UK General Election 2024: The Results & Aftermath

[eldomtom2]

Encouraging more immigration of working-age people (as an alternative to encouraging people to have more children) would also improve that ratio.

That's only a temporary solution, as declining birthrates are a worldwide problem.

Having children does of course come with massive, life-changing responsibility - so you really don't want to be encouraging people to have children who do not really want to.

There are plenty of people who want to have more children than they currently have...

 

[Bald Rick]

That's only a temporary solution, as declining birthrates are a worldwide problem.

Not quite, as the world population is still increasing.

But it will be soon.

Edit: I think I’ve misunderstood, apologies. Yes birth rates are reducing in most countries worldwide, but on average the population is increasing because the average birth rate is still above the ‘replacement rate’ of 2.1. But I reckon worldwide population will peak within a decade or so, notwithstanding various official forecasts.

 

[Busaholic]

I think sending out Zarah Sultana rather than say Rebecca Long-Bailey to the media rounds might have backfired on those 7.

Got to say the one I first saw on the media rounds was Rebecca Long-Bailey, whose name I'd almost forgotten about, and she presented a good reason for her decision I thought. I haven't seen Zarah Sultana, though.

 

[Magdalia]

That's only a temporary solution, as declining birthrates are a worldwide problem.

Not quite worldwide. High birth rates are still the problem in Africa.

I reckon worldwide population will peak within a decade or so, notwithstanding various official forecasts.

The United Nations first predicted a peak for worldwide population in 2022, when the projected peak was in 2086. A few weeks ago they moved the projected peak to 2084. See #46 here:

A discussion about falling birth rates in various parts of the world

However, we're what, ten billion and counting? Which means that many in the global South live lives that aren't massively better than they were a century ago, despite consuming more resources, just through sheer numbers of mouths to feed. And the sheer number of billionaires with Space...

www.railforums.co.uk

What happens to birth rate in Africa will determine when the peak is reached. For what its worth my reckoning is some time in the 2060s.

 

[GusB]

Most people in receipt of Universal Credit are in work.

The biggest cost element of Universal Credit is the housing element.

The housing element of Universal Credit costs so much because successive governments have failed to construct sufficient social housing, and so people are forced into the private rented sector. Many of these privately rented properties, ironically, used to be social housing before they were sold off under right-to-buy.

The primary beneficiary of the housing benefit largesse is, in actual fact, the already-wealthy landlord who is getting the taxpayer to pay for their buy-to-let mortgage.

This is an issue that some people are quite happy to ignore. That, along with the fact that the "welfare" bill also includes pensions. Back in the dim and distant past, my rent was about £40 a week for my two-bedroom council flat; had I been privately renting, the bill to the taxpayer would have been significantly higher.

I haven't heard anything from the new government about abolishing the "bedroom tax"; a scheme that punishes people for being unfortunate enough to be allocated a house that's too big for their needs, while at the same time there are few opportunities to downsize.

 

[The Ham]

This is an issue that some people are quite happy to ignore. That, along with the fact that the "welfare" bill also includes pensions. Back in the dim and distant past, my rent was about £40 a week for my two-bedroom council flat; had I been privately renting, the bill to the taxpayer would have been significantly higher.

I haven't heard anything from the new government about abolishing the "bedroom tax"; a scheme that punishes people for being unfortunate enough to be allocated a house that's too big for their needs, while at the same time there are few opportunities to downsize.

Indeed, I do wonder if a better option would have been to have offered incentives to move to a smaller place, for example you get half the rent difference as extra benefits for the first 6 months, then it drop by 5% points every 6 months (45% for months 7-12, 40% for months 13-18, etc.). For each smaller house (after the second) you turn down the starting point drops 5% points (so turn down 3 and you start at 45%).

Ultimately it works have saved money, but would have made people want to downsize when they could. It would have also given them moving money, so they could do things like to put down flooring if they were moving to a council house (as upon first rental they have, basically, none), pay some removals costs and do a bit to make the house more homelike.

