Starmergeddon: They Came And Ate Us

[Tichtheid]

The Mail On Sunday has a Delta Poll survey from 30th Dec to 3rd Jan which puts Labour on 30%, Cons on 23% Farrago on 22% (Farrago was an autocorrect but I'll keep it there, my laptop knows its stuff)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_p ... l_election

[_Os_]

https://x.com/YouGov/status/1876633123817214032

16% approval rating to start the year - tough track to bat on even with a stonking majority. Will be interesting to see how they play this out

Starmer started strongly by clamping down hard on the rioters and chucking them in jail, then went back to the normal pissing-in-the-wind we expect from politicians soon after.

They've made quite a lot of hard choices already. Winter fuel payments becoming means tested is something gammons are still banging on about, demanding they receive a benefit they do not need. Stating there does not need to be another national inquiry into rape gangs and they're okay with the one which cost £190m and took 7 years. They don't seem to care if choices aren't liked.

Worth remembering they've only had about 3 months with parliament being open so far: summer recess (31st July to 1st September), conference recess (13th September to 6th October), November recess (7th November to 10th), Christmas recess (20th December to 5th January).

This year we'll see the right switch the narrative from "they're all the same" (they are not) to "Labour are doing a lot of things and we hate it all". It's half a decade out from the next GE. Labour are going to ram through everything they outlined in their first King's speech (40 bills) in the coming year.

[Biffer]

The Mail On Sunday has a Delta Poll survey from 30th Dec to 3rd Jan which puts Labour on 30%, Cons on 23% Farrago on 22% (Farrago was an autocorrect but I'll keep it there, my laptop knows its stuff)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_p ... l_election

If you put the numbers from that poll, and the numbers from the latest Scottish constituency poll* into the electoral calculus model it gives a labour majority of 28, totals below

Tories 134, Labour 339, Lib 71, Reform 26, Green 4, SNP 45, NI 16, other 9



*obviously that's constituency polling for Holyrood, so it might not be the same. But it is constituency, not list.

[Paddington Bear]

The Mail On Sunday has a Delta Poll survey from 30th Dec to 3rd Jan which puts Labour on 30%, Cons on 23% Farrago on 22% (Farrago was an autocorrect but I'll keep it there, my laptop knows its stuff)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_p ... l_election

If you put the numbers from that poll, and the numbers from the latest Scottish constituency poll* into the electoral calculus model it gives a labour majority of 28, totals below

Tories 134, Labour 339, Lib 71, Reform 26, Green 4, SNP 45, NI 16, other 9



*obviously that's constituency polling for Holyrood, so it might not be the same. But it is constituency, not list.

I don’t know how useful electoral calculus is when we go into an election where 4 and often 5 parties will be competitive. Will create some very very bizarre outcomes

[dpedin]

The Mail On Sunday has a Delta Poll survey from 30th Dec to 3rd Jan which puts Labour on 30%, Cons on 23% Farrago on 22% (Farrago was an autocorrect but I'll keep it there, my laptop knows its stuff)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_p ... l_election

If you put the numbers from that poll, and the numbers from the latest Scottish constituency poll* into the electoral calculus model it gives a labour majority of 28, totals below

Tories 134, Labour 339, Lib 71, Reform 26, Green 4, SNP 45, NI 16, other 9



*obviously that's constituency polling for Holyrood, so it might not be the same. But it is constituency, not list.

I don’t know how useful electoral calculus is when we go into an election where 4 and often 5 parties will be competitive. Will create some very very bizarre outcomes

This is all fun but tells us nothing whilst we are 4 years out from a General Election, especially given Labour,, as most other Govs is getting the shitty stuff out of the way in their first year. It's a bit like trying to predict who will win the Premier League in July and then being stunned in January that Nots Forest are 2nd= and 6 points ahead of Man City. A lot of water to flow under the bridge before the next GE, not least 4 years of a shitshow from Trump! Who knows what is going to happen with these brainless feckers in 12 days time. Belt up and get ready for a rocky ride.

[Biffer]

If you put the numbers from that poll, and the numbers from the latest Scottish constituency poll* into the electoral calculus model it gives a labour majority of 28, totals below

Tories 134, Labour 339, Lib 71, Reform 26, Green 4, SNP 45, NI 16, other 9



*obviously that's constituency polling for Holyrood, so it might not be the same. But it is constituency, not list.

