Why did the amendment have to mention Grenfell and recent terror attacks. This vote was all about Labour trying to get one up on Tory's and the Tory's not letting Labour get one up on them. Lose Lose for the country and politics in general.
The Tory's downfall (on this subject, there are many others to come no doubt) will be when the independent report comes out with it's recommendations. My understanding is despite the pay freeze the report will recommend a level regardless. If the Tory's don't take heed of that then they are even bigger fools than I think right now.
As i've said previously, 'public sector' is all well and good, but that makes up around 17% of the working population of this country. If any party was really for making the lives of those less fortunate/lower paid (or however you wish to describe it) better then they'd be looking at doing something for all of them, not try to score political points or carry favour with the public.
I've no doubt a lot of the public sector deserve to earn more, but so do many, probably more (due to the 83/17% split), in the private sector, what about them? 'For the many not the few' yer right.
I've never been so engaged in politics but also never been so saddened as to what a complete joke they all are. The quicker we get rid of both May & Corbyn the better.
Chop chop @bobmunro with @cobbles running your campaign you've my vote, i'll even register in your constituency so that I can vote for you even if I have to buy a flat there (we can rent it to @cabbles sorry cobbles, to run the campaign from).
Of course including reference to our emergency services in the amendment was political point scoring and it served its purpose. There was zero chance of the amendment going through, everyone knew that. It was to drive home the point that these are the sorts of public sector workers who have been subject to the ideologically driven cuts to pay and conditions.
Most of the public, frankly, don't give a monkey's if a social worker or a EHO or a planning inspector or a teacher or a carer or a refuse collector effectively take a pay cut year after year for 15 years (because that's what we are talking about after all). And that's because we in the UK utterly undervalue our public services on the whole and if we don't use them then we're not bothered if they get treated poorly by our government.
But when you start pointing out that this deliberate attack on public sector pay also impacts on nurses, ambulance staff, firefighters and the police then the message starts to get through. Look at the police officer interviewed yesterday. He'll quite rightly get all the plaudits and awards he deserves but the amazing bravery and selflessness he and his colleagues demonstrated isn't valued enough by this shower of a government to give them a decent pay award
The public are starting to see that at long last and I think that's what we are seeing in the latest social attitudes survey that came out.
As pointed out, Labour presented other measures to address the stagnent pay within the private sector but it shouldn't be a case of either/or anyway.
To be honest, I think @cafcfan makes some good points there.
Those of us who are anti- Tory, for very good reasons, shouldn't give Corbyn and his useless cohorts a free ride.
Well maybe you need to give him credit for clever wording then Prague - It was entirely sensible to keep the wording on numbers vague and I am surprised you didn't get that.
I can spell it out for you - firstly if you give a number, you can have Tory/DUP MPS saying they didn't vote for it because whilst they agree we need more, the disagree with the number as it a) isn't enough or b) it needs to be targeted in key areas. It also has to be vague to garner support from as many people as possible - it is around the direction rather than the detail. They now have this vote next to their name - great for those in marginal seats where this can make a difference. iT is setting them up for the next election as today is going to be! There - done it for you Prague.
Just read the amendment to the Queens speech. Jeremy Corybn Ms Diane Abbott Jonathan Ashworth Emily Thornberry John McDonnell Mr Nicholas Brown.
God help us when that lot get in at the next General Election. Remember well the saying re Labour, ''Empty head vote them in Empty bellies vote them out!
Glad to see some of our most ardent labour/corbyn supporters agree yesterday was nothing more than party political and that's it's now perfectly acceptable to not provide any detail
Half of it is all smoke and mirrors and rhetoric to score those political points, interesting to read on some areas in the public sector that have had good rises (3.2% is 1.2% more than on average my staff got in March).
Teacher pay scales since 2008 are up circa 17%, inflation is 22% in that period so is clearly 5 points behind. However when you allow for the fact that the personal allowance has increased by 90% in that period, net pay is up by 22% - pretty much the same as inflation then.......
Glad to see some of our most ardent labour/corbyn supporters agree yesterday was nothing more than party political and that's it's now perfectly acceptable to not provide any detail
Half of it is all smoke and mirrors and rhetoric to score those political points, interesting to read on some areas in the public sector that have had good rises (3.2% is 1.2% more than on average my staff got in March).
Teacher pay scales since 2008 are up circa 17%, inflation is 22% in that period so is clearly 5 points behind. However when you allow for the fact that the personal allowance has increased by 90% in that period, net pay is up by 22% - pretty much the same as inflation then.......