It costs a lot to move house (even if you move your own stuff) so the extra cost you have to pay in bedroom tax is going to mean fitter baby is a long time of paying it before you're better off by being in the correct sized home.

It's also unlikely to have actually generated much money after the admin costs, at least not for the first few years, and even then those managing it have got to keep on top of which children are still at home, what age they are and so on, so that you are taxing everyone correctly.

Of course, there's loopholes, like having a lodger or being of pensionable age (although there some complications with these) and so those managing it then have to also manage those too.

 

[birchesgreen]

Its just an example of a cruelty tax, main effect is to make right wingers feel better about themselves for putting the boot into poor people.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Indeed, I do wonder if a better option would have been to have offered incentives to move to a smaller place

I haven't heard anything from the new government about abolishing the "bedroom tax"; a scheme that punishes people for being unfortunate enough to be allocated a house that's too big for their needs

Part of the problem is how "too big for their needs" is determined.

One bedroom for a couple- yes, fair enough.

Beyond that, it gets messy.

Two children of the same sex aged under 16 are expected to share a bedroom. So if you give them a bedroom each- perhaps to give your 15yo son some privacy from his 8yo kid brother- your home is "too big for your needs".

Two children of different sex aged under 10 are expected to share a bedroom. So if you give them a bedroom each- perhaps because your 9yo daughter has started puberty- then your home is "too big for your needs".

The effect is that a family of four- two adults, two children- will be hit by the bedroom tax if they have two children of the same sex and they won't be hit by the bedroom tax if their children are opposite sexes. Doesn't seem very fair to me.

And that's before we actually look at the property market. How many one-bedroom flats are there? I'm aware that some housing associations simply reclassified a number of their smaller two-bedroom flats as one-bedroom flats, as it was the only way of ensuring that their tenants could pay their rent.

 

[The Ham]

Part of the problem is how "too big for their needs" is determined.

One bedroom for a couple- yes, fair enough.

Beyond that, it gets messy.

Two children of the same sex aged under 16 are expected to share a bedroom. So if you give them a bedroom each- perhaps to give your 15yo son some privacy from his 8yo kid brother- your home is "too big for your needs".

Two children of different sex aged under 10 are expected to share a bedroom. So if you give them a bedroom each- perhaps because your 9yo daughter has started puberty- then your home is "too big for your needs".

The effect is that a family of four- two adults, two children- will be hit by the bedroom tax if they have two children of the same sex and they won't be hit by the bedroom tax if their children are opposite sexes. Doesn't seem very fair to me.

And that's before we actually look at the property market. How many one-bedroom flats are there? I'm aware that some housing associations simply reclassified a number of their smaller two-bedroom flats as one-bedroom flats, as it was the only way of ensuring that their tenants could pay their rent.

Indeed, which is why I suggested that it could be better incentive people to reduce the size of their home rather than do all that admin to work out if you can charge them extra.

As then it's down to the individual as to if they feel it's better for them to move. For example, there's no penalty in staying in a three bed house whilst your 15 year old is still at home (as the extra space away from their kids sibling whilst their doing their GCSE's and A levels is beneficial to them), but once they move out moving to a smaller house could give the parents a bit of a boost of income so they can help both their children at a key time in their lives.

 

[brad465]

Patel? A unity candidate? This is about as believable as Hannibal Lector saying he speaks for vegetarians:

Priti Patel vows to get Tories 'match fit' in leadership bid

Dame Priti is the first woman to enter the race, with Kemi Badenoch expected to announce her bid on Monday.

