He cited 2.1%.
He said the government should at least stick to their own 2.1%, rather than dump it.
He could’ve have cited 5%.
He could have, but it's easy to guess why he didn't. The laziest attack line for any Tory MP is "Labour's profligate and unrealistic spending pledges" they say it each and every time. Given that we've just spent huge amounts of money propping up the economy, and people (however wrongly) understand the message of "we've got to tighten our belts a bit" I can understand a political decision being made that Labour cannot make those sorts of promises and not have it used against them. The story has to be "Tory's can't be trusted to be fair to critical workers", not "more Labour debt"
Lots of folk still believe the Cameron/Osbourne claim that it was Labour spending pre 2008 that "They had to sort out with Austerity" I don't think Labour are on firm ground when it comes to public spending promises.
The laziest attack line for any Tory MP is “Labour’s profligate and unrealistic spending pledges” they say it each and every time
But what's the alternative? Saying nothing just creates a vacuum and makes it look like Labour has no alternative to offer.
But what’s the alternative?
We're years away from an election, I don't think there's no point in setting out an alternative, it's not like people have a choice...There's just a message that this govt are corrupt, incompetent, and can't be trusted.
He could have, but it’s easy to guess why he didn’t. The laziest attack line for any Tory MP is “Labour’s profligate and unrealistic spending pledges” they say it each and every time. Given that we’ve just spent huge amounts of money propping up the economy, and people (however wrongly) understand the message of “we’ve got to tighten our belts a bit” I can understand a political decision being made that Labour cannot make those sorts of promises and not have it used against them. The story has to be “Tory’s can’t be trusted to be fair to critical workers”, not “more Labour debt”
Ah, this is exactly why they need to get away from their Fiscal Credibility rule rubbish.
The limit to spending is not the amount of spending.
It's real resources, employment and inflation. (And not just the minor uptick we have currently.)
The point being just because we spent a few quid in the pandemic is an example of how you can put government spending to work. The limit on that isn't "we've spent a lot - therefore we can't spend more."
Tightening our belts is not the solution. Examples of Goverments both stateside and here shows time and time again austerity and trying to balance the books makes no sense for a currency issuer.
Labour never come out on top when they try and become the party of fiscal prudence. The Tories will always win the war on that despite clearly being inefficient spenders.
The argument on here of play it safe against the Tories hasn't been cutting through. So I'm not convinced Starmer's wishy washy neolibral approach to dealing with the finances is actually doing them any good.
We’re years away from an election, I don’t think there’s no point in setting out an alternative, it’s not like people have a choice…There’s just a message that this govt are corrupt, incompetent, and can’t be trusted.
But we're not are we?
I could think of no better time than the last few months to start building a case against the government. The opposition have wasted this.
Ah, this is exactly why they need to get away from their Fiscal Credibility rule rubbish.
["Devils' advocate"]
Ah, Labour are scared by the truth, so they want you to trust in their financial jiggery-pokery to bend the rules and blind you with smoke and mirrors, just like they did in 2008 and it all came crashing down around them, and everyone in Britain paid the price. The good and sensible folk of Britain know that you can't spend beyond your means, any prudent housewife can tell you that.
[/"Devils' advocate"]
Say it in a Boris Johnson voice for maximum effect....
He said the government should at least stick to their own 2.1%, rather than dump it.
So he still cited 2.1%.
Nothing to see here.
The opposition have wasted this.
I don't disagree, they've been all over the place.
The opposition have wasted this.
I agree with that. We need to be realistic and not expect a detailed manifesto and alternative first budget at this point though. That needs to come in an election year. I also happen to think a new leader is needed in that election year. Starmer could change my mind on that point, but he hasn't yet, and he's had plenty of time and opportunity to do so.
Ah, Labour are scared by the truth, so they want you to trust in their financial jiggery-pokery to bend the rules and blind you with smoke and mirrors, just like they did in 2008 and it all came crashing down around them, and everyone in Britain paid the price. The good and sensible folk of Britain know that you can’t spend beyond your means, any prudent housewife can tell you that.
They didn't defend themselves enough in that era. Certainly against a Global recession - they just rolled over. What with Liam Byrne in the room as his stupid joke note.
I agree Labour are having a hard time moving away from tax and spend. But tax and spend has not done them any favours has it?
I regularly chat with James Meadway one of Labours previous senior economic advisors - and he is all about balancing the books. He's completely at odds with the way the economy actually works. My take is Labour don't employ the right economic advisors. And to win they need to.
I'm going to stick this here again. Sorry.
https://www.ted.com/talks/stephanie_kelton_the_big_myth_of_government_deficits
It's the way forward.
And to win they need to.