I think your last point is a flawed argument. If the government abolished the 45% tax rate I wouldn't consider my employer had given me a 5% pay rise. Similarly if it was increased to 50% I wouldn't think my employer had cut my pay.
The fact that the increase in personal allowance has made up (in percentage terms) the shortfall so they are treading water just evidences how poor teacher's pay has become.
Just read the amendment to the Queens speech. Jeremy Corybn Ms Diane Abbott Jonathan Ashworth Emily Thornberry John McDonnell Mr Nicholas Brown.
God help us when that lot get in at the next General Election. Remember well the saying re Labour, ''Empty head vote them in Empty bellies vote them out!
The sad thing is there is at least one human being on this planet gullible enough to agree with this nonsense.
Glad to see some of our most ardent labour/corbyn supporters agree yesterday was nothing more than party political and that's it's now perfectly acceptable to not provide any detail
Half of it is all smoke and mirrors and rhetoric to score those political points, interesting to read on some areas in the public sector that have had good rises (3.2% is 1.2% more than on average my staff got in March).
Teacher pay scales since 2008 are up circa 17%, inflation is 22% in that period so is clearly 5 points behind. However when you allow for the fact that the personal allowance has increased by 90% in that period, net pay is up by 22% - pretty much the same as inflation then.......
I think your last point is a flawed argument. If the government abolished the 45% tax rate I wouldn't consider my employer had given me a 5% pay rise. Similarly if it was increased to 50% I wouldn't think my employer had cut my pay.
The fact that the increase in personal allowance has made up (in percentage terms) the shortfall so they are treading water just evidences how poor teacher's pay has become.
I think I broadly agree @bobmunro re your view of if you feel your employer had increased/decreased your pay.
If it's all just about the feeling of being better off then drop the personal allowance and give the public sector a 7.5% rise! But then that would hurt heavily the 83% in the non public sector.
I was trying to show, that on a real basis teachers are broadly in the same position as 10 years ago when it comes to money in their pockets and allowing for inflation. Is a teacher in 2017 worth more than one in 2008? Maybe they are and were also under paid in 2008 and before.
There are of course far wider issues that effect all walks of life, not just public sector, housing costs being a real key one. This is where a huge part of the public sector pay scales falls down massively. A teacher will earn the same in Sunderland as in Brighton, yet the cost of living is far greater in Brighton than Sunderland. We have Inner London, Outer London, Fringe and rest of the country, there needs to be considerably more flexibility which they have tried to bring in but the unions are up in arms..... so what you see is teachers moving from the 'expensive areas' to the 'cheaper areas' of the country as despite getting an effective pay cut they are massively better off.
I know two teachers who have in recent times moved from Inner London (jobs) to Norfolk. In the process they have paid off their mortgages and bought with cash a bigger house and are considerably better off each month with despite the lower salary it is made up 5x due to not paying £1k a month+ on a mortgage.
You in the main wouldn't get this anomaly in the private sector.
Edit, if anyone is remotely interested - property prices in East Anglia since 2008 have increased exactly in line with inflation, 22%. Conversely on average London has increased 60%.
To be honest, I think @cafcfan makes some good points there.
Those of us who are anti- Tory, for very good reasons, shouldn't give Corbyn and his useless cohorts a free ride.
Well maybe you need to give him credit for clever wording then Prague - It was entirely sensible to keep the wording on numbers vague and I am surprised you didn't get that.
I can spell it out for you - firstly if you give a number, you can have Tory/DUP MPS saying they didn't vote for it because whilst they agree we need more, the disagree with the number as it a) isn't enough or b) it needs to be targeted in key areas. It also has to be vague to garner support from as many people as possible - it is around the direction rather than the detail. They now have this vote next to their name - great for those in marginal seats where this can make a difference. iT is setting them up for the next election as today is going to be! There - done it for you Prague.
Well that is a good point , Mutts, but I am still struggling to buy into it. That is because this Labour front bench has shown weakness and vagueness on figures throughout, and has a shadow Chancellor who seems more comfortable making speeches that make him sound like a latter day Arthur Scargill. You may be right. Nevertheless, you, like me are in the private business sector, where one simply cannot afford to get figures wrong, or put resources where they are not needed. Such people will never be able to get behind this lot unless they show themselves to be much more precise on the finances and allocation of financial resources than they have done up to now. And that is before we get on to Corbyn's pathetic, shameful approach to Brexit , which is being slaughtered on my Twitter feed on more or less an hourly basis.
Just read the amendment to the Queens speech. Jeremy Corybn Ms Diane Abbott Jonathan Ashworth Emily Thornberry John McDonnell Mr Nicholas Brown.