www.bbc.co.uk

Dame Priti Patel has said she can unite the Tories and turn them "back into a winning machine" as she launched her bid for the party's leadership.
The former home secretary said her political experience meant she would be able to "reinvigorate" the party following its recent election defeat.
“I have done this throughout my 30 plus years of service to our Party, in both government and opposition. I can get us match fit to win the next general election.”
Dame Priti is the first woman to throw her hat into the ring to replace Rishi Sunak, and joins James Cleverly, Robert Jenrick, Tom Tugendhat and Mel Stride.
The 52-year-old was widely expected to run for the leadership. Other people who are expected to join her but have not yet declared include the shadow communities secretary Kemi Badenoch and Suella Braverman, another former home secretary.
Dame Priti has been a backbench MP since stepping down as home secretary in 2022, following the resignation of her ally Boris Johnson.
She has been highly critical of the Conservative Party's leadership in recent years, blaming them for the Tories' slide from political favour that culminated in July's historic election defeat.
"It isn’t our heroic members who failed, but politicians’ distraction from public service," she said on Saturday.
“It is time to put unity before personal vendetta, country before party, and delivery before self-interest."
Dame Priti added that one point of difference between her and other leadership candidates was that she would reward members' dedication by giving them more of a voice in the party.

 

[Busaholic]

Patel? A unity candidate? This is about as believable as Hannibal Lector saying he speaks for vegetarians:

Priti Patel vows to get Tories 'match fit' in leadership bid

Dame Priti is the first woman to enter the race, with Kemi Badenoch expected to announce her bid on Monday.

www.bbc.co.uk

So she managed to get those twelve MPs to back her then! (Proposer, seconder, then 10 others I believe, though maybe it's just 10 in total?) Seems to me only the bookies' favourite Kemi Badenoch is left to declare, meaning Braverman can't get the support, so she'll defect to Reform.

 

[jfollows]

Patel? A unity candidate? This is about as believable as Hannibal Lector saying he speaks for vegetarians:

Priti Patel vows to get Tories 'match fit' in leadership bid

Dame Priti is the first woman to enter the race, with Kemi Badenoch expected to announce her bid on Monday.

www.bbc.co.uk

Yes, but her electorate is a small number of Conservative MPs followed by a relatively small number made up primarily from old white men in the Conservative Party, so does this sort of stuff appeal to them? To you and me I agree that it’s nonsense.

 

[nw1]

In fact one could argue it was the "heroic members" (in the words of Patel) who failed, as they installed Truss as PM. And before that Johnson, who, despite winning the election for the Tories in 2019, has left a pretty disastrous legacy.

 

[SuspectUsual]

The thing - actually, one of many things - that really irks me about statements like Patel’s is the reference to “service”.

 

[Busaholic]

The thing - actually, one of many things - that really irks me about statements like Patel’s is the reference to “service”.

Self-service, more like. Fill your boots!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Self-service, more like.

In fairness, most politicians in the UK and US for that matter are a bit like this.

 

[edwin_m]

In fairness, most politicians in the UK and US for that matter are a bit like this.

I'd say that's not true for the UK, but the worst ones are the most noticeable.

 

[Busaholic]

I think it's fairly certain now that 6 Tory MPs will contest the party leadership, including Badenoch, perhaps the favourite, but excluding Bravernan. Mel Stride could be described as the Jeremy Corbyn of the piece, in that many of those nominating him have no intention of supporting him in the actual ballot! Expect him to be the first name to be eliminated. Tugenhadt could be the dark horse here.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

My money is on Badenoch.

 

[Busaholic]

My money is on Badenoch.

I think it's very likely too. Penny Morduant not holding her seat gives Badenoch a straight run imo.

 

[jfollows]

I think it's very likely too. Penny Morduant not holding her seat gives Badenoch a straight run imo.

My money is on Badenoch.

Yes, but don't overlook the mechanics of the process. In the past the "front-runner" didn't end up winning on more than one occasion.
There are two things:
Firstly, the (six) candidates get whittled down to four, then to two, then put in front of the "old white men" electorate, that's to say the party at large.
Secondly, during these processes, it's often the "least worst" candidate who ends up being chosen rather than the "best".
Now that the winner won't (ever) be PM I'm not bothered about the winner really.
My guess would be the same - Badenoch + Other in the final pair, in which case she'll win. I dislike her but I don't really care because she'll lead the party into further oblivion. She said that the Conservatives lost the election because they were too left-wing. Really? I don't think so. But I don't like her.
But don't discount her not making it to the final pair because of shenanigans associated with the elimination process. They'll end up with the equivalent of Duncan-Smith. Again.

