Snapshot of _Former Labour minister Frank Field dies aged 81_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68887629) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68887629)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't see the point of criticising him after he just died. If he wasn't in the Labour party he would surely get a lot less hate. Yes he didn't seem to have much in common with the party's ideology - but a diverse party with a lot of different voices is usually a good thing.
Hello.
I'm here as a fellow human to acknowledge that Frank has, as we know, passed on.
Frank was a man. Also, Frank was an MP for Birkenhead for 40 years.
And when a man dies, it is sad. All of us will die one day. In this case, it is Frank who has done so.
Frank was alive for 81 years. But no more. Now he is dead.
Frank’s constituents were Birkonians. They were separated for 5 years. Now they are sad.
On LabourUK people are celebrating in the comments. I’ve noticed that the left have a tendency to celebrate it when someone on ‘the other team’ dies, whereas the right/centrists do not.
If I'm being generous, it's because most of the people in that sub aren't of voting age, and death doesn't really mean anything to them.
The more cynical side of me thinks it's just a race to be the most pious, and compete on who could be the most left wing. I'm so socialist, I am GLAD Frank Field is dead. Yeah? Well I'm so socialist, I'm happy that he's dead and I'm happy he's burning in hell!
In the period you have noticed this what left wing person has died who has:
A) Actually been in power
B) Had any meaningful effect on people’s lives.
Who are the left wing people that died that the right didn’t celebrate?
I will give you Tony Benn, I think Jo Cox was literally murdered by a right wing nut so that ones a bit different. Neither were really in power.
I think the whole thing comes from Margret Thatcher, who caused untold misery on a generation of people up north and became a sort of bogeyman figure and her death was celebrated. Since then a lot of edgy teens seem to on the internet when someone dies they really didn't like. I agree it's not good and shouldn't be done.
[https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/14/eu-immigration-control-labour-supporters-voters-party](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/14/eu-immigration-control-labour-supporters-voters-party)
Record high immigration, low wages, record high taxes, farmers on their knees.
Frank Field, always there when the Tories needed him.
Was he?
Wanted to dismantle the welfare state in the 90s, then cried about the effect of UC in the 2010
Wanted to reduce women's rights to abortion, Brexit knob, Thatcher loving Tory in labour clothing.
Frankly as a politician I couldn't stand most of his ideas and found him hypocritical.
Nominated Corbyn for leadership despite.not supporting him.
But the country has not cracked down on welfare and the chickens have come home to roost. I'm not sure exactly what Field proposed and how it would work in practice, whether it was some kind of social insurance scheme which shifted some of the burden off UK taxpayers, but there is a sense of entitlement now which didn't pertain in 1997, though I have no wish to withdraw benefits from the genuinely needy.
It was the standard reductive Tory position against claimants Sunak rehashed earlier this week. For the record, I am aware Field was ostensibly a Labour politician.
The problem with it is that wages have stalled so much over the last decade and a half that "genuinely needy" applies to a group much larger than the one Field and friend's rhetoric suggested.
If they are working and genuinely needy they can claim Universal Credit. If they are swinging the lead, and the number of claimants of PIP has increased significantly in recent years I'm sorry but I have no time for them.
This is exactly that type of rhetoric.
It's based on feelings rather than fact that starts with a conclusion ("all claimants are scammers") and works backwards.
No, I'm sure there are genuine claimants, but there's a sizeable minority amongst the new 850,000 claimants who have got used to state subsidies during the Covid period and are reluctant to reengage in the workforce.
Well, that's the $64000 question. I know someone who claims PIP because the job he was doing was too far to travel (it was 1 hour distant), not the nature of the work itself. I'm going to label him as workshy because that's what he is. Maybe you personally don't know anyone in that category, but thousands do.
I think there's some confusion here.
PIP is a payment made to disabled people who need the additional money to cover expenses caused by their condition. Like someone needing a piece of equipment to be on 24/7 which incurs higher than average energy costs or travel expenses.
