That Starmer fella...

if only they'd had time to try and figure out how to do that. the whole bit during campaigning was that they weren't going to remove it so 🤷

I think they left of their own accord after a failed coup?

But yes, if Corbyn ruled with the same authority as Starmer then the project might have been more successful. Starmer probably learnt that when he was one of allies.

And there it is.

CORBYN!

Guys, stop complaining. You're all too dumb (sorry not well informed enough) to really understand the grown-up politics that's taking place. And anyway, this was all a clever trap which only the dumbest MPs fell for - they only have themselves to blame (ignore the fact that, by all reports, a large portion of the PLP is quite angry with how Starmer and the whips handled the situation). Also, by voting for the amendment, they have somehow now made it harder for the policy to be changed in the future! They're the real villains.

In any case, we need to give Starmer time. It's only his first King's Speech! This one is about growing the economy, not growing food for starving children.

this comment is emblimatic of the issue, politics is not just fun to jibber about, on many issues people have felt most frustrated about, you treat it as such. a game of technicality football. rather than imagining that people are coming with positions they're knowledgable about and have lived experience of. in many issues are actively harming or reducing their quality of life or someone they love.

i personally talk about stuff here as i interact with many parts of the forum off line, hang out with people and i think it's good to talk through stuff they might not even acknowledge, many people talk to me about such.

you're getting big man on the ball, over some people upset over the party, many of them have voted for their entire lives, campaigned for, is sacking no name back bench mps for saying "can we spend an insignificant amount of money to help feed 1.6 million kids after 14 years of cuts"?. weeks after they cannae even say anything about another no namer doing actual section 28 homophobia.

also, as an aside, i'm a trans woman on the internet who's pretty public about her life and experiences, the fact you think i'd be upset of things a man on a bike forum could post on the internet is very funny. if that was the case i'd have left this site long ago.

Yeah fair enough, can see that argument. Still think that trying to win the point by voting against the kings speech is more or less the worst approach in terms of strategy

I doubt McDonnell 'walked into a trap'. He's a very seasoned politician, regardless of what one might think of his politics.

He hasn't been terrifically successful at achieving his aims though has he?;

lived experience

.

i have lived experience of having to eat less because of benfits constrictions, yeah? i have lived experience of seeing family back home struggle with with this cap on top of everything else.

my childhood and health, was shaped by it. so was my families.

what a weird comment

Perhaps bleekrefs also has experience that informs their views?

No, it was a weird comment. Neckbeard-alt-right-gotchya-esque.

I actually agree that Labour should remove the two-child cap on benefits. I just don't see the need for the approach that has been taken to the discussion here.

lol. posted three words m9, the lad loves real politik and to paraphrase Self Esteem, he does this all the time. it's was a light dig. "unneccesarily personalised"lmao, even.

not sure it has anything to do with point winning tbh, rather voting with their conscience.

.

1 Attachment

Am on holibobs at the moment with limited net access but havent labour initiated work/report/research into poverty across the UK which includes the child benefit cap? Therefore they are following their own direction rather than the SNP?

Or am I imagining that I saw it?

The only reason that Starmer and Reeves have now announced they are thinking about lifting the cap is because of a growing rebellion in the ranks. In fact, it's the sub in the article you linked to:

PM endorses earlier comments by Bridget Phillipson amid brewing rebellion on policy among Labour MPs

If a majority of Labour backbenchers had really wanted to get rid of the cap and said they would vote for the SNP amendment, you can bet that Starmer would have promised to lift the cap immediately in order to head off the rebellion, rather than just reviewing it

You think? The leadership were always going to push back hard on this, as they need to show who is in charge. You can’t fold on the first rebellion, otherwise it will encourage more.

Rebellions will happen, of course, but with such a large majority, it’s going to take a something special to defeat the government.

That's the stupid bit though isn't it. Vote with your conscience even if it makes the outcome that you (your conscience) want less, not more, likely.

It does my head in. If you want to change things, think about what is most likely to achieve that

Or am I imagining that I saw it?

No, you're exactly right - that's the Poverty Review, and Starmer has indicated that one of its first actions is likely to be to recommend nixing the two child limit cap. So really, if these MPs were interested in actually helping kids, they'd have voted in line with the government and volunteered to work with the Poverty Review to help ensure the long term outcome of lifting children out of poverty - they're better placed than anyone else in the country to do so. They are in the party of government. They have actual power.

But they'd prefer the sugar rush of protest to actually working on the solution. Plus ca change.

I don't think it says that. "amid" does not mean "because of"

nah. what makes the outcome less likely (it doesn't really) is Starmer's response in removing the whip, not the vote itself. which is my issue with this. That authoritarian streak of his is really fucking troubling.

he also said repeatedly that they wouldn't.

A vote for child poverty is a vote against child poverty. Sure.

Absolutely no need for the whip to be removed for 6 months, and it wasn't something that they were aware would happen according to Zarah Sultana (or at least she wasn't).

You're in government
You have a stonking majority
4% of that stonking majority vote against you on a matter of conscience
What do you do next?

For all you 'smart politics' guys, bringing down the banhammer in the way that Labour have done is not actually smart politics. The headlines are dominated by this, there's disquiet in the PLP. Smart politics gets you a tactical gain. I understand that Starmer and Co see a tactical gain here in making steps to further eliminate Left voices from the party, but that's a intra-party tactical gain rather than a national politics one. Putting intra-party politics ahead of national ones is a bad order of priorities, see the Tory party for the last forever.

Smart politics would be to smile in public and say 'We get this is an emotive topic, and we can see why these rebels have done what they have done, but let's be clear if they do it again then we will cut them open in parliament square for the public to gaze upon the goo that lives within'. And then if they rebel again then you cut them open in parliament square etc etc. Parliamentary parties have many ways of maintaining order that fall short of removing the whip, going straight for the nuclear option doesn't necessarily make you look big and strong.

As it is, the Starmer administration has just reacted in the exact way you would react if you were a bunch of thin skinned authoritarian weirdos who hated the left more than anything else in the known universe.

I don't really follow your point. You don't like that Starmer imposes party discipline? Ok, your prerogative, but it's not as if they didn't know they were rebelling and would likely face some consequences.

I stand by what I said. If you want to achieve something, in what world is making a public stand to show up the leadership about something is likely to be the most effective way of doing it? It isn't. If anything the threat people might rebel is a stick you can use against the leadership, once you've done it you've lost that.