That Starmer fella...

I think that's a key part of the strategy isn't it?

In Labour's ideal world, they return control to the local area, give people control over the day to day annoyances in life (buses, antisocial behaviour, their high streets), empower them to feel a sense of ownership over their local spaces - and thereby cut the legs off all those movements which rely for their efficacy on suggesting that 'they' have removed something you have a right to. Whether that's Brexit, Indy Ref 2, anti-wokery, whatever it is.

It reminds me a little of Roosevelt's plan to save capitalism in the immediate aftermath of the depression. I can't remember the exact quote, but this was described as being 'a little socialism now to avoid having to have a lot of socialism in the future'.

It might even work. Consent is hugely important. When I was locked in legal battles against my freeholder, my home life was intolerable. Now we make the decisions about what we fund and what we don't fund, my home life is fine. The actual quality of life has only improved by a little, but the sense of control has made it feel completely different.

I'd need to see how good they are at a) selling the vision and b) implementing it, but it does at least feel like an idea with legs.

I think one of the issues with this is that a lot of the "control" that people want over their local area is really NIMBYism. I recently joined a Facebook group for a regional town (don't ask), and the majority of posts are about strategising to prevent development in fields adjoining the main road in and out of town. That's an area where you want central planning to share the pain (as they see it) of development.

The other stuff would be nice but it's pointless if it's not matched with funding - I don't know whether Starmer plans to increase central fiscal transfers. At the moment, the only real ways that councils can raise their own cash to spend locally are (i) parking charges and (ii) speculative property investments funded by PWLB loans.

empower them to feel a sense of ownership over their local spaces

It reminds me a little of Roosevelt's plan to save capitalism in the immediate aftermath of the depression.

Reminds me of how New York dug itself out of a hole under Giuliani too.

For me the key to success would be enabling local authorities to raise more tax locally (at the expense of centrally-controlled taxation), and ideally not just based on property values set three decades ago.

This would incentivise councils to expand the tax base by attracting businesses and workers - which one would hope leads to competition between local authorities which would be making local improvements to facilitate the movement of capital.

Of course what you would try and avoid is American-style local tax-incentives which ultimately end up with large corporates playing off towns & cities against one another to get tax exemptions and local resident's cash for building offices/factories/etc. And there would need to be a mechanism for redistributing tax receipts from wealthy authorities to struggling ones.

Totally, but I wonder if that's a function of local people not having control in other areas. My local area has a very similar instinctive dislike for any kind of development or improvement, and they'll literally block any attempt at any kind of planning almost by default.

I think a lot of this is due to a general sort of resistance to change, which I have absolutely no time for, but the other half (which I find harder to disagree with) is from experience of change not being for the better. Those cliches about the council approving huge tower blocks but not upgrading the infrastructure (GPs, buses, dentists, etc) are cliches for a reason. If local people were able to take care of their concerns,the support for that kind of blanket disagreement might fall away, and they'd be back to being NIMBY kooks rather than the leaders of a fairly decent size movement. I think I'm looking for positives before I look for negatives, but I can see how it COULD work.

On your second point I think the plan IS to formalise specific funding. Annalise Dodds on R4 yesterday talked about Andy Burnham's successful lobbying of westminster to get transport in Manchester sorted out. If they can formalise that funding, it would free up councils to do proper improvement work.

Party unity still going well I see.

Admitedly I haven't paid any attention to Starmer over recent weeks. I did hear a brainless thing about self referral to physio which wound me up a little, seeing as post op waits for physio are over one year in some parts of the country right now. Where are these physios that people will be able to self refer to?

Still, probably not enough of a reason for me to vote Tory.

1 Attachment

I mean, how can an MP who wants to be taken seriously, read an article about the Tories failing the NHS with direction, funding and planning and take that as an attack on the NHS?

I don't think its paywalled so read it for yourselves...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/01/14/nhs-not-out-of-bounds-shrine-needs-unsentimental-reform/

A lot of Starmer criticism from from all angles of the left yesterday on his NHS and pay positions

Some of the larger Twitter accounts on the left are calling for action to "keep Starmer out of office"

At times it's like they don't want to get elected.