I don’t know how useful electoral calculus is when we go into an election where 4 and often 5 parties will be competitive. Will create some very very bizarre outcomes

This is all fun but tells us nothing whilst we are 4 years out from a General Election, especially given Labour,, as most other Govs is getting the shitty stuff out of the way in their first year. It's a bit like trying to predict who will win the Premier League in July and then being stunned in January that Nots Forest are 2nd= and 6 points ahead of Man City. A lot of water to flow under the bridge before the next GE, not least 4 years of a shitshow from Trump! Who knows what is going to happen with these brainless feckers in 12 days time. Belt up and get ready for a rocky ride.

Yeah, I agree. I was just pointing out that the 'disaster for Labour' reporting on the polls doesn't actually stack up to them losing the next GE.

[dpedin]

I don’t know how useful electoral calculus is when we go into an election where 4 and often 5 parties will be competitive. Will create some very very bizarre outcomes

This is all fun but tells us nothing whilst we are 4 years out from a General Election, especially given Labour,, as most other Govs is getting the shitty stuff out of the way in their first year. It's a bit like trying to predict who will win the Premier League in July and then being stunned in January that Nots Forest are 2nd= and 6 points ahead of Man City. A lot of water to flow under the bridge before the next GE, not least 4 years of a shitshow from Trump! Who knows what is going to happen with these brainless feckers in 12 days time. Belt up and get ready for a rocky ride.

Yeah, I agree. I was just pointing out that the 'disaster for Labour' reporting on the polls doesn't actually stack up to them losing the next GE.

Sorry - my misunderstanding - we are saying the same thing then!

[robmatic]

I don’t know how useful electoral calculus is when we go into an election where 4 and often 5 parties will be competitive. Will create some very very bizarre outcomes

This is all fun but tells us nothing whilst we are 4 years out from a General Election, especially given Labour,, as most other Govs is getting the shitty stuff out of the way in their first year. It's a bit like trying to predict who will win the Premier League in July and then being stunned in January that Nots Forest are 2nd= and 6 points ahead of Man City. A lot of water to flow under the bridge before the next GE, not least 4 years of a shitshow from Trump! Who knows what is going to happen with these brainless feckers in 12 days time. Belt up and get ready for a rocky ride.

Yeah, I agree. I was just pointing out that the 'disaster for Labour' reporting on the polls doesn't actually stack up to them losing the next GE.

Just wait until they get rid of the triple lock on pensions.

[_Os_]

Starmer just ate Badenoch alive in PMQs.

1. Badenoch was minister for Women and Equalities, whilst she was in the job it led the Equalities Office an independent department within the Cabinet Office. Both May and Truss had it before they became PM. Mordaunt, Rudd, and Greening are other Tories who have had the job, further back under Labour there's Patricia Hewitt and Harman. Not an underpowered position. Badenoch never mentioned grooming whilst she was a minister. Her defence was she wasn't in the Home Office, but also said she used her position to do anti-trans stuff.

2. There's been multiple local inquiries and a national inquiry. Badenoch wants another national inquiry, as Starmer pointed out that means nothing happens and this is all returned to in the 2030s. Badenoch also claimed the national inquiry didn't refer to Rotherham only "mentioning Rotherham once", the reason for this which she didn't state is that Rotherham had a local inquiry also chaired by Jay and the national inquiry didn't want to duplicate the work of the local inquiry.

3. As Starmer pointed out (and without getting into the parliamentary weeds), Badenoch is attempting to score political points through an amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing Bill for a second national inquiry, if successful this will kill the Children’s Wellbeing Bill and will not result in a second national inquiry. The bill can then only come back after the next King's speech, meaning additional protections for children will be delayed.

4. No defence of Jess Phillips by Badenoch, someone who is being viciously attacked for supposedly not caring about the main issue her entire political career is built on, which is violence against women and girls. She has also endorsed Jenrick's comments about "alien cultures" (is she herself from an alien culture? if not why not? Sunak? Patel? Braverman? Javid?) and mentioned some of those talking points in PMQs, so I guess she's not seeking to represent every British person just some.

Badenoch just isn't a serious person. She was supposed to make the Tories into something serious, that isn't happening. Musk isn't from the UK and has never lived in the UK, his contention was there is a huge coverup of grooming gangs and Starmer should be jailed. In reality there have been local and national inquiries that have lasted years the national inquiry alone costing £190m, and Starmer was literally the guy who led the initial prosecutions over a decade ago. If she knew what she was doing Badenoch wouldn't have followed the lead of Musk, someone who knows very little about the UK. Badenoch's face looked like a spanked arse for a lot of that PMQs.