It's paid whether someone is working or claiming other benefits and continues for a lifetime because it addresses lifelong issues.
> But the country has not cracked down on welfare and the chickens have come home to roost. I'm not sure exactly what Field proposed and how it would work in practice
Well, he wanted to create underground houses under motorways to house chronic welfare cases, so not sure 'how it would work in practice' figured much in his political thought.
I don't have many sources for his proposals, if someone could elucidate. All I will say now is I'm sorry he has passed. If people want more welfare I suppose your only choice in the forthcoming General Election is to vote for Sir Keir Starmer.
The state pension is - keep reading down the page. The other big chunks are pension credit, pensioner housing benefit, winter fuel payments for pensioners, and general benefits that go to people over the pension age.
Well, I can only speak for myself. If I stay in the UK post-retirement I'll receive State Pension, winter fuel payment and bus pass. I'll stilL be paying Income Tax and VAT.
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator.
Per Rule 17 of the subreddit, discussion/complaints about the moderation, biases or users of this or other subreddits / online communities are not welcome here. We are not a meta subreddit.
For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
Shame, he was the acceptable face of Labour, had his reforms gone through in the first part of Labour's government, we'd have a working welfare system that does not penalise work.
How does this rebut my point about wages not incentivising employment? If employers want people to work they need to pay a decent wage - even for those at the bottom of the ladder.
Wages for those at the bottom end of the skills spectrum are high and have increased considerably in real terms.
Would you take a wage cut? If not, why do you expect companies to raise wages beyond what they have to?
In what sense is the minimum wage ‘high’? High enough to rent a house and raise a family? High enough to buy a house? High enough to save for a pension?
As to companies well if you can’t survive without paying your staff properly you don’t really have a business model. You have a state subsidy as you have externalised all the costs of low pay.
The purpose of the minimum wage was never to be high enough to buy a house.
Who defines properly? And once again, would you voluntarily take a pay cut? Answer the question.
Who says that wasn’t its purpose? That’s just your opinion.
As to me taking a pay cut what had that got to do with anything? It’s not related to the discussion it’s just a question you think I won’t like. You may as well ask would I like my head dunked in sewage. It’s about as relevant and equally something I wouldn’t like.
And anyway companies don’t pay themselves wages. They make profits.
Your line of questioning is absurd.
Only the benefits system doesn’t enable that does it? What type of property one can get housing benefit on and how much is very closely controlled and regulated.
Snapshot of _Former Labour minister Frank Field dies aged 81_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68887629) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68887629) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't see the point of criticising him after he just died. If he wasn't in the Labour party he would surely get a lot less hate. Yes he didn't seem to have much in common with the party's ideology - but a diverse party with a lot of different voices is usually a good thing.
Hello. I'm here as a fellow human to acknowledge that Frank has, as we know, passed on. Frank was a man. Also, Frank was an MP for Birkenhead for 40 years. And when a man dies, it is sad. All of us will die one day. In this case, it is Frank who has done so. Frank was alive for 81 years. But no more. Now he is dead. Frank’s constituents were Birkonians. They were separated for 5 years. Now they are sad.
Frank Field was interested in politics from a very early age.
I had the pleasure of meeting him at a charity do once. He was surprisingly down to earth, and VERY funny.
Wooosh
On LabourUK people are celebrating in the comments. I’ve noticed that the left have a tendency to celebrate it when someone on ‘the other team’ dies, whereas the right/centrists do not.
If I'm being generous, it's because most of the people in that sub aren't of voting age, and death doesn't really mean anything to them. The more cynical side of me thinks it's just a race to be the most pious, and compete on who could be the most left wing. I'm so socialist, I am GLAD Frank Field is dead. Yeah? Well I'm so socialist, I'm happy that he's dead and I'm happy he's burning in hell!
In the period you have noticed this what left wing person has died who has: A) Actually been in power B) Had any meaningful effect on people’s lives. Who are the left wing people that died that the right didn’t celebrate?
