Forum menu
I hadn't realised, or at least I had forgotten, just how unpopular Ed Miliband had been.
I guess like Starmer despite having the PLP united behind him he had little of substance to offer voters, other than broadly similar policies to the Tories.
As I remember it Miliband's most radical flagship policy during the 2015 election campaign was a 2 year freeze on energy prices. Which I don't think was seen as a long term solution to anything.
I said a day or two back that if Labour has a problem it isn't Starmer. The dismal performance of the previous 2 leaders kind of backs up that claim.
I hadn’t realised, or at least I had forgotten, just how unpopular Ed Miliband had been
Bacon butty wrestling is a highly regarded skill. Failure to master it often leads to rejection
Perhaps like Starmer’s father your dad was bitter and had a chip on his shoulder about being a toolmaker?
No his beef was with a middle management that did not recognise a 25 year veteran of the company at a visit to his facility. Which is understandable and symptomatic of the other part of the failure of British industry in the 70's a god awful management class.
His main problem was not recognising at that time that other people have other drivers than climbing the greasy pole or raking in the most money. It was beyond him that others may want to better society without any reward other than the satisfaction of a job well done.
As I remember it Miliband’s most radical flagship policy during the 2015 election campaign was a 2 year freeze on energy prices. Which I don’t think was seen as a long term solution to anything.
Yes, a perfect example of let's keep the market forces in control but toss everyone a bone. Tories nicked it anyway as they could see the value of a pretty limited cap - that you can change twice a year. (Standing charge nearly doubled.)
The boneheadness of liberal politics.
Flagship policy ...
Every single year some principled person says MPs shouldn't get the whopping rise but then they have to cave in because it's determined 'independently'. It's laughable and, in part, it's how they're bought off by the system and even more distanced from constituents.
Independent is a meaningless term for bureaucratic purposes.
You couldn’t make this up. Starmer was too spineless to stand behind one of labour’s most popular policies in fear that the establishment would turn against him, and now the tories have gone and nicked (part of) it.
Good job Keir.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1512205823770075140?s=21&t=3BYyr0iQo94kcAkopEJFtw
Or good work LibDems. They have been doing a hell of a lot over the last year, I just haven't seen any of it...
They have been doing a hell of a lot over the last year
Following the centrists main principle of not offering any new ideas interrupting your enemy while they are shooting themselves in the foot. Imagine building successes on being even more invisible than Starmer and labour.
There’s “a bit” of local history as regards the Labour council, with ongoing battles and rebellions and investigations. Surprised they held the seats that they did. I’d have considered trying to help get a LibDem candidate over the line as well if I was there. Not exactly going to risk flipping the council to the Conservatives, is it.
There’s “a bit” of local history
This is true of damn near every local election.
I wouldn't read too much into a council by-election result, if anything.
Here are the results of the Everton by-election also held yesterday where the Labour candidate received 62% of the vote and the LibDem candidate 2%
https://councillors.liverpool.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?ID=451&RPID=53836591
I don't know if the fact that Labour candidate is the daughter of the former Everton councillor, who is a left-wing Labour MP, not a Starmer supporter, helped her.
Or the fact that the LibDem candidate is a former member of the Tory Party was the reason for him coming an extremely poor last in the ballot.
But I do know that most of the opinion polls of the last couple of years show the LibDems on less support than they had at the last general election, in which they did very badly.
'A bit' of local history?
Thats a gloriously understated way of pointing out that Liverpool council is one of the most brazenly corrupt institutions in the country. The living embodiment of Private Eye's 'Rotten Boroughs'
I’m trying to be understated and free of hyperbole from here on in. Doubt it’ll last. I probably would still vote for a Labour councillor in Liverpool, but it would be a much harder decision than here, where the local team are bloody ace, and firmly have my vote.
[ we have some good LibDem councillors as well ]
You couldn’t make this up. Starmer was too spineless to stand behind one of labour’s most popular policies in fear that the establishment would turn against him, and now the tories have gone and nicked (part of) it.
On the podcast "oh god what now" super centrist 'comedian/writer' Matt Forde was absolutely gushing with Starmer's invisible non-political approach to everything.
They even distorted recent polls to reflect badly on Corbyn rather than good for Starmer. (They didn't even acknowledge the 2 year poll recently)
Forde endorsed Starmer's approach of supporting the government during the pandemic with no nuance at all.
And yet not one of the panelists could see wrong in Starmer bereft having ideas that the electorate could get excited about. Even though they acknowledged the cost of living crisis!
In the meantime the Tories are building theoretical Nuclear Power Stations.
Who is Matt Forde and how much does he care if Labour or the Tories win the next general election?
Stupendous car crash involvling Yvette Cooper on the BBC this morning. After questioning Sunak's judgement and the inherent unfairness in his wife not paying millions in taxes, she was then asked whether labour would remove non-dom status. The answer? 'We're conducting a review'. Clueless.
she was then asked whether labour would remove non-dom status. The answer? ‘We’re conducting a review’. Clueless.