But she has opened the can of worms now, so the question has to be asked why are the Tories desperate to talk about grooming gangs but demonstrably didn't care about the victims whilst they were in power? Why did Badenoch never talk about this issue when she was a minister and barely mentioned it at all until yesterday? Why did Big Dog say in 2019 that spending money on child abuse inquiries was "spaffing money up the wall"?

The answer as with Levelling Up, is they do not give a shit about working class people and do not give a shit about the north of England (or Scotland, or Wales, or NI). They just want to rage about brown/black/Muslim/immigrant people until the end of time. And the reason they want to do that is because they believe those people they don't care about are massive racists who will be impressed by this and vote for them (the party in their own words led by err successive "aliens"), once back in they'll bring forth more Rwanda schemes which achieve nothing but wasting resources, more inquiries without their recommendations being implemented too.

[Yeeb]

This is all fun but tells us nothing whilst we are 4 years out from a General Election, especially given Labour,, as most other Govs is getting the shitty stuff out of the way in their first year. It's a bit like trying to predict who will win the Premier League in July and then being stunned in January that Nots Forest are 2nd= and 6 points ahead of Man City. A lot of water to flow under the bridge before the next GE, not least 4 years of a shitshow from Trump! Who knows what is going to happen with these brainless feckers in 12 days time. Belt up and get ready for a rocky ride.

Yeah, I agree. I was just pointing out that the 'disaster for Labour' reporting on the polls doesn't actually stack up to them losing the next GE.

Just wait until they get rid of the triple lock on pensions.

Somebody needs to have the balls to do this , state pension is the single largest slice of our for govt spending , and proper funding has had the can kicked down the street for 40+ years

[Hal Jordan]

Who knew that pitting an experienced barrister against an experienced brain donor would yield such results in a debating chamber?

[inactionman]

Who knew that pitting an experienced barrister against an experienced brain donor would yield such results in a debating chamber?

PMQs going well, is it?

[sockwithaticket]

I often watch the PoliticsJoe PMQ's summary episodes, under Badenoch they've basically become a lowlights package. Even with how difficult it was to come up with a win in the dying days of the Tory government, Sunal still occassionally got a good shot in from the box. Badenoch's absolutely dreadful at it and seemingly getting worse. Os has written a fairly comprehensive summary there for this week's particular hot button topic, but the whole thing essentially conforms to her pattern so far - pick an issue for which the Tories have a terrible record, go incredibly hard at Labour (typically skipping over reality to do so) in such a way that invites ridicule given the aforementioned record and then look somewhat surprised or indignant that her point (such as it is...) is quite easily batted away or turned around on her.

[Sandstorm]

Who knew that pitting an experienced barrister against an experienced brain donor would yield such results in a debating chamber?

[_Os_]

I often watch the PoliticsJoe PMQ's summary episodes, under Badenoch they've basically become a lowlights package. Even with how difficult it was to come up with a win in the dying days of the Tory government, Sunal still occassionally got a good shot in from the box. Badenoch's absolutely dreadful at it and seemingly getting worse. Os has written a fairly comprehensive summary there for this week's particular hot button topic, but the whole thing essentially conforms to her pattern so far - pick an issue for which the Tories have a terrible record, go incredibly hard at Labour (typically skipping over reality to do so) in such a way that invites ridicule given the aforementioned record and then look somewhat surprised or indignant that her point (such as it is...) is quite easily batted away or turned around on her.

They haven't updated their attack lines on Labour since Hague, that's when all the stuff about New Labour letting immigrants in started (the subtext being that Labour are anti-English). This attack line - that Labour aren't English - is actually much older, some truth in it (Hawes wrote a decent book that covered some of this "The Shortest History of England") Labour are the only real British party and need Wales/Scotland/Northern England to win (the party emerges from Britain's industrial revolution, emphasis on Britain). The Tories in contrast are the party of Southern England and only really need to dominate there to win (they predate the Union of Scotland and England). When Labour do really well they have a leader who wins in Wales/Scotland/Northern England (where the industrial revolution happened), but is also acceptable enough to Southern England to pick up voters there (has to sound Southern English and act posh, the initial Tory instinct to fear Starmer as another Blair was basically correct).