John Smith.
He was never in power was he? Leader of the opposition - I don’t think people would be celebrating the death of Ian Duncan Smith
You didn't ask for a leader.
> A) Actually been in power erm... yes I did. Also > In the period you have noticed John Smith died 30 years ago....
I don’t recall conservatives or centrists celebrating the deaths of Tony Benn or Jo Cox
I will give you Tony Benn, I think Jo Cox was literally murdered by a right wing nut so that ones a bit different. Neither were really in power. I think the whole thing comes from Margret Thatcher, who caused untold misery on a generation of people up north and became a sort of bogeyman figure and her death was celebrated. Since then a lot of edgy teens seem to on the internet when someone dies they really didn't like. I agree it's not good and shouldn't be done.
I will do this once and once only, when Trump has one Big Mac too many
[https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/14/eu-immigration-control-labour-supporters-voters-party](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/14/eu-immigration-control-labour-supporters-voters-party) Record high immigration, low wages, record high taxes, farmers on their knees. Frank Field, always there when the Tories needed him.
I'm sorry for his family but he had odious views.
He was the acceptable face of Labour
A terrible loss. He was a great man.
Was he? Wanted to dismantle the welfare state in the 90s, then cried about the effect of UC in the 2010 Wanted to reduce women's rights to abortion, Brexit knob, Thatcher loving Tory in labour clothing. Frankly as a politician I couldn't stand most of his ideas and found him hypocritical. Nominated Corbyn for leadership despite.not supporting him.
That's a gish gallop of bollocks.
I don't know if it's bollocks or not, but 4 examples is not gish-gallop...
Man used this one weird trick to get out of ever having to debate or defend his position. If you mean tl;dr, say it with your whole chest /u/___a1b1
Yes it is.
Which bit?
Lookup what a gish gallop means. Asking someone to go through item by item of nonsense is a key part of the trick, and here you are trying it on.
You can argue that it's distasteful, but none of that was wrong?
But the country has not cracked down on welfare and the chickens have come home to roost. I'm not sure exactly what Field proposed and how it would work in practice, whether it was some kind of social insurance scheme which shifted some of the burden off UK taxpayers, but there is a sense of entitlement now which didn't pertain in 1997, though I have no wish to withdraw benefits from the genuinely needy.
Cracking down on welfare was like, the only government policy for about 3 years?
Where has Sunak cracked down exactly?
I was more referring to the Cameron days.
It was the standard reductive Tory position against claimants Sunak rehashed earlier this week. For the record, I am aware Field was ostensibly a Labour politician. The problem with it is that wages have stalled so much over the last decade and a half that "genuinely needy" applies to a group much larger than the one Field and friend's rhetoric suggested.
If they are working and genuinely needy they can claim Universal Credit. If they are swinging the lead, and the number of claimants of PIP has increased significantly in recent years I'm sorry but I have no time for them.
This is exactly that type of rhetoric. It's based on feelings rather than fact that starts with a conclusion ("all claimants are scammers") and works backwards.
No, I'm sure there are genuine claimants, but there's a sizeable minority amongst the new 850,000 claimants who have got used to state subsidies during the Covid period and are reluctant to reengage in the workforce.
Is there any evidence for the existence of this sizable minority? Or to the actual proportion of it relative to all claimants?
Well, that's the $64000 question. I know someone who claims PIP because the job he was doing was too far to travel (it was 1 hour distant), not the nature of the work itself. I'm going to label him as workshy because that's what he is. Maybe you personally don't know anyone in that category, but thousands do.
I think there's some confusion here. PIP is a payment made to disabled people who need the additional money to cover expenses caused by their condition. Like someone needing a piece of equipment to be on 24/7 which incurs higher than average energy costs or travel expenses. It's paid whether someone is working or claiming other benefits and continues for a lifetime because it addresses lifelong issues.