There is only one man who can decide policy on the issue, if he hasn't decided what it is, or hasn't told Yvette Cooper, it isn't necessarily her fault.
The current Labour leader is known for a strong reluctance to commit himself to anything, preferring instead to simply attacking the Tories, I can't imagine why he would have a clear unambiguous position on this particular issue.
attacking the Tories
Well, at least this thread has stopped being a series of complaints that he's not attacking the Tories.
On non-doms... there will always be good reasons for non-dom status to exist, but it needs rules that stop it being abused by people who are resident here. The rules have been tightened up before, and they will need to be again... and if Reeves is ever Chancellor of the Exchequer (unlikely I'll admit) then you'd hope she would be more likely to do so than the current person in that post (for bleeding obvious reasons). Would the changes need to be carefully thought through (with the help of, say, a review) rather based on a knee jerk reaction to news events? You'd hope so.
For what it's worth, despite not voting Labour when he was leader, I'd really like to see Miliband in Reeves' role soon, and in Sunak's current role after an election. Bring that on.
Well, at least this thread has stopped being a series of complaints that he’s not attacking the Tories.
I am glad that you approve. I know how important it is to you that political threads stick closely to the criteria which you decide is appropriate.
Of course Starmer attacks the Tories, the whole crux of his strategy appears to be that he would do exactly the same as the Tories only better.
Edit : Which presumably helps to explain why the very latest opinion poll, covering the period of the Tory Chancellor's green card/non-dom wife fiasco, only gives Labour a 4% lead over the Tories, well short of what would be needed to form a Labour majority government in a GE.
I know how important it is to you that political threads stick closely to the criteria which you decide is appropriate.
🥱
I've never said that. I don't think that.
FFS just say the words, 'Yes, we will remove non-dom status and other tax loopholes if we win the next election'. How hard is it?
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1513475789634875392?s=20&t=DnZGj4zymUkFjMqsJxNmog
How hard is it?
He needs to check with the big donors whether it would be acceptable or not.
Quite hard, otherwise it would have been done by now. For every HMRC bod trying to write clever loop hole free rules there are 50 in KPMG etc pulling them apart.
Quite hard
No it's not hard at all. He can say now that he intends to remove non-dom status and declare his intention to clamp down on other loopholes, then he's got two years to figure out the policy details. No one would expect a full policy now, just a simple expression of intent. But he can't even do that.
He needs to check with the big donors whether it would be acceptable or not.
Probably even more important to him is what would the Daily Mail say.
And let's be fair the Daily Mail would take a very dim view if the Labour Party took a hostile stance towards non-doms.
After all the Daily Mail owner himself, despite being British, owning a stately home in Britian, and even being a Freeman of the City of London, is a non-dom. On account that his father once lived in France.
That's patriotism Daily Mail style for you. And piss-taking Tory style.
The Viscount Rothermere absolutely should not be able to claim non-dom status. I mean, if you’re in the House of Lords you should be paying your taxes here. There’s a case for a visiting worker to be able to claim that kind of status though. The regulations need tightening up to stop abuse by people who live here. A soundbite “do away with non-dom status completely” would still have to be caveated with “after a full review of the tax laws around people in the UK but not permanently resident here”. It’s not simple. People do expect politicians to make things seem simpler than they really are though. And then they complain when the reality of implementation doesn’t match the simplicity of the solution as it was presented to them.
EDIT: completely forgot that Labour’s reforms meant he lost his seat. Ah, what a shame for him.
So it is a completely new problem which Labour now need to wrestle with?
Yeah let's have a review.... along with the one about the House of Lords. That's another a new problem that has suddenly sprung up and needs to be sorted out. One day.
Edit for your edit : So the House of Lords is sorted..... it's had its reform? I can't wait to see Labour's non-dom "reforms".
Btw this is the commitment that Keir Starmer makes on his website:
Abolish the House of Lords – replace it with an elected chamber of regions and nations.
A soundbite “do away with non-dom status completely” would still have to be caveated with
My point here is that Starmer hasn't got a clue about communication with the voters. Even after all he must have learnt from Johnson, and the fact that people don't seem to know what he stands for, he still can't express a simple, understandable message on a simple issue.
He's been handed another massive open goal on traditionally toxic terrain for the tories. All he has to say is 'yes we will do something about this!' and the listening voters would enthusiastically agree and perhaps conclude that he's on their side. But instead he says 'we'll conduct a review to examine all the issues and we'll tell you later what we decide to do'. It's pathetic.
thestabiliser
Free Member
Quite hard, otherwise it would have been done by now. For every HMRC bod trying to write clever loop hole free rules there are 50 in KPMG etc pulling them apart.
If they removed Non-Dom status then all it does is push those with earnings outside the UK to not bring them into the UK, so just offshoring their shares and assets, i believe this was the main reason behind the whole 30/60/90k annual payment for Non-Domicile status, so the UK could get some funding out of it.
You could withdraw Non-Dom status next year easily, just remove the law, but it won't bring any more money into the UK, not when there's several other routes to avoiding paying anything, as you say, the big 4 accountancy firms spend a lot of time and effort creating schemes to benefit customers, whilst also assisting the UK tax department in writing their tax laws!