But as Hawes pointed out, people that invade or migrate to Britain always arrive in Southern England first, it has better quality land and easier access from the sea and as a result has always been richer than the rest of the island. The Tories claimed New Labour let all the immigrants in, then themselves boosted immigration to the highest levels in history. Because they're a party of Southern England and that's where a lot of immigrants go, they also boosted candidates who weren't white in their own party (some way beyond their capabilities), this was done purely for self interest reasons to keep winning. They did this whilst changing none of their views, still an anti-immigrant party (whilst boosting immigration), still a party with a membership that's 95%+ white and mostly living in the Southern England (whilst claiming to care about Northern England), still the party a super majority of people who aren't white vote against. Now also a party digging up Enoch Powell and talking about alien foreign cultures.

Their attack lines against Labour, the core of which is claiming Labour aren't English (really meaning Southern England) and therefore are unfit to rule, without directly saying that. Now equally applies to the Tories. They've also ended up being led by "aliens" (using their own terminology), whilst trying to run a nativist project to win Reform voters. Reform types online often refer to Badenoch by her full name: Olukemi Olufunto Adegoke Badenoch.

It's totally incoherent. If the Tories keep trying this the boomerangs are going to keep coming.

[Slick]

Who knew that pitting an experienced barrister against an experienced brain donor would yield such results in a debating chamber?

Just watched PMQ's, she was awful but Starmer was probably the best I've seen him as well.

[SaintK]

Who knew that pitting an experienced barrister against an experienced brain donor would yield such results in a debating chamber?

Just watched PMQ's, she was awful but Starmer was probably the best I've seen him as well.

Nah, not possible. Telegraph saying that she absolutely "roasted" Starmer so it must be true

[Paddington Bear]

Borrowing costs at their highest since 2008. Again, an increasingly tricky pitch to bat on

[dpedin]

I often watch the PoliticsJoe PMQ's summary episodes, under Badenoch they've basically become a lowlights package. Even with how difficult it was to come up with a win in the dying days of the Tory government, Sunal still occassionally got a good shot in from the box. Badenoch's absolutely dreadful at it and seemingly getting worse. Os has written a fairly comprehensive summary there for this week's particular hot button topic, but the whole thing essentially conforms to her pattern so far - pick an issue for which the Tories have a terrible record, go incredibly hard at Labour (typically skipping over reality to do so) in such a way that invites ridicule given the aforementioned record and then look somewhat surprised or indignant that her point (such as it is...) is quite easily batted away or turned around on her.

They haven't updated their attack lines on Labour since Hague, that's when all the stuff about New Labour letting immigrants in started (the subtext being that Labour are anti-English). This attack line - that Labour aren't English - is actually much older, some truth in it (Hawes wrote a decent book that covered some of this "The Shortest History of England") Labour are the only real British party and need Wales/Scotland/Northern England to win (the party emerges from Britain's industrial revolution, emphasis on Britain). The Tories in contrast are the party of Southern England and only really need to dominate there to win (they predate the Union of Scotland and England). When Labour do really well they have a leader who wins in Wales/Scotland/Northern England (where the industrial revolution happened), but is also acceptable enough to Southern England to pick up voters there (has to sound Southern English and act posh, the initial Tory instinct to fear Starmer as another Blair was basically correct).

But as Hawes pointed out, people that invade or migrate to Britain always arrive in Southern England first, it has better quality land and easier access from the sea and as a result has always been richer than the rest of the island. The Tories claimed New Labour let all the immigrants in, then themselves boosted immigration to the highest levels in history. Because they're a party of Southern England and that's where a lot of immigrants go, they also boosted candidates who weren't white in their own party (some way beyond their capabilities), this was done purely for self interest reasons to keep winning. They did this whilst changing none of their views, still an anti-immigrant party (whilst boosting immigration), still a party with a membership that's 95%+ white and mostly living in the Southern England (whilst claiming to care about Northern England), still the party a super majority of people who aren't white vote against. Now also a party digging up Enoch Powell and talking about alien foreign cultures.

Their attack lines against Labour, the core of which is claiming Labour aren't English (really meaning Southern England) and therefore are unfit to rule, without directly saying that. Now equally applies to the Tories. They've also ended up being led by "aliens" (using their own terminology), whilst trying to run a nativist project to win Reform voters. Reform types online often refer to Badenoch by her full name: Olukemi Olufunto Adegoke Badenoch.

It's totally incoherent. If the Tories keep trying this the boomerangs are going to keep coming.