God help us when that lot get in at the next General Election. Remember well the saying re Labour, ''Empty head vote them in Empty bellies vote them out!
Ahh the famous saying that no one has ever said...er....except you.......!
Corbyn's apprtoach to Brexit is basically a soft Brexit rather than no Brexit at all or a Brexit with no deal. The rest would be resolved through negotiation. Not sure waht your problem with Corbyn is Prague, but it seems a bit irrational!
Of course it is party political Rob, Labour wants to pay public servants above 1% because they have been stitched up for years and it is fair. That includes Fire fighters, police and nurses! It is stupid giving a figure and giving the spineless Tory MPs and bought DUP MPs some excuse they can make around the figure. Labour's amendment did not go against their manifesto. Tory MPs have said they think it is fair stitching them up by voting the way they did - it is them that made a party political vote!
Corbyn's apprtoach to Brexit is basically a soft Brexit rather than no Brexit at all or a Brexit with no deal. The rest would be resolved through negotiation. Not sure waht your problem with Corbyn is Prague, but it seems a bit irrational!
Of course it is party political Rob, Labour wants to pay public servants above 1% because they have been stitched up for years and it is fair. That includes Fire fighters, police and nurses! It is stupid giving a figure and giving the spineless Tory MPs and bought DUP MPs some excuse they can make around the figure. Labour's amendment did not go against their manifesto. Tory MPs have said they think it is fair stitching them up by voting the way they did - it is them that made a party political vote!
If he had chosen to campaign seriously in the referendum it would most likely have been no brexit.
Why did the amendment have to mention Grenfell and recent terror attacks. This vote was all about Labour trying to get one up on Tory's and the Tory's not letting Labour get one up on them. Lose Lose for the country and politics in general.
The Tory's downfall (on this subject, there are many others to come no doubt) will be when the independent report comes out with it's recommendations. My understanding is despite the pay freeze the report will recommend a level regardless. If the Tory's don't take heed of that then they are even bigger fools than I think right now.
As i've said previously, 'public sector' is all well and good, but that makes up around 17% of the working population of this country. If any party was really for making the lives of those less fortunate/lower paid (or however you wish to describe it) better then they'd be looking at doing something for all of them, not try to score political points or carry favour with the public.
I've no doubt a lot of the public sector deserve to earn more, but so do many, probably more (due to the 83/17% split), in the private sector, what about them? 'For the many not the few' yer right.
I've never been so engaged in politics but also never been so saddened as to what a complete joke they all are. The quicker we get rid of both May & Corbyn the better.
Chop chop @bobmunro with @cobbles running your campaign you've my vote, i'll even register in your constituency so that I can vote for you even if I have to buy a flat there (we can rent it to @cabbles sorry cobbles, to run the campaign from).
Of course including reference to our emergency services in the amendment was political point scoring and it served its purpose. There was zero chance of the amendment going through, everyone knew that. It was to drive home the point that these are the sorts of public sector workers who have been subject to the ideologically driven cuts to pay and conditions.
Most of the public, frankly, don't give a monkey's if a social worker or a EHO or a planning inspector or a teacher or a carer or a refuse collector effectively take a pay cut year after year for 15 years (because that's what we are talking about after all). And that's because we in the UK utterly undervalue our public services on the whole and if we don't use them then we're not bothered if they get treated poorly by our government.
But when you start pointing out that this deliberate attack on public sector pay also impacts on nurses, ambulance staff, firefighters and the police then the message starts to get through. Look at the police officer interviewed yesterday. He'll quite rightly get all the plaudits and awards he deserves but the amazing bravery and selflessness he and his colleagues demonstrated isn't valued enough by this shower of a government to give them a decent pay award
The public are starting to see that at long last and I think that's what we are seeing in the latest social attitudes survey that came out.
As pointed out, Labour presented other measures to address the stagnent pay within the private sector but it shouldn't be a case of either/or anyway.
Bournemouth, do you work in the public sector by any chance?
Corbyn's apprtoach to Brexit is basically a soft Brexit rather than no Brexit at all or a Brexit with no deal. The rest would be resolved through negotiation. Not sure waht your problem with Corbyn is Prague, but it seems a bit irrational!
Of course it is party political Rob, Labour wants to pay public servants above 1% because they have been stitched up for years and it is fair. That includes Fire fighters, police and nurses! It is stupid giving a figure and giving the spineless Tory MPs and bought DUP MPs some excuse they can make around the figure. Labour's amendment did not go against their manifesto. Tory MPs have said they think it is fair stitching them up by voting the way they did - it is them that made a party political vote!