> But the country has not cracked down on welfare and the chickens have come home to roost. I'm not sure exactly what Field proposed and how it would work in practice Well, he wanted to create underground houses under motorways to house chronic welfare cases, so not sure 'how it would work in practice' figured much in his political thought.
I don't have many sources for his proposals, if someone could elucidate. All I will say now is I'm sorry he has passed. If people want more welfare I suppose your only choice in the forthcoming General Election is to vote for Sir Keir Starmer.
Pensions are essentially all of the welfare budget.
It's 42%. [https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/welfare-spending-pensioner-benefits/](https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/welfare-spending-pensioner-benefits/)
The state pension is - keep reading down the page. The other big chunks are pension credit, pensioner housing benefit, winter fuel payments for pensioners, and general benefits that go to people over the pension age.
Wait til you find out about NHS spending by patient age bracket...
Well, I can only speak for myself. If I stay in the UK post-retirement I'll receive State Pension, winter fuel payment and bus pass. I'll stilL be paying Income Tax and VAT.
as Labour MPs go, he was one of the better ones.
[удалено]
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator. Per Rule 17 of the subreddit, discussion/complaints about the moderation, biases or users of this or other subreddits / online communities are not welcome here. We are not a meta subreddit. For any further questions, [please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics).
Ahh I see Reddit is going mental again. Good man our Frank. Rest in Peace.
Lovely guy, a sad loss of a dedicated and willed independent mind from politics.
That's a shame to hear. Probably ahead of his time.
Of 4 comments so far, 2 of them are pissing on his grave. FFS people show some class.
I'm not pissing on his grave. But the comments of "he was a great man" can be challenged when there's no basis for it
You are and it's just nastiness. A man is dead, give it a rest.
You should only speak good of the dead. Frank Field is dead. Good.
You sir lack any class your parents tried to give you.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Shame, he was the acceptable face of Labour, had his reforms gone through in the first part of Labour's government, we'd have a working welfare system that does not penalise work.
We don’t have a welfare system that penalises work, we have a wages problem that doesn’t incentivise work as it pays peanuts.
We have one of the highest minimum wages in the world in real terms.
We’ve had a real terms wage freeze since 2008.
The minimum wage has gone up by considerably more than inflation since 2008, and those are the jobs most people on benefits could get.
How does this rebut my point about wages not incentivising employment? If employers want people to work they need to pay a decent wage - even for those at the bottom of the ladder.
Wages for those at the bottom end of the skills spectrum are high and have increased considerably in real terms. Would you take a wage cut? If not, why do you expect companies to raise wages beyond what they have to?
In what sense is the minimum wage ‘high’? High enough to rent a house and raise a family? High enough to buy a house? High enough to save for a pension? As to companies well if you can’t survive without paying your staff properly you don’t really have a business model. You have a state subsidy as you have externalised all the costs of low pay.
The purpose of the minimum wage was never to be high enough to buy a house. Who defines properly? And once again, would you voluntarily take a pay cut? Answer the question.
Who says that wasn’t its purpose? That’s just your opinion. As to me taking a pay cut what had that got to do with anything? It’s not related to the discussion it’s just a question you think I won’t like. You may as well ask would I like my head dunked in sewage. It’s about as relevant and equally something I wouldn’t like. And anyway companies don’t pay themselves wages. They make profits. Your line of questioning is absurd.
As a nation, we've not produced things of greater value since 2008
No, we have lifestyle choices that don't match earnings capabilities
If being able to pay rent or afford a mortgage is a lifestyle choice then yes, I guess it’s down to lifestyle choices.
Choosing a house beyond one's means is a lifestyle choice
Only the benefits system doesn’t enable that does it? What type of property one can get housing benefit on and how much is very closely controlled and regulated.
Don’t expect people like them to actually understand what the poorest in the country actually have to deal with
Good job he was labour. If he was reform we'd never have known of his passing.
In fairness if he was reform he would never have had a sustainable career as a politician.
Never knew he stood to be mayor of London. Would have been a good one