It is also incoherent in terms of the economy. England and Wales fertility rate continues to fall and is now sitting at 1.44 births per fertile woman, way below what is needed, 2.1 births, to sustain the current population. We have driven the pension age up to 66, and it will increase to 68 by 2044, and that is probably the max it can be, particularly with an NHS unable to meet demand from over 60s with chronic health issues ie joint replacements, COPD, cardiac issues, etc. Long term sickness absence due to long term health conditions increases by about 0.4 to 0.5% per year over the age of 60 and increases as they get older. With an aging population then the only way we can sustain the current available workforce over the next 25+ years is by immigration. This is particularly true of the SE of England where 25% of the NHS workforce is made up of folk who are non UK nationals, for the care sector it is even higher, probably closer to 50%.

As with agriculture, where we dont grow enough to feed ourselves, just over half, and rely on mainly the EU for our food imports, the health and care services, whether NHS of private, are dependant upon 'foreign imports' to sustain it. The same goes for many other industries. Whilst everyone agrees that immigration needs to be properly managed and controlled, it is however inevitable and the Tories/Reform ambitions to reduce immigration into the 10,000s is just pie in the sky and will collapse the economy.

Scotland is in an even worse position with a fertility rate of 1.31 and is in desperate need of immigration to sustain services and the economy for the foreseeable future. If immigration was to fall to the 10,000's then it would be a disaster for Scotland, we already struggle to fill vacancies in many sectors, particularly since Brexit.

[Lobby]

In other news, I see that delusional lettuce-phobe Liz Truss has got her lawyers to send a 'cease and desist' letter to Starmer asking him to stop claiming that she crashed the economy when she was PM and her mini-budget er crashed the economy.

Her lawyers claim that his statements in the lead up to the general election were “false and defamatory” and were likely to “cause serious harm to her reputation”.

Her lawyers suggested that his comments also contributed to Truss losing her South West Norfolk seat.

[dpedin]

In other news, I see that delusional lettuce-phobe Liz Truss has got her lawyers to send a 'cease and desist' letter to Starmer asking him to stop claiming that she crashed the economy when she was PM and her mini-budget er crashed the economy.

Her lawyers claim that his statements in the lead up to the general election were “false and defamatory” and were likely to “cause serious harm to her reputation”.

Her lawyers suggested that his comments also contributed to Truss losing her South West Norfolk seat.

Good grief - she has gone mad ... again! Surely her lawyers have a duty of care towards her and should have told her this was batshit crazy?

[Paddington Bear]

In other news, I see that delusional lettuce-phobe Liz Truss has got her lawyers to send a 'cease and desist' letter to Starmer asking him to stop claiming that she crashed the economy when she was PM and her mini-budget er crashed the economy.

Her lawyers claim that his statements in the lead up to the general election were “false and defamatory” and were likely to “cause serious harm to her reputation”.

Her lawyers suggested that his comments also contributed to Truss losing her South West Norfolk seat.

Good grief - she has gone mad ... again! Surely her lawyers have a duty of care towards her and should have told her this was batshit crazy?

That did cross my mind, albeit after pushing back a few times it really is her call as to how she wants to spend her money. She’s utterly mad

[robmatic]

Scotland is in an even worse position with a fertility rate of 1.31 and is in desperate need of immigration to sustain services and the economy for the foreseeable future. If immigration was to fall to the 10,000's then it would be a disaster for Scotland, we already struggle to fill vacancies in many sectors, particularly since Brexit.

Scotland has a pool of over 30 million workers who don't require visas or international relocation available immediately to the south. And the additional 300000 working migrants who come to the UK each year are generally not choosing to go to Scotland. I'm not sure why you think it is immigration specifically that is the answer to Scotland struggling to fill vacancies.

[Biffer]

Scotland is in an even worse position with a fertility rate of 1.31 and is in desperate need of immigration to sustain services and the economy for the foreseeable future. If immigration was to fall to the 10,000's then it would be a disaster for Scotland, we already struggle to fill vacancies in many sectors, particularly since Brexit.

Scotland has a pool of over 30 million workers who don't require visas or international relocation available immediately to the south. And the additional 300000 working migrants who come to the UK each year are generally not choosing to go to Scotland. I'm not sure why you think it is immigration specifically that is the answer to Scotland struggling to fill vacancies.

Aye, because there's an excess of workers in England right enough. Jesus.

[Paddington Bear]

Are we going to reach a point where we accept our primary issue is not availability of workers? The NHS has more staff than pre-covid and sees fewer patients, it needs capex and better staff, adding practitioners with poor language skills is in fact slowing things down in some hospitals.