Good stuff, glad we are starting to agree they are all as bad as each other with their games
Comments
Most of the public, frankly, don't give a monkey's if a social worker or a EHO or a planning inspector or a teacher or a carer or a refuse collector effectively take a pay cut year after year for 15 years (because that's what we are talking about after all). And that's because we in the UK utterly undervalue our public services on the whole and if we don't use them then we're not bothered if they get treated poorly by our government.
But when you start pointing out that this deliberate attack on public sector pay also impacts on nurses, ambulance staff, firefighters and the police then the message starts to get through. Look at the police officer interviewed yesterday. He'll quite rightly get all the plaudits and awards he deserves but the amazing bravery and selflessness he and his colleagues demonstrated isn't valued enough by this shower of a government to give them a decent pay award
The public are starting to see that at long last and I think that's what we are seeing in the latest social attitudes survey that came out.
As pointed out, Labour presented other measures to address the stagnent pay within the private sector but it shouldn't be a case of either/or anyway.
I can spell it out for you - firstly if you give a number, you can have Tory/DUP MPS saying they didn't vote for it because whilst they agree we need more, the disagree with the number as it a) isn't enough or b) it needs to be targeted in key areas. It also has to be vague to garner support from as many people as possible - it is around the direction rather than the detail. They now have this vote next to their name - great for those in marginal seats where this can make a difference. iT is setting them up for the next election as today is going to be! There - done it for you Prague.
That's about the length and breadth of my contribution.
You're welcome.
Jeremy Corybn
Ms Diane Abbott
Jonathan Ashworth
Emily Thornberry
John McDonnell
Mr Nicholas Brown.
God help us when that lot get in at the next General Election.
Remember well the saying re Labour,
''Empty head vote them in
Empty bellies vote them out!
Half of it is all smoke and mirrors and rhetoric to score those political points, interesting to read on some areas in the public sector that have had good rises (3.2% is 1.2% more than on average my staff got in March).
I'm all for rewarding our key people accordingly, however to try and relay how this has all just become point scoring between parties, here's some facts on teachers pay. All salaries are available in the STPCD for each year, inflation was taken from here (bank of England) http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/education/Pages/resources/inflationtools/calculator/default.aspx:
Teacher pay scales since 2008 are up circa 17%, inflation is 22% in that period so is clearly 5 points behind. However when you allow for the fact that the personal allowance has increased by 90% in that period, net pay is up by 22% - pretty much the same as inflation then.......
Interesting data on the increasing number of students from disadvantaged backgrounds dropping out of University.
The fact that the increase in personal allowance has made up (in percentage terms) the shortfall so they are treading water just evidences how poor teacher's pay has become.
If it's all just about the feeling of being better off then drop the personal allowance and give the public sector a 7.5% rise! But then that would hurt heavily the 83% in the non public sector.
I was trying to show, that on a real basis teachers are broadly in the same position as 10 years ago when it comes to money in their pockets and allowing for inflation. Is a teacher in 2017 worth more than one in 2008? Maybe they are and were also under paid in 2008 and before.
There are of course far wider issues that effect all walks of life, not just public sector, housing costs being a real key one. This is where a huge part of the public sector pay scales falls down massively. A teacher will earn the same in Sunderland as in Brighton, yet the cost of living is far greater in Brighton than Sunderland. We have Inner London, Outer London, Fringe and rest of the country, there needs to be considerably more flexibility which they have tried to bring in but the unions are up in arms..... so what you see is teachers moving from the 'expensive areas' to the 'cheaper areas' of the country as despite getting an effective pay cut they are massively better off.
I know two teachers who have in recent times moved from Inner London (jobs) to Norfolk. In the process they have paid off their mortgages and bought with cash a bigger house and are considerably better off each month with despite the lower salary it is made up 5x due to not paying £1k a month+ on a mortgage.
You in the main wouldn't get this anomaly in the private sector.
Edit, if anyone is remotely interested - property prices in East Anglia since 2008 have increased exactly in line with inflation, 22%. Conversely on average London has increased 60%.
Amateurs the lot of 'em.
Of course it is party political Rob, Labour wants to pay public servants above 1% because they have been stitched up for years and it is fair. That includes Fire fighters, police and nurses! It is stupid giving a figure and giving the spineless Tory MPs and bought DUP MPs some excuse they can make around the figure. Labour's amendment did not go against their manifesto. Tory MPs have said they think it is fair stitching them up by voting the way they did - it is them that made a party political vote!