The winter fuel payment fiasco wouldn’t even have saved that much money, given the number of pensioners who applied for pension credit and now they’ve basically scrapped that too. Just penny pinching for literally no political or economic gain.
budapestersalat on
The “Sir” probably doesn’t help.
Honestly, it sounds a bit ridiculous to refer to a prime minister with that title in any random situation. We don’t refer to politicians with PhDs or other doctoral titles with it usually, even though that would be more understandable honestly.
justkillmeonce on
I mean.. the guy doesn’t have charisma and his recent decisions and communications prove that he doesn’t have a good political instinct as well. That’s a death combo in a parliamentary system.
One of the main weaknesses of the parliamentary system is that PMs always have to watch their back and there will be a bunch of ambitious MPs from your own side who are looking forward to dethroning you, this creates an environment where non charismatic PM who doesn’t have full control of his party will not be able to pass any policies which are even slightly controversial.
But of course this same thing is also one of the biggest strengths of parliamentary democracy against tyrants. Which is why parliamentary systems are rarely toppled by dictators when we compare it with the presidential system.
Lesson to be learned is that your PM HAVE to be popular with the public or he should have political weapons to keep his MPs in check.
No1PaulKeatingfan on
> One error has been for Sir Keir to court political pain for little gain, as the welfare debacle shows. Britain is suffering a steeper rise in benefits than other Western countries, owing partly to a surge in young claimants citing poor mental health.
> Labour should have dealt with the fundamental causes and managed the politics by offsetting cuts in one area of welfare with gains in another.
Such basic politics and they couldn’t even handle that smh
5 Comments
[link](https://archive.ph/V9NYm)
The winter fuel payment fiasco wouldn’t even have saved that much money, given the number of pensioners who applied for pension credit and now they’ve basically scrapped that too. Just penny pinching for literally no political or economic gain.
The “Sir” probably doesn’t help.
Honestly, it sounds a bit ridiculous to refer to a prime minister with that title in any random situation. We don’t refer to politicians with PhDs or other doctoral titles with it usually, even though that would be more understandable honestly.
I mean.. the guy doesn’t have charisma and his recent decisions and communications prove that he doesn’t have a good political instinct as well. That’s a death combo in a parliamentary system.
One of the main weaknesses of the parliamentary system is that PMs always have to watch their back and there will be a bunch of ambitious MPs from your own side who are looking forward to dethroning you, this creates an environment where non charismatic PM who doesn’t have full control of his party will not be able to pass any policies which are even slightly controversial.
But of course this same thing is also one of the biggest strengths of parliamentary democracy against tyrants. Which is why parliamentary systems are rarely toppled by dictators when we compare it with the presidential system.
Lesson to be learned is that your PM HAVE to be popular with the public or he should have political weapons to keep his MPs in check.
> One error has been for Sir Keir to court political pain for little gain, as the welfare debacle shows. Britain is suffering a steeper rise in benefits than other Western countries, owing partly to a surge in young claimants citing poor mental health.
> Labour should have dealt with the fundamental causes and managed the politics by offsetting cuts in one area of welfare with gains in another.
Such basic politics and they couldn’t even handle that smh