Again, don't disagree, I think it will take longer still than the coming election for Labour to overcome this. In the meantime, attacking this govt on it's obvious failings seems to me at least to be 1. Honest, and 2. becoming the view of many many voters (including left wing Tories )
There’s just a message that this govt are corrupt, incompetent, and can’t be trusted.
Which is what Labour has been saying, and we all know how well that's working for them. it just smacks of an opposition who can't come up with any ideas of their own.
it just smacks of an opposition who can’t come up with any ideas of their own.
That's one way of looking at it, it's also a pretty effective way of getting people to think about a government in a particular way. Keep on banging the drum...
That's the thing about ideological voting vs. voting a different way because you don't much like the present lot. They count just the same.
Definitely no purge or war on the left. Bloody tinfoil helmeted lefties!
https://twitter.com/kateosbornemp/status/1438926394701094913?s=21
Definitely no purge or war on the left. Bloody tinfoil helmeted lefties!
One case or a hundred? We don't even know what the allegations were (probably rightly)
Labour at war with itself is no good for anyone
Another conspiracy theory
When the source is Owen Jones of course it is, just might not be the conspiracy that you are thinking of
Some people are saying it's her tweeting in support of RLB when she was accused of anti semitism but who knows.
When the source is Owen Jones of course it is, just might not be the conspiracy that you are thinking of
What does that mean? Whatever you might think of Owen Jones I doubt he's just making stuff up.
Here we go folks, research by the right wing of the Labour party shows that Labour need to appeal more to Tory voters. Who'd have thunk it?
If they want to win an election of course they do. They are the swing voters and the only voters that used to matter. The sort of people who swung for Blair and then stayed a while.
Unfortunately the non swinging "Labour for ever" voters also now need to be appealed to as they switched to Tory but guess they could swing back as Brexit and Corbyn are in the past.
What does that mean? Whatever you might think of Owen Jones I doubt he’s just making stuff up.
He's an activist, he has an agenda (which admittedly moves around a lot) so he can't be seen as a dispassionate source of information rigorous in shedding any spin
When the source is Owen Jones of course it is, just might not be the conspiracy that you are thinking of
The source is not Owen Jones but a Labour MP.
Here we go folks, research by the right wing of the Labour party shows that Labour need to appeal more to Tory voters. Who’d have thunk it?
Not really rocket surgery is it?
It specifically says ‘soft’ Tory voters. Who did you expect them to have to target to be in with a chance of winning a majority in our two-party FPTP electoral system?
Neo-nazi’s, Russian ex-pats? disaffected Scottish nationalists? Green Party members who’ve just decided they actually fancy eating steak and buying a Range Rover?
There are plenty of people who normally vote Tory who are absolutely appalled at Johnson’s Nationalist Populist Blue-KIP, but were never going to vote for a Labour Party led by Corbyn.
The Lib Dem’s just picked up a lot of their votes at the last by-election
Energy market is looking good...
Let's keep banging them neoliberal policies out there.
Will Starmzy allude to any state ownership of the energy supply sector. Be a great opportunity wouldn't it?
But no he won't, as above in Binners' drunken rants - he needs to appeal to Tory sensibility of supporting market economics. (A big fat dead end.)
It's a double fail: he doesn't draw the Tory votes in and he supports all the trappings of the market.
Lose / Lose.
There are plenty of people who normally vote Tory who are absolutely appalled at Johnson’s Nationalist Populist Blue-KIP, but were never going to vote for a Labour Party led by Corbyn.
And yet there are plenty of people that appear to keep supporting Tory that don't want Starmer despite his Tory supporting coalition.
The Lib Dem’s just picked up a lot of their votes at the last by-election
The Lib Dems currently appear to be doing a better job of criticising the government than Labour.
So you think British politics needs one hard right party, and two centrist parties, and no left wing party at all?
If so many people want centrist politics why aren't the lib dems more popular?
So you think British politics needs one hard right party, and two centrist parties, and no left wing party at all?
If so many people want centrist politics why aren’t the lib dems more popular?
2nd question first: historically they've not been that unpopular in terms of vote share, just seats won and that's despite being er lib dems. A full on lefty socialist party, that I'd vote for in a PR system, could probably perform similarly once its had chance to establish itself. But we don't have PR. To win in FPTP a party has to include a broad spectrum, and have a strong constituency base able to mobilise voters. Enough of an answer?
Energy market is looking good…
Just when labour's policy of bringing energy under common ownership is being proved right, Starmer uses it to stoke more infighting and have an argument with one of his senior shadow cabinet members. His incompetence knows no limits.
https://twitter.com/JamesMills1984/status/1439840786179317761?s=20
The Lib Dems currently appear to be doing a better job of criticising the government than Labour.
Tory MPs are doing a better job of criticising the government than labour!
