Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party?
Discussion
turbobloke said:
SpeckledJim said:
Id love to be a fly on the wall for some of the screaming ding-dongs I bet they have behind closed doors.
Gordon Brown's tantrums involved throwing mobiles which marked office walls allegedly; at least crayon marks will be easier to fix.I can almost forgive Johnson for his handling of Covid, it's a tough situation with no obvious "right" way.
What I can't forgive, as a leaseholder of a flat, is being thrown under the bus by his government and made to pay for the mistakes of others in constructing my flat. Especially not considering the way they've all consistently said they would make sure the innocent don't pay, then spectacularly walked that back and ensured that we will pay, whilst still saying that we won't.
Party of home ownership my arse.
My vote will either go nowhere next time, or maybe to Labour, who at least are standing up for me.
What I can't forgive, as a leaseholder of a flat, is being thrown under the bus by his government and made to pay for the mistakes of others in constructing my flat. Especially not considering the way they've all consistently said they would make sure the innocent don't pay, then spectacularly walked that back and ensured that we will pay, whilst still saying that we won't.
Party of home ownership my arse.
My vote will either go nowhere next time, or maybe to Labour, who at least are standing up for me.
Sophisticated Sarah said:
turbobloke said:
SpeckledJim said:
Id love to be a fly on the wall for some of the screaming ding-dongs I bet they have behind closed doors.
Gordon Brown's tantrums involved throwing mobiles which marked office walls allegedly; at least crayon marks will be easier to fix.https://www.amazon.co.uk/Left-Out-Inside-Labour-Co...
There are some fantastic detailed accounts of the huge internal ructions during Corbyn's time. Proper crabs-in-a-barrel stuff. Makes for great reading.
bristolracer said:
Did I not hear that hes going to map out the new strategy today?
So that will be some guff about a fairer society then, followed by a bit of NHS, bit of education and sod all detail about paying for it.
So far he's already invoking 'the atmosphere of 1945' (which apparently he has 'personal experience' with...). Knowing Starmer his idea of 'the atmosphere of 1945' will be a 0.5% increase in local government funding, a slightly longer freeze on business rates than the one the government has already implemented and a pledge to not do some things the government has said it will do but hasn't done yet. Because the spirit of Attlee, Bevan and Beveridge was all about tiny detail tinkering to the minutiae of the existing system...So that will be some guff about a fairer society then, followed by a bit of NHS, bit of education and sod all detail about paying for it.
Just before I click 'Submit', he has said he has said he won't apologise for criticising the government. Really tough, strong, principled opposition there, Sir Keir! It's a step forward from apologising when you criticise the government, I suppose...
Lots of Blitz spirit vexilosexual empty rhetoric so far as well. Urgh.
2xChevrons said:
bristolracer said:
Did I not hear that hes going to map out the new strategy today?
So that will be some guff about a fairer society then, followed by a bit of NHS, bit of education and sod all detail about paying for it.
So far he's already invoking 'the atmosphere of 1945' (which apparently he has 'personal experience' with...). Knowing Starmer his idea of 'the atmosphere of 1945' will be a 0.5% increase in local government funding, a slightly longer freeze on business rates than the one the government has already implemented and a pledge to not do some things the government has said it will do but hasn't done yet. Because the spirit of Attlee, Bevan and Beveridge was all about tiny detail tinkering to the minutiae of the existing system...So that will be some guff about a fairer society then, followed by a bit of NHS, bit of education and sod all detail about paying for it.
Just before I click 'Submit', he has said he has said he won't apologise for criticising the government. Really tough, strong, principled opposition there, Sir Keir! It's a step forward from apologising when you criticise the government, I suppose...
Lots of Blitz spirit vexilosexual empty rhetoric so far as well. Urgh.
Starmer making some economic policy statements today with some suggestions about recovery bonds and startup grants focused away form London.
Seems like he’s still stuck between not being able to politicise the coronavirus too much or criticise the government and still having credibility problems with labour.
And in polls he’s still on the decline.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/keir...
Seems like he’s still stuck between not being able to politicise the coronavirus too much or criticise the government and still having credibility problems with labour.
And in polls he’s still on the decline.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/keir...
anonymoususer said:
Looking upwards
Moving forward
The futures clear
It's best with Keir
At one point in his speech he said that he didn't believe in Build Back Better because he wanted to go forwards, not backwards. Which would have been great if he hadn't said 'let's build back better' less than six months ago.Moving forward
The futures clear
It's best with Keir
The one thing we were promised was that Starmer would at least be a good political operator and policy salesman. He can't even do that.
It's also really telling that after talking about his rather ludicrous national bonds idea he completely fluffed the (very obvious) question from the floor about what he would actually spend the money on. Not even one easy, popular feel-good fiscal multiplier like removing all the dodgy cladding from every building in the land, a new council house programme (Spirit of '45, and all that), reopening closed railway lines or a scheme to eliminate road potholes by 2030. Not even any populist red meat cross for the tabloids like a little Union Jack made by unemployed ex-servicemen for every schoolchild.
