shadow ministers developed plans on the basis they could do anything as long as it was revenue neutral and not taking into account Hunt's budget changes. Ruling anything out that needed spending & not understanding some existing programmes would end. And no co-ordination between depts

they did that

Pride in Place has a better capital/revenue split than some programmes have had but I can see half of the revenue going to project management, governance and community engagement work. It worries (but doesn't surprise) me that too many MPs don't really understand the way these work

At local govt level there was a massive withdrawal of services. Especially youth services, long term prevention, social infrastructure and neighborhood management. All of these shunting costs onto blue light services and/or creating a visible decline in the public realm

weak, weak, weak!

I'm sure it's just a writer saying "you've had some right cowboys in 'ere mate. I can do something with it but it ain't gonna be cheap"

I think raising income tax would be an admission that she's finished as Chancellor and will be leaving govt along with Starmer before too long. They'd effectively both be sacrificing their careers to protect the party. I'm not sure no 10 and no 11 are up for that

The conditions for them to be a key part of a govt coalition and to prioritise this legislation in negotiations with larger parties aren't going to be present any time soon are they? Nevermind the rest of their policy agenda...

The UK is not the destination of choice for asylum seekers in Europe. It is behind Germany & France and is 17th, or 5th at a stretch, of 28
www.gov.uk/government/s...

Yeah - I remember when I started going to matches my dad gave me and a friend a lecture on how to stay safe. It was never 'good natured'