 

[Gloster]

I wonder if Braverman reckoned that the Conservatives aren’t going to get back into power at the next election and whoever leads them into it will be dumped shortly afterwards. She is standing back so that she can pick up the pieces and stand a chance of getting in to power in 2034: she wants to be PM and s*d the good of the party (or the country). I know not if Badenoch is so deluded that she thinks her bonkers policies will win the next election or whether she is playing the long game and wants to build the party into her image of it so she can win the one after.

You wonder if Stride is hoping to win on a ‘not one of the others’ ticket. At least he doesn’t seem to have a long record of cack-ups, unlike the others; but then, he doesn’t really have a record.

Still, we can at least hope for a bit of entertainment over the next three months as the candidates tear into each other. It will be just like a Labour election of old: Come on in, the blood’s lovely.

 

[nlogax]

Whomever wins this will need to address their fundamental problem of division. For the longest time we've been told the Conservatives are a 'broad church' but their reality more resembles a pair of honey badgers in a trenchcoat. Maybe this will be a good opportunity for some of their remaining and lunatic fringe vocal outliers to join the likes of Farage, Anderson and co, make a bit of a name for themselves in a smaller party and in doing so return the Tories to an effective centre-right party in the process. Some in the leadership race (and now outside of it) do have the option of defecting as their unpleasant viewpoints align pretty well with Farage's bunch. I don't know why they'd opt to stay as Conservatives.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Whomever wins this will need to address their fundamental problem of division. For the longest time we've been told the Conservatives are a 'broad church' but their reality more resembles a pair of honey badgers in a trenchcoat. Maybe this will be a good opportunity for some of their remaining and lunatic fringe vocal outliers to join the likes of Farage, Anderson and co, make a bit of a name for themselves in a smaller party and in doing so return the Tories to an effective centre-right party in the process. Some in the leadership race (and now outside of it) do have the option of defecting as their unpleasant viewpoints align pretty well with Farage's bunch. I don't know why they'd opt to stay as Conservatives.

Whatever happens, The Conservative Party needs completely rebuilding. A good long period in the wilderness should enable them to achieve this. I would a argue it all went wrong when Cameron decided to have a referendum on Brexit.

 

[edwin_m]

Whatever happens, The Conservative Party needs completely rebuilding. A good long period in the wilderness should enable them to achieve this. I would a argue it all went wrong when Cameron decided to have a referendum on Brexit.

Arguably even sooner. Although the Cameron government gave an impression of being somewhat competent, they were already implementing austerity, which stifled recovery from the financial crisis and created large-scale resentment which was arguably one of the causes of the Brexit result.

 

[ainsworth74]

Arguably even sooner. Although the Cameron government gave an impression of being somewhat competent, they were already implementing austerity, which stifled recovery from the financial crisis and created large-scale resentment which was arguably one of the causes of the Brexit result.

I would suggest that Brexit was the spark that sent them off the rails. The tinder for the Tory party to lose its mind was already in place, Brexit just ignited it.

 

[jon0844]

I think it's fairly certain now that 6 Tory MPs will contest the party leadership, including Badenoch, perhaps the favourite, but excluding Bravernan. Mel Stride could be described as the Jeremy Corbyn of the piece, in that many of those nominating him have no intention of supporting him in the actual ballot! Expect him to be the first name to be eliminated. Tugenhadt could be the dark horse here.

Five years until the next election and six candidates for Tory leader. I think given their past performance all of them should manage to get a go. They might actually need a few more.

 

[Busaholic]

Five years until the next election and six candidates for Tory leader. I think given their past performance all of them should manage to get a go. They might actually need a few more.

Now that Braverman can't get the necessary signatures (despite her version of non-events) there's a possibility that no-one worse than Truss might emerge, a very low bar admittedly.

 

[JonathanH]

Is there any public record of who has nominated each candidate?

 

[Busaholic]

Is there any public record of who has nominated each candidate?

Can't see why there should be, though any Tory MP can only nominate one candidate: it's fairly meaningless trying to read anything into it, any more than Margaret Beckett or Sadiq Khan having nominated Corbyn as Labour leader when they were MPs.