Similarly, the private sector has been allergic to training and development, as well as automation. Pouring more workers in just exacerbates the issue and stymies wage growth.

[dpedin]

Are we going to reach a point where we accept our primary issue is not availability of workers? The NHS has more staff than pre-covid and sees fewer patients, it needs capex and better staff, adding practitioners with poor language skills is in fact slowing things down in some hospitals.
Similarly, the private sector has been allergic to training and development, as well as automation. Pouring more workers in just exacerbates the issue and stymies wage growth.

I agree 100% - Capex is required for an NHS with not enough beds, not enough imaging equipment, etc. Just look at comparisons with similar health systems across comparable countries in Europe to see how under resourced the NHS is in terms of beds, imaging kit, etc. I wonder where the 40 new hospitals went promised by the Blonde Bumblecunt? At the moment they are trying to manage growing demand through a reducing bed capacity with about 75% of the beds as the rest are blocked by delayed discharges - no beds then no operations etc. Nothing frustrates healthcare staff more than having to cancel an operation because there is no bed in ICU/HDU/Ward because of delayed discharges - I hear it every week from my consultant mates! Running the NHS at 95% bed occupancy with 25%+ of beds unavailable due to delayed discharges is completely inefficient and leads to poorer productivity.

All clinical staff from abroad are required to undertake a language test in order to get onto the professional register for their profession ie doctors, nursing, midwifery, etc. Last time I was in hospital in Edinburgh I had more difficulty understanding the nurse with a broad Bristol accent than I did my Indian Consultant.

Whilst automation etc will reduce demand for labour to some extent there is still excess demand for labour in an increasingly tight labour market. There are some exciting developments in healthcare with AI etc - reading of MRI/CT/x-rays can be done very successfully using AI such as reading breast mammograms/scans, etc and will reduce demand on radiologists. However some other exciting developments such as robotic surgery ironically place greater demands on the workforce. Unfortunately in much of healthcare for example machines can't feed the patient with dementia, change the urine soaked beds, wipe your soiled arse or roll you over in bed to avoid bed sores.

An interesting fact - Amazon employs over 75,000 in the UK, 30,000 added in the last few years. Highly efficient maybe but still need boots on the ground.

[Biffer]

Are we going to reach a point where we accept our primary issue is not availability of workers? The NHS has more staff than pre-covid and sees fewer patients, it needs capex and better staff, adding practitioners with poor language skills is in fact slowing things down in some hospitals.
Similarly, the private sector has been allergic to training and development, as well as automation. Pouring more workers in just exacerbates the issue and stymies wage growth.

I agree 100% - Capex is required for an NHS with not enough beds, not enough imaging equipment, etc. Just look at comparisons with similar health systems across comparable countries in Europe to see how under resourced the NHS is in terms of beds, imaging kit, etc. I wonder where the 40 new hospitals went promised by the Blonde Bumblecunt? At the moment they are trying to manage growing demand through a reducing bed capacity with about 75% of the beds as the rest are blocked by delayed discharges - no beds then no operations etc. Nothing frustrates healthcare staff more than having to cancel an operation because there is no bed in ICU/HDU/Ward because of delayed discharges - I hear it every week from my consultant mates! Running the NHS at 95% bed occupancy with 25%+ of beds unavailable due to delayed discharges is completely inefficient and leads to poorer productivity.

All clinical staff from abroad are required to undertake a language test in order to get onto the professional register for their profession ie doctors, nursing, midwifery, etc. Last time I was in hospital in Edinburgh I had more difficulty understanding the nurse with a broad Bristol accent than I did my Indian Consultant.

Whilst automation etc will reduce demand for labour to some extent there is still excess demand for labour in an increasingly tight labour market. There are some exciting developments in healthcare with AI etc - reading of MRI/CT/x-rays can be done very successfully using AI such as reading breast mammograms/scans, etc and will reduce demand on radiologists. However some other exciting developments such as robotic surgery ironically place greater demands on the workforce. Unfortunately in much of healthcare for example machines can't feed the patient with dementia, change the urine soaked beds, wipe your soiled arse or roll you over in bed to avoid bed sores.

An interesting fact - Amazon employs over 75,000 in the UK, 30,000 added in the last few years. Highly efficient maybe but still need boots on the ground.

