bunch of irate sixth formers does not a coherent strategy make - they?ll be doomed to the wilderness.


I voted for Khan partly for personal reasons that I?m not going into on here, but also because I don?t think Bailey is up to the job. Binface got second preference (because I want Fox to get less votes than a man with a bin on his head) but everything else was Green. Labour need to get their head together or this?ll be a one-party state.

j.a. Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > If you want an answer to why the Labour Party

> > keeps losing just google ?Hartlepool? and ?

> thick?

> > this morning. Doomed if so many of its vocal

> and

> > activist supporters hate this country and the

> > people they claim to represent.

>

>

> You do realise that pretty much everyone on this

> thread has already agreed with that?

>

> Seems like you came on here purely to

> virtue-signal your own opinions. If people were

> posting derogatory comments about Hartlepool

> voters than I could understand you, but as it is

> your basically being a pound shop Nadine

> Dorries...and she?s already pretty pound shop...



Bizarre, but I'll ignore your lack of civility as I'm really not interested in having and argument I'm not looking for with someone I don't know on the internet. Have a good day.

Seabag Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This put a smile on my face

>

> And the town is no stranger to political upset, in

> 2002 the main political parties were all fighting

> to become Hartlepool's first elected mayor.

>

> Instead, the town chose local football mascot

> H'angus the Monkey



And then the person in the costume was re-elected twice before the post got abolished - that dismayed me - democracy dying. Why do they not want serious local democracy ?


(And I mean that if they had a proper mayor the post wouldn't be abolished)

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> j.a. Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > ???? Wrote:

> >

> Bizarre, but I'll ignore your lack of civility as

> I'm really not interested in having and argument

> I'm not looking for with someone I don't know on

> the internet. Have a good day.



So much cognitive dissonance...so much...

fishbiscuits Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hartlepool is proper Brexity though, isn't it.

> Surely this is a big part of it. Boris Johnson's

> neo-nationalism and promises to "level up" the

> North are sure vote winners in places like that

> (not sure how many of you have been to Hartlepool,

> but Hartlepool is in desperate need of a bit of

> levelling... one way or the other)


That and it has also been selected for one of the Freeport licences. Boris is still in ascendancy because he is only two years in. When the pandemic is over, and the party tries to claw back the debt, and when many of those red walls areas see nothing changes for them, the pendulum will swing back as it always does.


Having said that, I don't see Starmer as the person to pull them back. He is just too lacking in personality and dynamism. I can see Labour lose the next GE and then, depending on who takes over, rebuilding from there.

I am pretty much with j.a. here. Labour has to find a way to reconnect to the red wall, because it has no way to power without it. Failure to understand why Corbyn was so hated is a real issue. There are many party members who still blame the media, the right wing of the PLP and just about anyone but Corbyn himself. These are people who want a socialist revolution irregardless of what the electorate want. Under Corbyn's leadership, the party was more focused on internal reform than winning elections. That damage will take time to repair but here is the upside. The Tories also were struggling with slim majorities, until they found that leader who could break through. Sadly politics really is that fickle. Personality is everything. If Labour are going to defeat the character that is Boris, they need their own character that plays the game better. Then everything can change very quickly. Blair is the obvious example of that.


And to add that the SNP are consolidating, so coalition at the cost of a referendum may well also be their only way back to power (just as an EU referendum was for the Tories to see off the UKIP threat). That in itself has electioneering problems for Labour of course, so will never be talked about until the scenario to form a coalition actually arises.

We have short memories - do we remember how Blair was portrayed on Spitting Image, a school boy in-between Prescott in a boiler suit, and a horsey looking Beckett. Most were still grieving for John Smith.


How much of Blair's ascendency was a very weak Tory government? It helps in establishing your Prime Ministerial credentials. Just a personal insight on the mid 90s


What a really really hate is all these mixed messages on foreign travel. And the selective leaking to some of the dailies. Let's see what the spin is on all of this at 5 when the announcements are made about overseas roadmap.

When Starmer took over it felt like the right move, a safe pair of hands to steady the ship after the disaster of Corbyn, but I've been disappointed by his lack of drive and not having a clear vision. He should be given more time to try and turn things around, but if no improvement then look towards Andy Burnham. He certainly has plenty of drive and passion, so I can see him giving Johnson a contest on that level.

He won a lot of plaudits when he stood up to the Tories over the Tier system, and I can see him naturally appealing to Red Wall voters but not to the extent of alienating the electorate elsewhere...

Perhaps the people of Hartlepool aren't as thick as some portray them to be. If they didn't vote a CONservative in, what chance of getting any investment in their area from the Tories? The Tories have a habit of looking after their own. Mind you, when they fail to keep their promises, then that will be a different kettle of fish.

Gentle reminder. The tories have been in power for 11 years


Blaming labour for leaving some straw man white working class behind only goes so far


If people are disaffected and left behind, why blame a government from over a decade ago?


And what is it that this government is promising and going to deliver? Because I take an interest in these things and I have no idea.

Quite Sephiroth. The disenfranchised have been failed by both parties in recent decades.


It seems to go like this at the moment. Starmer has a pint in a working class pub, and he is patronising the working classes. Boris or Farage do that, and they are standing with the common people. That is the narrative the BBC for example, have been pumping out for some time now. Labour, talking to themselves, too metropolitan, middle class etc. Boris meanwhile, an old Etonian, nothing in common with ordinary people, and not a peep about that.