So it is a completely new problem which Labour now need to wrestle with?
No.
My point here is that Starmer hasn’t got a clue about communication with the voters.
Agreed. And that’s nothing new, it has always been true of him, in my opinion.
FFS just say the words, ‘Yes, we will remove non-dom status and other tax loopholes if we win the next election’. How hard is it?
Ex- Lawyer talks like a lawyer shocker
So the House of Lords is sorted
No, it isn't. And historically that's as much Labour's fault as it is the fault of any other party.
Jesus. So instead of promising to get rid of non-doms he’s taking the opportunity to call for eco-protesters to be locked up. Priorities!
https://twitter.com/keir_starmer/status/1513576855869218817?s=21&t=q6lYZHPs_PRh1G4R70ZjJw
Why would he promise to do something without knowing the full facts, same with the protest thing, not sure of what the whole just stop oil protest breadth is, but it’s certainly not aimed at getting public backing unfortunately
Pfft! Bloody wishy-washy, liberal hand-wringer! They should all be thrown down disused coal mines! Bloody crusties! 😉
We need those coal mines, going by how much Starmer is hated i can see Kinnock making a comeback ;o)
going by how much Starmer is hated
Who hates Starmer? Daz seems to be regularly surprised by Starmer's complete ineptitude and appears to still expect better from him.
Nothing Starmer says or does surprises me anymore, but as I have said more than once : if the Labour Party has a problem it isn't Starmer.
Otherwise just replacing Starmer would solve the problem, and no one truly believes it would - because they quite simply can't think of anyone to replace him with.
And people say that Sky News is fair and unbalanced… look at how they describe the aims of the protestors…
They are demanding that the government commits not to boost UK energy security in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine via new oil and gas extraction.
…no, they want us (the world) to stop depending on oil… there are other forms of energy, especially in the UK. We (the UK) are a net exporter of oil. We need to use less, sell less, extract less.
Oh, and I agree with you 100% on this one Dazh. You can see the political positioning to try and head off the Tories and the papers so they can’t put Labour in an “enemy of the motorist, ally of the climate change radicals”, but it’s cowardly and weak… and I think will look so to a great many of the people he needs to win over to Labour, not just its existing support.
Who hates Starmer?
Me. Quite frankly I f****** despise him, possibly even more so that Johnson. Johnson doesn’t really try to hide the fact that he’s playing a game, Starmer on the other hand pretends things will be different if he is in power. They won’t be. They could even be worse. I’ve never come across a more cynical, wilfully dishonest and cowardly politician as Starmer. He has the worst traits of Johnson minus the personality and ambition.
but it’s cowardly and weak… and I think will look so to a great many of the people he needs to win over to Labour, not just its existing support.
Which is the flaw really. He needs to keep the existing support on side and not just charm anyone who thinks Rothermere and others who dodge any link with the country are patriotic instead of challenging the hypocrites.
That he is reliably hardline when it appeals to the press barons but soft as a marshmallow when it comes to anything which will impact their taxdodging is unfortunately rather telling.
If you have such a low opinion of Starmer Daz why do you still appear constantly shocked and surprised by the latest example of his ineptitude? Or is it all fake?
I agree that Starmer is "worse" than Johnson because Johnson at least doesn't claim to be anything other than a Tory. And there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Starmer is anymore honest than Johnson - a man who is without doubt a habitual liar.
But then I also don't have as much of a problem with Johnson as many on stw filled with utter hatred seem to have.
And the reason for that is twofold. Firstly I would much rather Johnson remains Tory leader as all the likely contenders for the job would, imo, make significantly worse Prime Ministers with regards to the interests of ordinary working people. They would follow a far more rigid thatcherite pro-austerity Daily Mail approved agenda.
And secondly because in politics I intensely dislike certain ideologies but individuals really don't bother me that much. Individuals are mostly the product of their environment, I find it hard to hate someone because they are a product of a certain upbringing or environment. Besides, hatred against others is a pretty pointless and useless emotion.
Anyway back on topic.......if you think Starmer is the problem you haven't understood the problem imo. Starmer is the symptom, not the cause.
You like Johnson because he helped make Brexit happen, and don’t care what additional damage he does to the UK and the lives of people living here because he gave you that. He is wrecking lives all over these islands, but hey, he gave the EU and the chattering middle classes a bloody nose, so he has a free pass to pop away at the ordinary Brit, shift the tax burden further onto the workers, asset strip the country, and undermine and sell off our institutions. Good old Boris.
Anyway, back on topic… Starmer is the problem in that he is too dull to win over the electorate when an election finally occurs. But it’s not only him that is the problem… the Labour Party is happy to let the wrong leader take them into an election because of some sense of fairness… the “let them have an election before replacing them” line holds the party back… they need to adapt faster, and move lacklustre leaders on rather than follow them into yet another election defeat.
You like Johnson
Sorry who likes Johnson? Your rant is amusing but not overly informative as to its target. Have you been taking lessons from binners?