Funny you mention the rolling over in bed, I know of a company that is developing a system for exactly that purpose

https://www.silverlioninnovations.com/products-1

I do think a lot of our elderly care in 15-20 years time will be robotically or AI assisted. Wearable health monitors will have an ambulance called before someone collapses, Alexa / Siri equivalents with acouple more decades will manage your medications for you alongside that. Wearable robotics will help people with weakness and instability problems, preventing falls. And the humanisation of AI characteristics in personal assistance will help to keep people in touch with others. Chaning beds, cleaning, washing clothes etc are the kinds of things that could be done by automated systems as well. So independent living for the elderly and frail becomes much more achievable.

[Paddington Bear]

Are we going to reach a point where we accept our primary issue is not availability of workers? The NHS has more staff than pre-covid and sees fewer patients, it needs capex and better staff, adding practitioners with poor language skills is in fact slowing things down in some hospitals.
Similarly, the private sector has been allergic to training and development, as well as automation. Pouring more workers in just exacerbates the issue and stymies wage growth.

I agree 100% - Capex is required for an NHS with not enough beds, not enough imaging equipment, etc. Just look at comparisons with similar health systems across comparable countries in Europe to see how under resourced the NHS is in terms of beds, imaging kit, etc. I wonder where the 40 new hospitals went promised by the Blonde Bumblecunt? At the moment they are trying to manage growing demand through a reducing bed capacity with about 75% of the beds as the rest are blocked by delayed discharges - no beds then no operations etc. Nothing frustrates healthcare staff more than having to cancel an operation because there is no bed in ICU/HDU/Ward because of delayed discharges - I hear it every week from my consultant mates! Running the NHS at 95% bed occupancy with 25%+ of beds unavailable due to delayed discharges is completely inefficient and leads to poorer productivity.

All clinical staff from abroad are required to undertake a language test in order to get onto the professional register for their profession ie doctors, nursing, midwifery, etc. Last time I was in hospital in Edinburgh I had more difficulty understanding the nurse with a broad Bristol accent than I did my Indian Consultant.

Whilst automation etc will reduce demand for labour to some extent there is still excess demand for labour in an increasingly tight labour market. There are some exciting developments in healthcare with AI etc - reading of MRI/CT/x-rays can be done very successfully using AI such as reading breast mammograms/scans, etc and will reduce demand on radiologists. However some other exciting developments such as robotic surgery ironically place greater demands on the workforce. Unfortunately in much of healthcare for example machines can't feed the patient with dementia, change the urine soaked beds, wipe your soiled arse or roll you over in bed to avoid bed sores.

An interesting fact - Amazon employs over 75,000 in the UK, 30,000 added in the last few years. Highly efficient maybe but still need boots on the ground.

There may well be language requirements on paper, but they are not being enforced, and there are plenty of people across the NHS who would be happy to tell you that. The language tests can of course be cheated on as well.

If there’s excess demand for labour then wages should be rising, they are still in real terms lower than they were in 2008, in part because there is essentially an inexhaustible supply of labour interested in working in this country.

Fully agree on the capex point

[Biffer]

.

If there’s excess demand for labour then wages should be rising, they are still in real terms lower than they were in 2008, in part because there is essentially an inexhaustible supply of labour interested in working in this country.

That would be the case in a free market system, but where wages are centrally set as in the NHS, that drive is constrained and you end up with an inefficient market where demand is not met.

[Paddington Bear]

Gilts are continuing to take a battering, not sure how long the government can go without making some sort of announcement. Current yields make spending commitments basically untenable

[Biffer]

Gilts are continuing to take a battering, not sure how long the government can go without making some sort of announcement. Current yields make spending commitments basically untenable

The reason they're going up at the moment is because of worries about what Trump is going to do. The impact of the labour budget is already present.

[Paddington Bear]

Gilts are continuing to take a battering, not sure how long the government can go without making some sort of announcement. Current yields make spending commitments basically untenable

The reason they're going up at the moment is because of worries about what Trump is going to do. The impact of the labour budget is already present.

I’m not convinced that this is right, and even if it is it doesn’t change that there is very much a local crisis element to this which could piss all over Labour’s cornflakes

[robmatic]

Scotland is in an even worse position with a fertility rate of 1.31 and is in desperate need of immigration to sustain services and the economy for the foreseeable future. If immigration was to fall to the 10,000's then it would be a disaster for Scotland, we already struggle to fill vacancies in many sectors, particularly since Brexit.

Scotland has a pool of over 30 million workers who don't require visas or international relocation available immediately to the south. And the additional 300000 working migrants who come to the UK each year are generally not choosing to go to Scotland. I'm not sure why you think it is immigration specifically that is the answer to Scotland struggling to fill vacancies.