Non-paywall version of the article here
https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fnews%2F2023%2F01%2F14%2Fnhs-not-out-of-bounds-shrine-needs-unsentimental-reform%2F
Describing it as attacking the NHS is a weird take (and actually reinforces the message of the article).

they don't want to get elected.

Of course they don't. If they were, their ideas would be tested and shown to be absolute shit.

Some of the larger Twitter accounts on the left are calling for action to "keep Starmer out of office"

Ugh. I try to console myself by thinking that at least some of these self-professed lefty accounts are Tory plants.

I think Abbott might be a Tory plant.

1 Attachment

And more

1 Attachment

I suppose she is only showing the same loyalty to the leadership that the current lot did when her faction was in charge. Lovely "big tent" stuff.

How about we try not to have warring factions and do whats achievable and best for the country?

do whats achievable and best for the country

Obviously problem being - who gets to decide what that is?

Obviously problem being - who gets to decide what that is?

Same as now. The electorate picks the best fit from the manifestos on offer.

Indirectly I'm just pointing out that a far left manifesto wouldn't well in next year's general election so constantly screaming that Starmer is not left enough is braindead and pointless. So the left of the Labour party should support, within reason, whatever it takes to get Labour in power for a decade or more and work within the party to influence policy in a left leaning direction. Its as simple as that.~

The Labour party are as beholden to the left of their own party as the Tories are with the ERG. Maybe even worse.

Think about it gize.

This is Malcolm Tucker / Alastair Campbell level clever.

The working class, non-London, right-wing-press-reading swing voters hate Diane Abbott. Positioning her against Starmer is a national-level vote winner for Labour. Her constituency know her and like her so she’ll not lose there. This will help not hinder Labour getting into government.

I'm just pointing out that a far left manifesto wouldn't well in next year's general election

This is a statement of opinion not of fact though. I don't think you can wish away factionalism by saying that everyone should just accept the result of the party leadership election and shut up until the next one.

I've never understood ideological purity but it does seem to be really important to some people, i.e. they'd prefer to be in opposition than complicit with a government whose policy platform they aren't aligned with. You see it on left and right alike.

The working class, non-London, right-wing-press-reading swing voters hate Diane Abbott. Positioning her against Starmer is a national-level vote winner for Labour. Her constituency know her and like her so she’ll not lose there. This will help not hinder Labour getting into government.

I don’t know if I believe they’d pre-planned it - or that Abbott would go along with such a plan - but I wouldn’t be surprised if she is allowed to keep on sniping away

If I, a funemployed wastelord, could think of it, the top PR bods at Labour definitely could. Abbott wouldn’t need much encouraging to be rude about Suck Here Starmer.

My only experience of top level politics is Yes Minister and The Thick of It tho.

This is a statement of opinion not of fact though.

True, but its a resonably educated guess. Based on a number of things but not least of all how the most consumed media outlets in this country report on left wing policies and supporters. Something else that is quite potent for me is the number of older folk I have spoken to in recent times who say they don't want to vote Tory but won't vote for labour because "socialist policies will bankrupt the country".

The working class, non-London, right-wing-press-reading swing voters hate Diane Abbott. Positioning her against Starmer is a national-level vote winner for Labour. Her constituency know her and like her so she’ll not lose there. This will help not hinder Labour getting into government.

I can see your logic but I think that those people would rather use it to portray a party in crisis instead of go for her. "Would you really vote for a party that would make Abbott a ministe" was an effective attack line in 2019 after all.

Yes, but that was when JC was at the helm and they were best buddies, distancing her from Starmer weakens that line of attack.

Note also that The Telegraph, newspaper for cunts, is working with Starmer on this. As a teenager I hated that Tony Blair got in bed with the cunt press, but in hindsight we had a competent centre-left government for three terms. Not quite the government those of us who admired John Smith were hoping for, but compared to the last 12 years it was glorious.

Keep Alexi Sayle in your heart but Alastair Campbell in your head. That’s my motto.