That Starmer fella...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/13/angela-rayner-labour-attack-ad-hard-hitting-refuses-to-give-full-backing

The narrative seems to be that the shadow cabinet are at odds with their leader.

Profile on Starmer by Michael Crick

https://spotify.link/l1cCUYsW0yb

1 Attachment

Labour will be most interventionist government for a generation, says shadow minister
British public has yet to comprehend scale of party’s economic ambitions, says business chief Jonathan Reynolds

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/apr/15/labour-party-economic-ambitions-interventionist-jonathan-reynolds

It's taken three years, but it sounds like the penny is dropping:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/08/voters-returning-to-labour-after-corbyn-and-brexit-keir-starmer-to-say

I'm still a bit apprehensive about what "real change" might look like with a Cabinet including Phillips and Streeting but it sounds like we're getting somewhere at last.

After the news about water companies' ridiculous profits this morning, something on the cost of utilities might be a start...

What's your issue with Jess Phillips if you don't mind me asking?

I find her insufferably smug, I don't like the way she repeatedly undermined Labour under Corbyn and there seem to be a lot of issues around her finances, including from a crowd-funded leadership bid that never went anywhere.

Fair enough. I don't have any strong feelings either way with her, but interesting to hear that about crowd funded bid etc.

I really want to see what labour offer for net zero and solar panel installation in their manifesto.

I'm holding off that there are some hefty taxbreaos over the Tory non offerings

I can normally centrist dad away arguments against Starmer as letting perfect be the enemy of good and unnecessary ideological purity but his position on the protest arrests at the weekend takes the piss, few months ago he was voting against the Bill and now he's saying its necessary because of just stop oil and we shouldn't challenge police operational decisions, joker

few months ago he was voting against the Bill and now he's saying its necessary

Is there a source on that? Not being lazy, I did look, but couldn't find

https://twitter.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1655970444351086592?s=19

Yes I know he's being pragmatic but the saying it's needed because of just stop oil but really annoyed me

Yeah that's weak. I didn't hear him say it was necessary but he did say he wasn't going to repeal it. I don't really see why. If he'd justified it in a slightly different way - something like 'the problem with the law is not the law but with Suella Braverman directing the police to use their powers for govt priorities not for what the law itself allows for' we'd at least have seen a different approach, but the 'bedding in' defence is just beige weak 'wait and see' nothing.

Again I'm with you, I know he's being electorally pragmatic - he doesn't want to allow Sunak the ability to say 'he's on the side of the protesters' - but at some point he has to have the courage of his convictions. If he truly believes the Tories picked the wrong horse by going for the culture war dollar, and everything he's said recently seems to point in that direction, then he needs to start winning the arguments OUTSIDE the culture war.

Just backing down from every fight is going to be as counterproductive as stepping on every rake the Tories put out there.

I think it's worth noting that IF one had a lot to say about major policies that would win the argument outside the culture war and IF you were focussed on maximising your electoral chances and IF your strategy was to stay out of fights until the absolute optimum time to start throwing policy punches and IF that optimal time had not yet arrived, then the behaviour that we see now is entirely concordant with that strategy.

I have no idea if the above is the case, just noting that given the kind of strategy he has employed so far, the above narrative dovetails with the observed behaviour.

How will that not come across as more flip flopping and blowing with the public opinion wind. There is an ever growing bank of footage of him taking positions which will be cut up against any new position to show he doesn't really have any real beliefs. You already seeing it happening on social media and it will only get worse the more positions he takes like this as no one remembers the caveats

The problem, as I think you are now seeing, with the argument, is that it's not even good. When someone (repeatedly) tells you who they are, believe them.

This country needs genuinely transformative change, not continuity or things being slightly better.

This country needs genuinely transformative change, not continuity or things being slightly better.

Feels like a stepping stone may be needed to get from here to transformative change though?

he doesn't want to allow Sunak the ability to say 'he's on the side of the protesters'

He needs to say that he is on the side of the democratic right of people in the UK to protest as a repost to any claim Sunak may make that he is on the side of protesters.

He could also say that he s on the side of nurses, teachers etc right to ask for a fair wage

https://metro.co.uk/2023/05/10/keir-starmer-wouldnt-repeal-torys-illegal-migration-bill-18763229/#:~:text=Sir%20Keir%20Starmer%20reportedly%20has,to%20enact%20their%20immigration%20reforms.

pretty sure at this point big lad of the realm could slam his dick in a car door and james o'brian would be along to tell me about how this is great because it means rishi can't spend the next 12 months saying he's too scared to slam his dick in the car door

Just the transformative changes that Starmer pledged he would make would be nice.

This article is mainly about Seldon's views on Boris Johnson (and it's a great read), but he is a very clever man who knows much more about Prime Ministers than anyone else in the country. His take on Starmer:

"The country now needs a synthesis from whichever party. The great prime ministers are healers and teachers. They need to be able to tell a story of where they have come from and to where they will lead us.”

Is that leader evident to him?

“Well,” he says, “this is the reason why for the moment Starmer is disappointing, because there is this enormous desire for renewal. But Starmer seems micro when he could be macro, cautious when he could be passionate, dull where he could be inspirational.”

For all his many faults, you knew where Blair stood and that he was confident in the popularity of those beliefs.

Surely any opposition party, as a starting point, should be pledging to repeal all of the existing government's legislation. Otherwise what's the point.

Because that would take an entire parliament and they have their own agenda to implement at the same time?

You can't, because it would occupy all of your time in parliament, thereby not allowing you to do any new stuff.

SNAP

With a working majority surely repealing a law takes no time at all. Obviously I'm not an MP. Not yet anyway.

Others have put it perfectly, but just to add.

small boats racist nonsense and right to protest etc, whilst there hot topics for places like this and twitter etc, the average person in the street doesn’t give a shit. They care about the cost of living, housing, the nhs, the environment, the economy. That’s what labour need to talk about to win an election. If they just start talking about obscure bits of legislation Most people haven’t heard about there as out of touch as the Tories.