That Starmer fella...

You are reading a single comment by @ReekBlefs and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.

•

greentricky in reply to @hugo7

For all the chat from political pundits and the sort of people in this thread about "needing" to know what he stands for rather than what he's against

I guess this is the challenge and to bleekrefs point about starmer not needing to commit to things now, yesterday he was happy to commit to maintaining the cap on child benefit, a policy shown not to bring more people in to the work force as intended but effective at harming disadvantaged children, gives space for pundits and people in this thread space to extrapolate from what he stands for

•

ReekBlefs in reply to @greentricky

yesterday he was happy to commit to maintaining the cap on child benefit

I don't see an inconsistency there. Labour's current approach is not to make any off the cuff commitments - whether that applies to spending or repeal of legislation - so as not to make themselves a hostage to fortune later. Lammy did the same thing with the protest bill. He didn't commit to anything.

•

greentricky in reply to @ReekBlefs

He was asked if he would lift the cap and said no, that is different from saying I won't comment on it or we will review benefits as part of a broader review or it will depend if it complies with our new fiscal rules. It was a clear answer to the question.

About

Avatar for ReekBlefs @ReekBlefs started