Aye, because there's an excess of workers in England right enough. Jesus.

There's enough of an excess of graduates for wages to be absolutely pish for young people.

[Biffer]

Scotland has a pool of over 30 million workers who don't require visas or international relocation available immediately to the south. And the additional 300000 working migrants who come to the UK each year are generally not choosing to go to Scotland. I'm not sure why you think it is immigration specifically that is the answer to Scotland struggling to fill vacancies.

Aye, because there's an excess of workers in England right enough. Jesus.

There's enough of an excess of graduates for wages to be absolutely pish for young people.

Our graduates this year start on about £32k and will advance to about £43k in two years.

[Slick]

Scotland has a pool of over 30 million workers who don't require visas or international relocation available immediately to the south. And the additional 300000 working migrants who come to the UK each year are generally not choosing to go to Scotland. I'm not sure why you think it is immigration specifically that is the answer to Scotland struggling to fill vacancies.

Aye, because there's an excess of workers in England right enough. Jesus.

There's enough of an excess of graduates for wages to be absolutely pish for young people.

We could probably do with getting some of the 25% inactive working age folk off their sofas as well

[Jockaline]

Are we going to reach a point where we accept our primary issue is not availability of workers? The NHS has more staff than pre-covid and sees fewer patients, it needs capex and better staff, adding practitioners with poor language skills is in fact slowing things down in some hospitals.
Similarly, the private sector has been allergic to training and development, as well as automation. Pouring more workers in just exacerbates the issue and stymies wage growth.

I agree 100% - Capex is required for an NHS with not enough beds, not enough imaging equipment, etc. Just look at comparisons with similar health systems across comparable countries in Europe to see how under resourced the NHS is in terms of beds, imaging kit, etc. I wonder where the 40 new hospitals went promised by the Blonde Bumblecunt? At the moment they are trying to manage growing demand through a reducing bed capacity with about 75% of the beds as the rest are blocked by delayed discharges - no beds then no operations etc. Nothing frustrates healthcare staff more than having to cancel an operation because there is no bed in ICU/HDU/Ward because of delayed discharges - I hear it every week from my consultant mates! Running the NHS at 95% bed occupancy with 25%+ of beds unavailable due to delayed discharges is completely inefficient and leads to poorer productivity.

All clinical staff from abroad are required to undertake a language test in order to get onto the professional register for their profession ie doctors, nursing, midwifery, etc. Last time I was in hospital in Edinburgh I had more difficulty understanding the nurse with a broad Bristol accent than I did my Indian Consultant.

Whilst automation etc will reduce demand for labour to some extent there is still excess demand for labour in an increasingly tight labour market. There are some exciting developments in healthcare with AI etc - reading of MRI/CT/x-rays can be done very successfully using AI such as reading breast mammograms/scans, etc and will reduce demand on radiologists. However some other exciting developments such as robotic surgery ironically place greater demands on the workforce. Unfortunately in much of healthcare for example machines can't feed the patient with dementia, change the urine soaked beds, wipe your soiled arse or roll you over in bed to avoid bed sores.

An interesting fact - Amazon employs over 75,000 in the UK, 30,000 added in the last few years. Highly efficient maybe but still need boots on the ground.

I hope it isn't graduate Nurses that are the ones feeding, changing beds, wiping arses etc. A waste of years of training.

[robmatic]

Aye, because there's an excess of workers in England right enough. Jesus.

There's enough of an excess of graduates for wages to be absolutely pish for young people.

Our graduates this year start on about £32k and will advance to about £43k in two years.

Minimum wage is £25k this year. Your graduates get a couple of extra quid per hour and an additional tax

[Paddington Bear]

World’s smallest violin but a £40 something k salary does not go miles with rents and the cost of living as they are. It certainly doesn’t give a young professional the life they probably expected to have

[robmatic]

World’s smallest violin but a £40 something k salary does not go miles with rents and the cost of living as they are. It certainly doesn’t give a young professional the life they probably expected to have

If I discount that £40k using RPI back to when I graduated in 2001, it's probably less than what folk were getting then so I think the frustration is understandable.

[Sandstorm]

World’s smallest violin but a £40 something k salary does not go miles with rents and the cost of living as they are. It certainly doesn’t give a young professional the life they probably expected to have

If I discount that £40k using RPI back to when I graduated in 2001, it's probably less than what folk were getting then so I think the frustration is understandable.

Yup, UK wage stagnation is very real.