So while impression matters and sticks, you have to blame the media for creating those impressions and making them stick too. The fact is that the media is owned by people with vested interests in maintaining a Conservative status Quo. Labour, no matter what they do, are always on the back foot as a result.

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Quite Sephiroth. The disenfranchised have been

> failed by both parties in recent decades.

>

> It seems to go like this at the moment. Starmer

> has a pint in a working class pub, and he is

> patronising the working classes. Boris or Farage

> do that, and they are standing with the common

> people. That is the narrative the BBC for example,

> have been pumping out for some time now. Labour,

> talking to themselves, too metropolitan, middle

> class etc. Boris meanwhile, an old Etonian,

> nothing in common with ordinary people, and not a

> peep about that.

>

> So while impression matters and sticks, you have

> to blame the media for creating those impressions

> and making them stick too. The fact is that the

> media is owned by people with vested interests in

> maintaining a Conservative status Quo. Labour, no

> matter what they do, are always on the back foot

> as a result.


Yes these are all impressions. But if most people are being honest Sir Kier, when at the pub or interacting with 'common people', looks about as comfortable as a pig at a BBQ.


For all Boris's many faults, you can't deny he is an electioneering/campaigning machine, and one of the skills of that is appearing comfortable and at ease with having that pint in a working class pub - and still managing to do that even though people know he went to Eton etc.


I think blaming the media is missing the point here. Sir Kier has a reall challenge ahead, as even if he gets a handle on his own party, the 'impression' I have is that Labour will conduct focus groups etc to basically work out what they should say to disenfranchised former labour voters. And, yes, all parties use the same tools, but for whatever reason, many people will still have the impression that Sir Kier is saying it becuase he has been told to say it. Whereas they will believe that Boris is genuine, even if the same mechanics have been used by both parties to get to the key message...frustrating for some...but it's a key skill of all the more electable politicians...think Blair as a great example, and think Theresa May as an awful example. So labour need to find someone that has skill....


While I would agree that I wish competence was a key criteria, the reality is that it is not. And labour would do well to realise this....surely they can dig someone up that has competence AND charisma...

I wouldn't disagree with most of that Cat


But it does feel a bit like we are back in late 19th century Wild West where snake oil salesmen went from town to town and I wonder why that is


for most of 20th century it seems like we avoided obvious charlatans and relied on boring competence (I'm oversimplifying - but as a generalisation) . Why are we back here?

Good question. I agree something has changed int he past 30 odd years.


A couple of wild theories....


- Ever-presence of Mainstream media - So not specifically to do with bias per se (as was referred above), but just that absolutley everything gets reported on and blown out of proportion, as media outlets need far more content than they did last century to compete in an oversaturated media marketplace. I.e. 30 years ago, would we really have seen the same volume of clips of therasa may during the 2017 election to brand her a 'robot'?

- Rise of social media - I've said this plenty of times on here. But the rise of everyone having a platform to express whatever crazy view they want has just accelerated the tribalism and partisanship of modern politics. It has also amplified the importance of 'personality' as there's only so much people can discuss policy before losing interest.

- Culture wars - this will likely be a more controversial point, but if you feel that neither major party is doing much for you. But if you feel one of them (including their outriders) is calling you stupid/rascist/priveliged and sort of looks down on you...and the other is not....then competence probably matters less than emotion.

I suppose the rise in last 20 years of voting as entertainment shows from X factor to apprentice plays a part too


I think people on all sides need to worry less about being called stupid (either explicitly or by allusion) and reflect a little on wether they are choosing wisely.


It is possible for intelligent people to make very very stupid decisions. And it should be ok for other people (be it friend or foe) to call them on it


People in this country find it very easy to call voters in other countries racist or dumb or wrong. Partly because it can often be true, but also the distance allows more objectivity


But it is possible for people in this country to take a wrong turn and over-indulge ?an entertainer? because he provokes or indulges less-than-benign impulses


And I definitely think this country is going down a dark path. Not because it won?t vote labour. But because after 11 years of this govt it?s very angry and not willing to accept who really might be the root of that anger

People are reading into this too much. The left often over-dissects a poor election result, and then makes all sorts of wild assumptions.


It?s simple. Labour is appeasing two camps. Metro socialists and traditional working classes. Metro socialists are over represented at parliamentary level, and a perception (rightly or wrongly) has festered in the mind?s of some of those traditional old industrial communities, that Labour doesn?t represent their opinions anymore.


How do you fix that? Boris comes across as your best mate (even if he?s blindsiding you in every sense). All he is doing, is successfully riding off the back of a perception solely created by the Labour Party. Go back to basics, have policy ideas which reflect the concerns of these communities, put those policies across from charismatic personalities who look and sound like the people they want to represent. Move away from London-centric representation. It isn?t reflecting everyone else?s opinions in the country.


Louisa.

Loutwo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> How do you fix that? Boris comes across as your

> best mate (even if he?s blindsiding you in every

> sense). All he is doing, is successfully riding

> off the back of a perception solely created by the

> Labour Party. Go back to basics, have policy ideas

> which reflect the concerns of these communities,

> put those policies across from charismatic

> personalities who look and sound like the people

> they want to represent. Move away from

> London-centric representation. It isn?t reflecting

> everyone else?s opinions in the country.

>

> Louisa.


You might have added that Boris throws mountains of money at any issue that he thinks will help him eg HS2 ?106Bn), Covid (????Bn), Regional infrastructure (?80Bn), etc etc, Garden Bridge and we may even get a Tunnel to Ireland!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...