Just nothing. How can you be this vacuous when you've called a press event to launch your policy platform and you've just evoked one of the most transformative and policy-rich governments in British history?
And this was a relatively friendly event. I think he's going to get eviscerated at an actual election debate.
How would Government Bonds work with the current very low interest rates for deposits?
Just on BBC News was a lady who I think is a Labour MP. She was saying that it was important for the Government to be able to access what she described as the high level of personal savings during the Pandemic. Is she suggesting an element of compulsion for this proposed scheme?
Just on BBC News was a lady who I think is a Labour MP. She was saying that it was important for the Government to be able to access what she described as the high level of personal savings during the Pandemic. Is she suggesting an element of compulsion for this proposed scheme?
jmn said:
How would Government Bonds work with the current very low interest rates for deposits?
Just on BBC News was a lady who I think is a Labour MP. She was saying that it was important for the Government to be able to access what she described as the high level of personal savings during the Pandemic. Is she suggesting an element of compulsion for this proposed scheme?
Sounds like a bail-in, punishing savers.Just on BBC News was a lady who I think is a Labour MP. She was saying that it was important for the Government to be able to access what she described as the high level of personal savings during the Pandemic. Is she suggesting an element of compulsion for this proposed scheme?
A third of Brits have less than £600 in savings. The average is aruond £6k.
20% UK adults have no immediately accessible savings (according to OpenMoney}.
If it was a Labour MP they could consider this a good and safe policy, bashing the 'rich' where rich means over £6k in the bank.
I feel both a little disappointed and sorry for him. He has a lot of potential but seems to be fighting a battle that no longer exists. Labour just do not seem to get the mood of the nation any more.
When I say sorry its because I feel he is either shackled by the party or just not able to see what the public want. He seems to believe he is offering what they want. I feel he wants to make positive change but his compass is off and he does not realise it. They are providing answers to questions we all stopped asking a long time ago.
Recovery bonds funded by the general public? At today’s rates. To be spent on supporting businesses and people affected by the forced closure. Because they believe people who have, for the first time, managed to get some savings together are going to invest it all in a long-term bond??
So close and yet so far. I know its a common perception on here but I believe the very very large majority of people do not want handouts, and are more and more conscious of public debt. People want to get working and earning and want to see a prosperous economy.
Had he instead set out a roadmap for reopening in a safe and controlled way with perhaps a little more support for sectors that would need it he would have nailed it, against a backdrop of Conservatives seemingly wanting endless lockdowns.
His cross-examination style of picking out the detail and holding it up for scrutiny is, I believe, what the public initially liked. The public need an end to sales-style politics and bluff and bluster. He could be/could have been the perfect answer to where we are politically, but instead he is ever there talking about war bonds.
When I say sorry its because I feel he is either shackled by the party or just not able to see what the public want. He seems to believe he is offering what they want. I feel he wants to make positive change but his compass is off and he does not realise it. They are providing answers to questions we all stopped asking a long time ago.
Recovery bonds funded by the general public? At today’s rates. To be spent on supporting businesses and people affected by the forced closure. Because they believe people who have, for the first time, managed to get some savings together are going to invest it all in a long-term bond??
So close and yet so far. I know its a common perception on here but I believe the very very large majority of people do not want handouts, and are more and more conscious of public debt. People want to get working and earning and want to see a prosperous economy.
Had he instead set out a roadmap for reopening in a safe and controlled way with perhaps a little more support for sectors that would need it he would have nailed it, against a backdrop of Conservatives seemingly wanting endless lockdowns.
His cross-examination style of picking out the detail and holding it up for scrutiny is, I believe, what the public initially liked. The public need an end to sales-style politics and bluff and bluster. He could be/could have been the perfect answer to where we are politically, but instead he is ever there talking about war bonds.
2xChevrons said:
It's also really telling that after talking about his rather ludicrous national bonds idea he completely fluffed the (very obvious) question from the floor about what he would actually spend the money on. Not even one easy, popular feel-good fiscal multiplier like removing all the dodgy cladding from every building in the land, a new council house programme (Spirit of '45, and all that), reopening closed railway lines or a scheme to eliminate road potholes by 2030. Not even any populist red meat cross for the tabloids like a little Union Jack made by unemployed ex-servicemen for every schoolchild.
With the exception of cladding, aren't those Traditional Labour style ideas? As opposed to the current approach which I guess I'd call Islington Labour?There doesn't appear to be much on offer for the Traditional Labour types, based on what little I know. I'm supposed to be one - I'd happily vote Labour if they appealed, but the Conservatives appear to align much more closely with my values and that doesn't seem to be changing any time soon.
I caught a clip of his big new idea on the midday news bulletin. He seems unable to express himself with any conviction.
Mad as Jeremy’s ideas were, he did at least express them very clearly and with passion.
So his feet are now firmly under the table, but i feel we have just a slightly worse version of Ed Miliband.
Mad as Jeremy’s ideas were, he did at least express them very clearly and with passion.