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1439877076820049922?s=20
Just when labour’s policy of bringing energy under common ownership is being proved right
Milliband was passionate in his assertion about public ownership last week. Is that not policy then?
As it stands, it looks like the government is about to underwrite the energy firms (with taxpayers money) but not nationalise them. Truly the worst of both worlds.
Oh, and you know how Starmer is the darling of remainer FBPE types? Well it would now appear he had a major role, or was perhaps singularly responsible for crashing a deal that would have provided a soft brexit and prevented Boris from ousting May.
perhaps singularly responsible for crashing a deal t
"perhaps" doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence. From your link:
Gibb told Ashcroft: “there were briefings to the BBC’s Today programme saying that the cross-party talks are going nowhere. I’d get a call from the BBC saying, ‘I believe the talks are on the verge of collapse.’ ‘Well, who have you spoken to?’, I’d say. ‘Can’t say. It’s official sources’. He is convinced the negative briefings came from Starmer or his team, and that the mixed messages highlighted conflicting attitudes within the Labour delegation
...so I guess that settles it. Brexit is Starmer's fault based on a blog report of a book written by someone who was told that someone in the bbc said someone had said to someone else said that startmer or someone in his team said... Really? Really really?
Are you suggesting that 'Colonel Despard’s Radical Comment' isn't the go-to destination for accurate and impartial 'news'?
Or relying Michael Ashcroft the former deputy leader of the Conservative party writing an entirely truthful, unbiased and well researched biography of Kier Starmer.
Are you suggesting that ‘Colonel Despard’s Radical Comment’ isn’t the go-to destination for accurate and impartial ‘news’?
No I'm suggesting that everything that has happened in the past four years is easily understandable within the context of the right wing of the labour party using extreme tactics which are not in the interests of the party or the working people it represents, in order to win a factional battle against the membership. This account supports that, past events support that, and everything they're now doing from purging members and intimidating MPs supports that.
The labour right are destroying any hope of deposing Johnson and the tory party from power in favour of winning a factional war against their own membership. FFS Iain Duncan Smith is currently providing more opposition to the UC cut than Starmer is, what more do you need to know?
Contact! Wait out.
Jarvis is starting manoeuvres
https://order-order.com/2021/09/20/dan-jarvis-to-stand-down-as-south-yorkshire-mayor/
I imagine he'll be very active at conference
I see the usual gang are still here trying to keep the dream of a socialist utopia alive, fair enough, if you had:
it would work, but in reality none of the main parties and their respective left/right wings want PR because it actually means sharing power with others. So:that I’d vote for in a PR system
To win in FPTP a party has to include a broad spectrum, and have a strong constituency base able to mobilise voters. Enough of an answer?
You are stuck with this, having to compromise in other ways to win. That's the reality, I'm not sorry if it rather messes up peoples fantasies.
You are stuck with this, having to compromise in other ways to win. That’s the reality, I’m not sorry if it rather messes up peoples fantasies.
Yes, some of us get that while others just call us doom mongers for living in the reality of Britain (the voters and the voting system).
it would work, but in reality none of the main parties and their respective left/right wings want PR because it actually means sharing power with other
Aside from this isnt obviously true. For Labour there was a strong group for PR prior to 97 and it was in the manifesto. Sadly Straw and a few others managed to convince Blair not to go for it although the pro-pr group did succeed in all the other election types.
Given the previous outcome I am not sure Straw ideological successors would succeed this time round.
The only ones really opposed to it are those on the hard right who see it as the only real way of keeping power.
I see the usual gang are still here trying to keep the dream of a socialist utopia alive
For now we'd be happy with a Labour Party that's noticeably to the left of the Conservatives or the Liberal Democrats
The only ones really opposed to it are those on the hard right who see it as the only real way of keeping power.
Wrong.
For now we’d be happy with a Labour Party that’s noticeably to the left of the Conservatives or the Liberal Democrats
I'd like that as well, but elections aren't going to be won that way at the moment.
I was wondering about Jarvis… saw him on the news the other evening and thought… “He’s been quiet”. Is there an obvious seat for him to try and win before the next election? Or is he, like most contenders, looking at a post general election loss stab at the big job? Labour really should replace Starmer before then, but we know it’s unlikely. Labour is not the flexible tactical beast that the Tory party is.
Oh, and Clive Lewis is right about PR… why we need it and how we get it.
But we’re going the other way. Johnson is managing to undo sensible voting systems for English mayoral elections and installing FPTP for all English local elections. Without any need to consult or hold a referendum. Just BAM… the election system has changed in a way that benefits his party unfairly and returns winning candidates opposed by the majority of their constituents. Worse representation.
I was wondering about Jarvis… saw him on the news the other evening and thought… “He’s been quiet”. Is there an obvious seat for him to try and win before the next election?
He's already a MP
He's been doubling up as a mayor