So his feet are now firmly under the table, but i feel we have just a slightly worse version of Ed Miliband.
amusingduck said:
2xChevrons said:
It's also really telling that after talking about his rather ludicrous national bonds idea he completely fluffed the (very obvious) question from the floor about what he would actually spend the money on. Not even one easy, popular feel-good fiscal multiplier like removing all the dodgy cladding from every building in the land, a new council house programme (Spirit of '45, and all that), reopening closed railway lines or a scheme to eliminate road potholes by 2030. Not even any populist red meat cross for the tabloids like a little Union Jack made by unemployed ex-servicemen for every schoolchild.
With the exception of cladding, aren't those Traditional Labour style ideas? As opposed to the current approach which I guess I'd call Islington Labour?There doesn't appear to be much on offer for the Traditional Labour types, based on what little I know. I'm supposed to be one - I'd happily vote Labour if they appealed, but the Conservatives appear to align much more closely with my values and that doesn't seem to be changing any time soon.
1) It's not just cladding, there are lots of other fire safety risks that we're being obliged to pay to fix, but Jenrick just keeps talking about money for cladding
2) The funding they've put up is not enough by half
3) There's no support beyond cladding loans (that will add £600 per year to service charges and consequently massively dent property values) for blocks under 18m even though some of them are still lethally dangerous (see Worcester Park fire). Even the loans they're offering are only for cladding, so many blocks still won't be remediated
4) Australia have already proven how it can be done, the taxpayer stumps up the cash and then re-coups it from developers over 30 years with a levy - why not do it here? Perhaps due to the huge proporition of their donations that come from the developers?
5) Even if you don't own a flat and are thinking this doesn't affect you, wait until you want to move and your whole chain collapses because the flat at the bottom turns out to be un-mortgageable.
What seems staggering to be is that 40% of the victims of this scandal voted Tory, it's unlikely any of us will again. We're not stupid and can see right through their soundbites and we know who they're looking out for (and it's not us).
amusingduck said:
With the exception of cladding, aren't those Traditional Labour style ideas? As opposed to the current approach which I guess I'd call Islington Labour?
There doesn't appear to be much on offer for the Traditional Labour types, based on what little I know. I'm supposed to be one - I'd happily vote Labour if they appealed, but the Conservatives appear to align much more closely with my values and that doesn't seem to be changing any time soon.
What are you defining as 'current approach'? Corbyn or Starmer? Because - as I keep pointing out - the 2017 and 2019 manifestos had loads of those Traditional Labour ideas. People just refused to talk about them because they wanted to get vapour attacks about higher income taxes and the Gender Rights Act. There doesn't appear to be much on offer for the Traditional Labour types, based on what little I know. I'm supposed to be one - I'd happily vote Labour if they appealed, but the Conservatives appear to align much more closely with my values and that doesn't seem to be changing any time soon.
And why isn't cladding a Traditional Labour issue? Do tenants in the Red Wall want to live in buildings with severe fire safety issues? Building regs, residential safety and tenant rights are key Labour issues. So would be providing a good deal of work to labourers, traders and manufacturers if there was a proper government drive to eliminate the issue.
2xChevrons said:
What are you defining as 'current approach'? Corbyn or Starmer? Because - as I keep pointing out - the 2017 and 2019 manifestos had loads of those Traditional Labour ideas. People just refused to talk about them because they wanted to get vapour attacks about higher income taxes and the Gender Rights Act.
And why isn't cladding a Traditional Labour issue? Do tenants in the Red Wall want to live in buildings with severe fire safety issues? Building regs, residential safety and tenant rights are key Labour issues. So would be providing a good deal of work to labourers, traders and manufacturers if there was a proper government drive to eliminate the issue.
Poorly worded, apologies. I was trying to say that of the ideas listed, only cladding seemed to be something that 'Islington' Labour would be interested in. Not suggesting that Traditional types would not be interested.And why isn't cladding a Traditional Labour issue? Do tenants in the Red Wall want to live in buildings with severe fire safety issues? Building regs, residential safety and tenant rights are key Labour issues. So would be providing a good deal of work to labourers, traders and manufacturers if there was a proper government drive to eliminate the issue.
I'll have a closer look at the next Labour manifesto, there was little need in 2019 due to Brexit.
Blue Oval84 said:
I can almost forgive Johnson for his handling of Covid, it's a tough situation with no obvious "right" way.
What I can't forgive, as a leaseholder of a flat, is being thrown under the bus by his government and made to pay for the mistakes of others in constructing my flat. Especially not considering the way they've all consistently said they would make sure the innocent don't pay, then spectacularly walked that back and ensured that we will pay, whilst still saying that we won't.
Party of home ownership my arse.
My vote will either go nowhere next time, or maybe to Labour, who at least are standing up for me.
Boris announced a £3.5b cladding replacement fund on 10th Feb. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56013464What I can't forgive, as a leaseholder of a flat, is being thrown under the bus by his government and made to pay for the mistakes of others in constructing my flat. Especially not considering the way they've all consistently said they would make sure the innocent don't pay, then spectacularly walked that back and ensured that we will pay, whilst still saying that we won't.
Party of home ownership my arse.
My vote will either go nowhere next time, or maybe to Labour, who at least are standing up for me.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff